"Rogue IT" 11

[vbainchicago]

I've recently found myself in an interesting situation and wanted to get "unbiased IT" opinions. Here's where I'm at:

My "job is not IT related. I've been in purchasing for 9+ years with two different companies. My passion has always been "IT" related - database design, SEO, building websites, building and troubleshooting PC's, networking, etc. I've been working on IT projects on my own for a little over 10 years. I've never had any formal training - everything I know I've taught myself through books, trail and error, and forums like this one. 3 years ago I even started my own consulting company on the side and have been doing fairly well.

I've been with my current company for a little over 4 years. When I started, the "systems" in my department were a joke. Nothing was automated, and no one had any idea how to use even basic functions in MS Office applications. The person who trained me actually told me "Excel is just like Word only it has boxes to help your keep things organized".

In order to do my job more effectively, I designed databases in MS Access. When my co-workers saw that I could get done in 5 minutes what took them 5 hours, they took notice. My systems grew from a single user (me) system to an integrated system that over 25 people use on a daily basis. Some newer employees have even been trained on my software since the day they started, and couldn't do their job effectively if you took my systems out of the picture.

I was recently called into a meeting with my boss (he's pc illiterate) and two of the head IT people from our company. It's a decent size company (over 500 people) so I had never even met the IT people before. I was informed that the work I've done over the last 4 years is what they deem "Rogue IT", and that I was to cease any further development on any system. I was also supposed to hand over all my passwords (I implemented security in my db to prevent tampering) and if I hadn't already, thoroughly document the db design and functionality and hand that over as well. As of today, I've just continued to ignore the requests.

Portions of the db were developed at work, and my boss approved the time spent working on them. My boss has actually requested database modifications and additions over the years. I did a lot of the db design and modifications outside of work on my own PC and on my own time as well.

The justification is that if I leave, no one could support the system. There's no "Access expert" in our IT group. They have requested that I train one of the IT people on Access and walk them through my entire database. Of course, I have to do this in addition to my regular job, as no one will cover my regular responsibilities while I'm "training" my IT department.

What do you think? How would you handle this situation?


VBAinChicago

http://www.jjscomputing.com

For Fun -

http://www.321google.com

 

[dyarwood]

I was in a similar situation. I was on a short term contract doing some analysis work and suggested a process to be created with the idea that IT would take it over. The IT department asked me to do as I had the idea and this gave them a good idea of what I was capable of doing. I have now been offered a job within the IT department. I would say you have shown your worth and as a result you are becoming more invaluable to them.

 

[TomKane]

vbainchicago - first of all I want to say well done for having to determination to develop your own app.

I am quite attached to the systems I work with and can empathise with your situation.

There is a bright side - looking after the system becomes someone else's problem - freeing up your time to do other things.

We're in the process of setting up a SQL farm where all the databases from all our applications will be hosted on one "super" server.

It could be that your IT department's ambitions require them to have all the companys computer systems in a common configuration/situation or server for the sake of business resumption plans or infrastructure and operations support, backups, etc.

It will probably be necessary for IT to take control of your system so that in the event of network failure service can be resumed in a much more controlled manner instead of saying "OK we're done, now ring 'vbainchicago' so that he can do his bit"

I'm not "dissing" access - but it's not the most scalable database application - I'm basing this on a situation that happened to us here where I work. If the IT guys take the system on they can use their experience of IT to make the best decisions for the future of the app in line with the future of the company's IT in general.

 

[SgtJarrow]

I have been on both sides of this fence. I was hired into a mjor banking firm into the billing department solely based on my Access skills. I was the unofficial IT person for the division, completely operating under the radar of the "real" IT staff. I was promised, in my contract, a permanent position in the IT staff within 12 months. During my time in Billing, I was to develop databases and applications to streamline various portions of manual and cumbersome systems currently in place. As my knowledge and time-saving applications became known, IT became aware of my existence. They even came to me for help in Office coding and designs.

Of course they brought it to the division chief's that they would not support my stuff anytime. But he insisted this was fine as I would be an ITer within the year. But 16 months roled around,and I had not been given a position in IT. I left the company. Since then, the division I worked for has gone backwards as my apps needed support and their IT staff wouldn't help. I now work in a tech support company and deal with this a lot from this side. While the apps and stuff created by a "rogue" may save him or his team time, in the long run we spend more time trying to fix it when it is brought to us.

=======================================
People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. (Calvin from Calvin And Hobbs)

Robert L. Johnson III
MCSA, CNA, Net+, A+
w: rljohnso@stewart.com
h: wildmage@tampabay.rr.com

 

[jsteph]

Dimandja
<<This is actually to be expected of very sophisticated IT shops. Access is not used at all by any IT that develops serious software, because it is an inferior database system:>>

Although I fully agree with your other post on the fact that the company owns vbainchicago's work, I disagree about the Access statement. I've been consulting for over 10 years. I've worked highly 'sophisticated' IT shops (Chicago Board of Trade, Chicago Board Options Exchange, LaSalle (abn/amro) Bank, EDS, Ford Motor Co., and numerous other huge companies to name a few) that do excellent IT work, in highly mission-critical environments.

In every one of these shops, MS Access was used--no, not for anything mission-critical because Access is inferior and unstable--I agree on that point. But I can say that I have never seen a company that didn't use Access on some level or another. These larger clients I mentioned above used Access for numerous departmental-level things, smaller companies use it for slightly higher-level purposes, and very small business use it as their core system.

So I have to say that I find it odd that no one in a large IT department knows anything about Access. It's so easy to learn and know that many IT people--even the screwdriver-in-pocket hardware guys know it by osmosis--let alone developers using other tools. In the Access forums here I'm sure you'll find many who attest to this--Access is so ubiquitous that many of us got our start with it and continue to make a comfortable living doing consulting with this tool--I've personally found that this level of development hasn't been hit by offshoring precisely because it is done on a smaller, departmental level, with projects too small or with too much of a need for end-user interation to ever be exported.
--jsteph

 

[Kjonnnn]

Im probably gonna get hit by a shoe, but cheers to you.

It appears the no one in IT or your Boss cared a ding dong about your methods... that is until they saw how successful it was. Now they want it after you've done the thought work.

If you got hit by a bus, they'd be back where they were anyway, no Db. What you did was make them look bad. You raised the bar.

Now those of you were born IT guys, don't get me wrong. I hate the concept of &quot;rogue IT&quot; guys. Got a few here (one is the IT department). But you're not reconfiguring systems and the network, you just created something to make your job easier. You filled a void created by their lack of initiative. I'm sure if you had went to IT, after the dear caught in the headlights look lefted their faces, it would have been put on the list of things not to do,

I DO believe that the approach to your should have been different. Instead of approaching you TAKE the DB, I would think they would have came with the attitude of .... tell us about that program, how does it work, can you document it for us so in case you gone, etc.

(throw your shoes now)

 

[CajunCenturion]

The only thing I object to is the attitude offered by some that the IT department doesn't care about the work you have done. The IT department's lack of initiative? Do you have any idea what their responsibilities are, what's on their plate, the corporate IT priorities? How many other applications are in the development queue, not because of lack of initiative, but due to lack of resources? Just because their initiative is not directed at your own projects, does not in any way mean that the IT department lacks initiative.

I don't think that it is being fair to the IT department, especially since you don't know that IT department, nor what they've been charged with doing. Often, IT is charged with maintaining corporate standards, and rogue IT development usually does not conform to those standards, if for no other reason, they don't know what those standards are. How many rogue developers have taken the initiative to find out if, or what those standards are, and then had the discipline to incorporate those standards in their own development effors? Very few outside of the IT Department have any idea of the cost of maintaining heterogenious systems, not just with respect to standards, but to inter-connectivity, and corporate data management, and other issues. Of course these are not your concern, because your own department is where your focus lies. Users generally have very little, if any, appreciation for the fact that the IT department does not work for them, nor that they might have development responsibilities other than what you want from them.

How does the IT Department Manager answer the following question from his/her VP? Why or How did you allow this application to be developed when it did not conform to the corporate standards that I mandated you establish and conform to? You have forced the IT Department into a situation where they have failed in their mandate for corporate standardization, and yet have to answer to it, and are usually told to fix it.

So I ask that you take a step back, and try to understand the big picture from the IT perspective in addition to your own.

Kjonnnn - For someone who shows the label (IS/IT--Management), I'm shocked at your narrow vision of, attitudes towards, and general demeaning of an IT staff that you know nothing about, or for that matter, any IT staff in general. If your comments happen to be appropriate to your own IT staff, of which you labelled yourself at a manager of, then I suggest that you some internal issues that need attention.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[benlinkknilneb]

Wow, it's gettin' crazy in here...

First of all, I'm not entirely sure I see what's wrong with KJonnnn's post. People swiping credit is not a jab at the IT department... it's a fact of life. Without knowing the people involved, I would be inclined to give the same advice. Someone taking credit for my ingenuity is certainly a valid concern (although it may not apply to this situation).

I do agree that Kjonnnn may have been a little harsh on the IT department with the following:

I'm sure if you had went to IT, after the dear caught in the headlights look lefted their faces, it would have been put on the list of things not to do

Granted, a lot of times the IT department is swamped with things that they have to get done, and they don't have time to work on my project... but this is a rather negative way of viewing it.

Perhaps KJonnnn's statement would be more suitable discussion fodder in reference to thread655-751711... the IT department he described sounds fairly elitist to me.

The short version: this probably could've all been prevented by improved communication with the IT department.


Ben

There's no place like 127.0.0.1.

 

[Dimandja]

jsteph:
I find it odd that no one in a large IT department knows anything about Access

The reason many IT shops don't use Access is because they have much better tools. They simply have no room for Access.

If you work in MS environments, of course you can't help but run into Access.

In my 20+ years of IT, because of the type of applications and the kind of environment I used, I never had any need for Access - nor did my colleagues nor our shops. We worked away from Microsoft software suites, because we had to use better tools.

Recently I have had to do web developement and PC related applications. I therefore learned to use Access along with other unstable tools. Not my choice.

By the way, if must use MS databases, try SQL server - you'll sleep better.

Dimandja

 

[jsteph]

Dimandja,
Most of my development in the last 5 years has been with Informix, Oracle and DB2 databases, so your snobbery bounces off of me and I have no trouble sleeping as a result of any database inferiorities.

Although I got my start using Access for everything, I now use Access primarily as a prototype tool, a meta-data repository, sometimes a front-end, and of course the quick & dirty department-level application. It has been a perfect fit in all of those areas. I don't know of any other single tool that can perform of those things as well as Access can.

And the subject of this thread is exactly what happens in many cases--some department head needs some quick & dirty reports for his budget or whatever, and he does them up in Excel or Access on his own. Why do they use these tools? Because they have them. Why do they have them? Because (if it's a responsible IT shop) the IT shop approved MS Office for the desktops, and if they did so, then they had better know something about what they put on hundreds of desktops. To choose desktop tools--tools that are in daily use--with no one in the IT staff that knows anything about them is irresponsible, in my opinion.
--jsteph

 

[SemperFiDownUnda]

One thing to note also is the possibility that the IT dept does not have a large development staff. I still do consulting work on a system I designed and wrote for a very large multi-national mining corporation. Their 9 story shared services center covers 9 floors of office space yet their IT dept is 2 perminate manager positions, and everything else is outsourced. Most of the outsourcing is in terms of desktop support, network and core applications and these applications are things like Global SAP.

So when designing the application I actually worked with the risk assessment team. If I'm hit by a bus and they are hit with an Earthquake the system is documented enough that they can get it running agian and get another &quot;Wayne Francis&quot; in to fix anything needed. They realise that the learning curve will be steep but there are reams of printout detailing the entire design, development and testing process.

So while not bagging IT/dept they may not be suited for this task and hense I suggested it might be an oppertunity for you. Just as the outsourced it dept that I work with can get the application running agian they do not have the resources to make modification without training. No offense to Network guys but its a bit different then programming. Same goes for programmers....I wouldn't want many of them fiddling around with the servers.

I also know many IT people that don't know Access. Sure they know SQL because of UNI but then I'm a SQL Server DBA but wouldn't want to mess with an Oracle system. There are similarities but it the differenses that make it what it is and can make or break a system.

Oh personally I didn't read it as vbainchicago wanted to make them pay for the system. I just read it as he/she wants to keep control of &quot;his/her systems&quot;.

PS has anyone notice their posts shifting positions? Mine was posted on Feb 6th right after DrJavaJoe's post &quot;You have an IT department that can't figure out Access?&quot; but skipped ahead 2 days :/

David need my SQL services? No no...hire SQLSister .... she'd be better value for money.



Hope I've been helpful,
Wayne Francis

If you want to get the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first

 

[jsteph]

<< and everything else is outsourced>>
Wayne,
Yes, and that's how I got my foot in the door in a lot of these companys. But I'm still a hired professional--in some cases was on open-ended gigs--and many employees assumed I was a permanent staffer.

So as a professional, I documented the code (with external docs and profuse comments) for their staff of those elite programmers who use 'much better tools' (funny how their shoes and clothes always seemed more threadbare than my worst duds--but I won't get caught up in that elitist pissing match--oops, I just did. Darn.) and a documented overview of the system for the end users. In a way, I was an extension of the IT department, but they were covered if I left--which should be the case with any professional consultant, and any responsible IT department should demand at least that.
--jsteph

 

[Dimandja]

jsteph:
so your snobbery bounces off of me and I have no trouble sleeping as a result of any database inferiorities

There is no need to get upset about my opinions on software that belongs to Microsoft - they can take the critiscism (all the way to the bank).

Also, if you check certain forums on this very site, you will find many people who have worse things to say about Access. By contrast, I'm being nice.

It didn't occur to me that someone would be put off that I didn't have any use for Access until about a year ago. I must also say that I have gotten pretty good at coding around Access annoyances.

Hey, don't take it personnally! For a moment there I thought you were Bill Gates.

Dimandja

 

[jsteph]

Dimandja
I think you missed my point. I can bash MS with the best of them, and have often fought hard in planning meetings against recommendations of using Access for anything larger than a recipe holder for a housewife.

The point is that there is a place for Access and it's the smarter person who recognizes that need and can capitalize on it, while it's a closed-minded person who looks down on something 'lesser' even though there is a real need for it.

I tip waiters, bellhops, etc. who do well because they provide a needed service and I'm glad they do it--someone's got to. You seem to take the attitude of one who turns his nose up at 'servants' and orders them around to impress his date, because your work is 'much better'. But be sure to check your fancy souffle for foreign substances when it comes to your table.
--jsteph

 

[Dimandja]

jsteph,

I appreciate your wisdom, but I really don't wish to engage in polemics here. As an answer to those who wondered how a an ITer can survive without Access, I simply tried to show that it is done routinely.

If you have a problem with that, it's hardly my &quot;fault&quot;.

Why do I have to agree with you that Access is great? I am entitled to my opinion on that, as you are. You shouldn't feel diminished because I disagree with you. You should really try to say something useful, to enrich this thread, instead of resorting to personal attacks.

Let's put this to rest, okay?

Dimandja

 

[jsteph]

Dimandja,
My comments weren't a personal attack--it's clear you still don't get my position.

I never said Access is 'great', just that it has a valid place in the IT world--much like 'lesser' waiters do in the restaurant business. What I disagree with is elitists who see certain tools as irrelevant because, in their opinion, they aren't as good as the tools said person uses. Much like one who looks down on waiters because they aren't wealthy like the restaruant owner.

This thread concerns 'Rougue IT', and my comments are that since Access is on the desktops in the department, there should be someone in the IT department--either a temp consultant or a permanent staffer--who know's it.
--jsteph

 

[Grenage]

I'll throw in my tuppeny piece, although it has already been said here and there in previous posts.

Obviously a company cannot afford one single employee to understand a system the company in some way relies on, that's just common sense.

It is also the IT departments responsibility rather than your own to deal with IT/support. The work you have done is really company work and ergo company property; you also work for the company and have been asked directly to hand it over.

As sleipnir214 quite rightly says &quot;I don't see why you'd even consider fighting this&quot;.

It is also worth noting that just because someone is in I.T it does not mean they should necessarily know Access,Word,Random Office Application through and through (if at all).

Russell.

 

[jsteph]

<<It is also the IT departments responsibility rather than your own to deal with IT/support>>

That is true. vbainchicago may be right in feeling miffed in the way IT came at him, however it is the responsibility of IT for the systems, even the little department-level things.

It would be like having an IT department without email--but having Exchange loaded on some clerks machine. Then that clerk--who needs to communicate with his co-workers daily--goes and sets up all the necessary connections and providers, and hands out email addresses to his co-workers so he can save literally hours comared to his old method--walking to the cubicle 3 floors up and across the building.

I think in this IT department someone had better know Exchange if they plan on keeping the email system--and in vbainchicago's case they indeed wanted to keep his Access system.
--jsteph

 

[Dimandja]

jsteph,

Maybe this will explain my position better:

From Grenage (among many very good points):
It is also worth noting that just because someone is in I.T it does not mean they should necessarily know Access,Word,Random Office Application through and through (if at all).

Dimandja

 

[jsteph]

...true, not everyone or anyone in particular, but someone should necessarily know the applications on the desktops. If no one does, then the &quot;rogue IT&quot; is the department itself, not the end-user who was only making use of what was on his desktop.
--jsteph

 

[rphips]

I find it hard to believe that a IT department would not know desktop applications. I have taught Network Engineering at multiple schools and one of the course that the student had to learn was desktop software. Of course it wasn't in depth since they were not there to be programmmers. But they where taught the nuts and bolts.

Also some IT departments only deal with the equipment on hand (narrow minded view) and outsource the desktop support. So its hard to tell what exactly thier IT department dynamics is without working there.



bob

Jones' Law
The man who can smile when things go wrong has thought of someone he can blame it on.