Damage cause by employees managing server

[Guest talkinggoat]

Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

something like that?

[Guest Danny Sanders]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

Pointing out the training that one has to go through to be "qualified" to

manage the servers would lead to the common sense conclusion that a person

without that training could not do the job adequately.

 

Look at the training involved in getting qualified.

 

 

hth

DDS

 

 

"talkinggoat" <johnmclaren_99@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:4e124933-9715-42c4-841c-e86d88700aa2@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

> Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

> companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

> servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

> something like that?

[Guest Thee Chicago Wolf]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

>Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

>companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

>servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

>something like that?

 

Not that I am aware. I would likely surmise that any employer (read:

Management / Director / Coordinator / etc.) who tries to shift blame

to an employee who is not qualified to manage a server via statistics

might as well just fire themselves for ineptitude or allowing a

non-qualified person to manage their server in the first place. If

statistics like this did exist, they would point in the opposite

direction of the employee.

 

- Thee Chicago Wolf

---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----

http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

[Guest Meinolf Weber]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

Hello talkinggoat,

 

If you or your management decide to allow non trained/qualified people to

manage servers, you will blame yourself. So don't search for a statistic,

train the people that should manage something on your servers. The statistic

will not help you if problems occur.

 

Best regards

 

Meinolf Weber

Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers

no rights.

** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups

** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

> Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

> companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

> servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

> something like that?

>

[Guest Hank Arnold (MVP)]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

talkinggoat wrote:

> Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

> companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

> servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

> something like that?

 

I'm curious as to why you are asking this question.... If you are an

I.T. person working for a company that wants to do this, get your resume

in order and get out....fast.... You are sitting on a time bomb.... You

are being set up for the fall......

 

I know several "qualified" people (as in MSCE qualified) who I would

never let near my network.... The proposition that an "un-qualified"

person would even get into my server room is grounds for my leaving.

 

--

 

Regards,

Hank Arnold

Microsoft MVP

Windows Server - Directory Services

[Guest Edric]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:48:50 -0700 (PDT), talkinggoat

<johnmclaren_99@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Does anyone know of any statistics or articles available regarding how

>companies that allow their non-qualified employees to manage their

>servers, networks and desktops cause more damage than good... or

>something like that?

 

What makes a person "qualified?" What "training" are we talking

about? I would take a person who has practical experience but no book

learning over a person who has all the classroom training, strings of

initials, but no real world experience any day.

 

I've managed many networks just fine but have never had formal

training - just YEARS of experience.

[Guest talkinggoat]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

I own an IT consulting firm, and, in the area of the country that we

work, people (especially managers) don't have the common sense to

budget generously for IT. They commonly allow their employees to run

ramped across the web, install whatever web games the want and, gasp,

manage their servers. For some reason, they don't understand that

communication and their IT solution is the heart of their business.

Even when an employee brings down the network, it still doesn't sink

in. What's even more frightening is some of these are insurance

companies, with thousands of social security numbers. I'm sure I don't

even have to say what would happen if they got the wrong virus. They

do have unified virus scanners, but that's like a bullet proof vest.

It may stop a pistol, but not a tank. When I tell them this, I get

blank looks or statements like "how much does it cost" I need

information to help them see past the cost factor and get them to

understand that the cost of loosing their business is worth far more

than the cost of a maintenance plan or gateway server. Any suggestions

that anyone has would be helpful.

[Guest SF]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

On Jul 17, 8:28 am, talkinggoat <johnmclaren...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I own an IT consulting firm, and, in the area of the country that we

> work, people (especially managers) don't have the common sense to

> budget generously for IT. They commonly allow their employees to run

> ramped across the web, install whatever web games the want and, gasp,

> manage their servers. For some reason, they don't understand that

> communication and their IT solution is the heart of their business.

> Even when an employee brings down the network, it still doesn't sink

> in. What's even more frightening is some of these are insurance

> companies, with thousands of social security numbers. I'm sure I don't

> even have to say what would happen if they got the wrong virus. They

> do have unified virus scanners, but that's like a bullet proof vest.

> It may stop a pistol, but not a tank. When I tell them this, I get

> blank looks or statements like "how much does it cost" I need

> information to help them see past the cost factor and get them to

> understand that the cost of loosing their business is worth far more

> than the cost of a maintenance plan or gateway server. Any suggestions

> that anyone has would be helpful.

 

My advice would be to try and avoid clients that do not place a value

on your services or on business continuity. In the end you will find

that they are difficult to deal with and never ever understand why

they need to pay for something that "ain't broke".

 

You may start with a list of industry best practices or even testimony

showing them what the leaders in their field are doing. That can work

for potential customers. Existing ones that don't value IT service can

be convinced with a really big and scary "near miss".

[Guest Leythos]

Re: Damage cause by employees managing server

 

In article <5541d454-3554-4213-87fd-

272e1abb3eef@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, johnmclaren_99@yahoo.com

says...

> I own an IT consulting firm, and, in the area of the country that we

> work, people (especially managers) don't have the common sense to

> budget generously for IT. They commonly allow their employees to run

> ramped across the web, install whatever web games the want and, gasp,

> manage their servers. For some reason, they don't understand that

> communication and their IT solution is the heart of their business.

> Even when an employee brings down the network, it still doesn't sink

> in.

>

I own an run an IT company with many clients across the USA, almost none

of them have on-site IT people and while all of them have the admin

passwords to the servers, firewalls, etc... I can't recall the last time

any of them have actually used them.

 

We take ANY business and restructure it so that users are LIMITED Users,

very few, if any, are local Admins. We implement content filtering on

HTTP and SMTP, don't allow unrestricted outbound, block anything not

part of the business, and life runs smoothly for them.

 

With just about any business that allows open internet use, you can

normally show them a 30% increase in productivity by just implementing

content filtering and access to business partner websites - after the

first week/two weeks of the players complaining....

 

If you're not able to show them the benefits based on your own

experiences and understanding then you're not going to be able to do it

from messages posted here in Usenet.

 

--

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)