Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
steelkilt
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
255 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-08-30 : 09:57:50
|
| A complex dilemma, but an interesting one, I assure you, for any DB designer/manager. Read on and weep...I've been hired to create a database for my new company. I'm a permanent employee, not a contractor. Currently they're trying to survive with a patchwork quilt of Excel spreadsheets, underutilized SQL Server 7.0 db with a lousy VB front end. I am tasked with bringing together several warring factions, all of whom guard their data closely. Top management have decreed that a centralized database must be implemented, but, due to politics, this is not going to be easy.The group in charge of kicking off the project (they are the largest data stakeholder and thus I must work closely with them first) is run by a woman who clearly knows very little about database design and who has left the database management task to her loyal database "manager", Joe. Problem: Joe doesn't know a database from an attaché case. So, I have to recommend a FULL database design to the higher ups, even while the woman in charge of directing the project spends most of her time trying to figure out how she can remain loyal to incompetent Joe, who is basically just getting in my way. Firing Joe is not an option, I have learned from inside sources.I have told this woman that a full redesign is in order, the whole nine yards: scrap existing "systems", establish requirements, business rules, do a full-blown data model. She has balked at this for the following reasons:1. It will take too long and she wants some results quickly2. The full redesign will assign to the electronic circular file all previous attempts at database design, including the existing VB app, and the existing SQL database. I gather they have spent a good amount of money on contractor services for this half-baked solution and they don't want to look like idiots when I recommend the trash heap for their efforts.3. Joe, the incompetent database "manager", needs work to do and much of his work involves the upkeep of the existing "system", such as it is. (the woman in charge obviously has not stated this as a reason, but I know this to be the case based on my observations of work flow).Whenever we meet, this woman tries to steer the solution to one that involves building a new system on top of the existing flawed SQL investment. When I tell her that the tables are a mess and I cite specific fields and how said fields can't be queried properly, she says things like "Well, that field is not important anyway. We've been managing with these tables so far. What's really wrong with them?" I give her more examples, we go around in circles etc. while Joe stares at the wall in a state approaching catatonia.It is clear to me that previous attempts at database redesign in this company have failed mainly because mid-level managers (the folks directly responsible for the data) have not been seriously involved in these projects. They leave it to people like Joe to patch together the remains of failed redesign attempts and they are afraid of a centralized solution because they know this means their data will be exposed to their colleagues and this makes them nervous. Top management, on the other hand, want a centralized solution to succeed and they hired me to make it work.I am being pressured by the mid-level manager woman described above to recommend a design solution that is only a partial redesign. Since this woman is only one of the players and since top management have said they are behind me 100% in whatever I decide to recommend, I am quite obviously leaning toward recommending the full redesign. This could mean hard times ahead for me as I work with this woman and her faithful sidekick Joe, but that's a risk I'm willing to take.I should add that this database is, design wise, a fairly simple one. Everything is keyed to the main Customer_ID. The main problems are the half-baked legacy systems that need to be destroyed.I'm curious to know what you all would do in a situation like this, and whether you've had any experience with this type of situation. Any advice is appreciated as I'm approaching the deadline for recommendations.Cheers,Steelkilt |
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 10:26:53
|
Since you have "top management behind (you) 100%" I believe you should simply short-circuit the middle-level problem people and go right to the top. Nothing will get the middle group moving faster than upper management snapping their fingers. I've never had quite the level of issues you're having now, but I've gone over people's heads before and it does work wonders.  Forget about the evil looks and nasty attitude, the point is that you're both there to do a job. Joe's job really isn't in any danger, his responsibilities will simply change. If anything, you're doing him a favor by making a new system without all of the bugs of the original. He can spend more time on the important stuff. Presenting it to him like that might help. If you think it's worth it, involve him in the design process...as an observer. I've found that keeping people involved makes them feel important, and if Joe is gonna have any contact with the new system then it makes sense to keep him involved. Whether he knows anything or not, it's better to try to teach him something about what you're doing. It'll help him and will give you an ally.Joe's boss sounds like a number of people I've had to deal with; basically she's a political animal. If she is interfering, it would help to make her boss aware of it. She's needlessly causing trouble for you, so there's nothing wrong in doing some of it to her. When she backs off, you back off. It's not your fault if she looks dumb for spending money to patch a bad system. Obviously, if that solution was still viable, you wouldn't be working there right now, and you should remind her and everyone else of that. The point is to cut their losses and move on. And if you want, you can console her with the fact that many, many corporations have had the same problem during the past dot-com boom and bust, and they are now doing the same thing: cleaning up a crappy system. A lot of contractors made a fortune patching and recommending bad systems just to lock in their clients. The point to drive home is that they cannot AFFORD to continue using the same old system.Lastly, as far as the little fiefdoms quibbling with each other over "their" data, remind them that they all work for the same company, and that the corporate management has decreed that there WILL be a centralized system. Also mention that you will be giving weekly (or daily) progress reports to upper management, and will be reporting any roadblocks that come up. Yes, you will make enemies, but they don't want to be friends with you anyway, and you still have a job to do.And always make your case as a reasonable argument. Try to have 10 times as much info as you might need to persuade someone. I've seen a lot of petty, unreasonable people actually convert to my side when inundated with logic, or at least cave in to overwhelming evidence. HTH<edit>Just to add, you really can't win playing politics. The best way to go is to avoid the politics as much as possible. Do your work; if someone slows you down, talk to their boss, and if the problem isn't solved, go to the top. It won't take long before people get out of your way; if they don't, then you're screwed anyway. </edit>Edited by - robvolk on 08/30/2002 10:30:21 |
 |
|
|
setbasedisthetruepath
Used SQL Salesman
992 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 10:36:44
|
| Your description reads almost to the letter like an experience of mine several years ago. First, kudos on describing the situation succintly yet clearly, and second, boy do I feel for you.I've found the key to clarity on these issues is understanding where a manager's instincts lie. Everyone's different, I've never met yours of course, but generally they manifest a lack of technical knowledge and ability with a tendency to oversimplify problems and understate the resources required to solve them. They also tend to insulate and guard their own little islands of data to preserve the (likely quite small) authority and expertise they hold on a given business process.So the overall question isn't what's right, really. You know what's right, it's a complete redesign and you were clear on that. The issue is: will your manager ever come on board with you? Deciding that requires prescient knowledge of what your redesign will mean to her. Will it consolidate her authority? Will it destroy it? Will it discredit her? Think of her perspective as pure political capital - her stance on the issue does not require technical reasoning (nor might it have any as you've pointed out). It is purely a reflection of what assertions she's made in the past. Perhaps the project is over budget, or late. Perhaps she's claimed the project would require far less resources than what it has to date. If so, for example, she's already been proven wrong on that point as you were hired specifically to address the issue, and you're recommending even more resources be allocated.If, on the other hand, you think she doesn't have much "skin in the game", as they say, go brazenly forward with your redesign and make it a gold-plated asskicker for the ages. Her resistance will crumble, she'll act as though she was aboard for the long-haul (her earlier resistance was only doubt about the newbie's skills, of course!), and everything's peachy. F*ck it up and you'll be on the street ... Jonathan{0} |
|
|
|
Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!
4970 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 10:41:06
|
Well that sounds like a diddly of a pickle  While I totally agree with what Rob says (and I know what some of the people he was worked with are like) one thing that can always help in situations like this is really emphasise the positives to the business.Middle managers and the like couldn't give two hoots about whether your database is normalised etc etc They don't care that the schema is a mess, all they hear is "blah blah blah blah blah blah 3 months". Tech people need to learn to talk to management better.Try some new approaches like :"you will be able to get better, more accurate reporting like .... blah"or"your application will be faster and we will have no concerns about YOUR data being corrupted"Put it in terms that they care about and you will get a lot further.Damian |
|
|
|
Page47
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2878 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 10:57:29
|
| Congrats, steelkit. You have reached a major milestone in the quest for bitterness. And I don't mean bitter like the taste of a bitter-sweet candy, but rather bitter like the scent left in the air by a spend round into the skull of the un-righteous ... Only one more step to take before you are ready to join the highly lucritive ranks of the 'the consultant/contractor'....You see, the next step is to think and act like a microsoft program. "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" ... yeah? ok, gone. Raise your concern and leave your emotions at the at the bank with your checking account. If your manager wants to run your data-tier into the ground, by all means do it; and do it like a champ. Dive bomb the son-of-a like a air stunt show gone wrong. Its the only option, if you want to suceed. The people that 'get ahead' are the once that are best at crushing thier piers. If you really want to do things right you need to get your she-boss and Joe-2D2 to think its their idea. You'll never get anywhere trying to convince them; rather you need to trick them into trying to convince you... If you can't do that then you need to help them create the worst system ever. If you can live with this ugly reality, you are ready to be a contractor.If you are unable to stomach the stench of the mercinary-of-technology business. Then keep on fighting the good fight. Go over her head and get the big-bosses behind you. She will raise a stink like all hell; in fact I foresee a meeting involving her tears ahead. You will stress. Your personal life will suffer. You won't end up with a good solution anyway, because you will have to make compromises here and there. And eventually, one of you will be fired or quit.Tech is a strange business. If you were a plumber, most likely, your boss is a ex-plumber that was so good at it, she got a promotion. Your foreman understands all the "hot is on the left; cold is on the right" stuff. However, in this biz, most likely your boss graduated college with a History degree or something.Just keep one more thing in mind. If you do it her way, and it fails, costing the business much money, she gets fired. If you squash her and do it your way, and it fails, costing the business much money, you get fired. Sometimes doing things right is much more risky ....Jay White{0} |
|
|
|
Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!
4970 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 11:18:29
|
| JayHas anyone ever told you that you may be a touch on the cynical side ?Damian |
|
|
|
Page47
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2878 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 11:33:46
|
If by "touch" you mean like the way bare human flesh touches concrete when one "get's off" a motorcycle at excessive speed on an Interstate highway...then yeah, I've been told that... Ever watch any of these new Reality-based shows: Big Brother, Survivor? Ever notice the most righteous person never wins? Ever notice the most the eventual winner was almost voted off/out at every turn of the game? In my mind, the safest political place to be is never on the top or on the bottom; rather, you should strive to be the second worst person on you team.Note: and I mean Big Note: This rule only applies when you are working for someone else. This rules changes when you are the boss. When you are in charge. When it's your project. In that case, your best effort is the only option.Jay White{0} |
|
|
|
steelkilt
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
255 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 11:41:45
|
| Now, those are some rather targeted and entertaining pieces of advice. Thanks much. One thing I should have pointed out vis-a-vis job security, I work for the Federal Government! So, practically speaking, this means:1. if I allow a poor design based on the wishes of one of the data stakeholders, and this poor design leads to a failed system, this being the federal government, more money will be thrown at the problem!2. If I get approval for a complete redesign that fails and it's my fault, I...move to another government agency!Seriously, though, the current state of affairs is so bleak for them that even a partial redesign that patched together existing flawed tables would be a huge improvement over what they've got. The question is what DEGREE of success do I want to get out of this and the answer is colored by the political struggles that lie ahead. This being the government, I can't afford to get stuck on the wrong side of a political struggle. I have my allies and they are all senior people, so I feel safe in recommending a complete redesign. I know the complete redesign will succeed on some level because it is based on a model I successfully implemented at another agency (web-based front end access SQL Server 7.0 via ASP for data input, updating, reporting). Of course at that agency my boss was actively engaged, was a veteran of IT infighting, and led the charge from start to finish, so... |
|
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 11:51:32
|
quote:
Note: and I mean Big Note: This rule only applies when you are working for someone else. This rules changes when you are the boss. When you are in charge. When it's your project. In that case, your best effort is the only option.
Since 99.9999999% of people work for someone else before striking out on their own, exactly when do they learn to give their best effort? That's not something you're born with, it's a learned skill that requires a lot of exercise. No one will be successful on their own if they do nothing but a half-assed job and kissing up to some complete idiot manager while working for someone else.It is NEVER a waste of time to ALWAYS do your best. To say otherwise is like suggesting a NYC firefighter should skate on the next building fire 'cause it's not as big an emergency as September 11th was. You sure as hell wouldn't want to be in that burning building, would you? |
|
|
|
steelkilt
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
255 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 12:25:07
|
| Rob,I tend to agree with you. I can't go into this thinking that I'll give it less than my best because, after all, it is mine. |
|
|
|
Onamuji
Aged Yak Warrior
504 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 12:41:14
|
LOL do what I did .... I had this exact thing but swapped ... all the mid level managers wanted a full blown redesign and were behind me while upper management was like OH no we've spent 10's of thousands of dollars developing the current system... so what I did was say we are upgrading the application to .NET and padding that project with enough time to redesign the database ... little do they know the 10's of thousands of dollars they spent having this application built is pretty much scrapped now ... however it looks and feels the same except it is 500% more efficient Sounds like the mid level lady is against change for the betterment of the company ... seems like she doesn't want the company to suceed  ... isn't this just an example of how ignorant management is to us DBA's and DB developers |
|
|
|
Page47
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2878 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 13:36:18
|
quote:
Since 99.9999999% of people work for someone else before striking out on their own, exactly when do they learn to give their best effort? That's not something you're born with, it's a learned skill that requires a lot of exercise. No one will be successful on their own if they do nothing but a half-assed job and kissing up to some complete idiot manager while working for someone else.
I disagree on many points. Ever read Pirsig's musings on Quality? Quality transcends definition, yet is understood by every (thinking) person. No, it's not rational, but try to envision a world devoid of the concept of quality. One must understand what it means to 'do things right' in order to accept doing things wrong, on purpose. In fact, I would suggest one learns more about being a good DBA by following around Joe while he promotes evil. Too often, a novice DBA stumbles upon the right way to do things, without knowing how she got there. SQL is a learned skill, true, but knowing what is Quality should be built in.And who ever said anything about half-assed. In fact, I think I said "do it like a champ". I am saying that when faced with doing things "the right way" and doing things "your boss's way", usually the latter (assuming you at least suggest and document the right way) can be the path of the successful professional in this field. I'm saying do things "your boss's way" to the best of your ability. It's not for everyone.I once was on a job and I found myself standing outside in the pooring rain at 2 in the morning exhausted from far too many hours of work and far too few hours of sleep. As I stood there, trying to spark a rain-soaked cancer-stick, I almost (I am a tough guy afterall) began to cry. I was fighting so hard against the grain to do things 'right' when my project manager felt we should do things 'wrong'. It was killing me inside. I mean meet-me-at-the-bottom-of-a-bottle-killing me. About a month later, I was "downsized", mainly because of my "inability to follow direction". From then on, for me, its been Z.E.I. - Zero Emotional Investment. When I see a better way to do things, I make a suggestion. I may even put some time into offering sound reasoning why it is higher quality. But the moment I realize I am trying to square-peg a round-hole (meaning boss isn't going to go my way), I drop it and tow the boss's line with a smile. Managers are driven by power, afterall. I file what I learned away in my head. I've learned something about SQL and I've made boss happy. Win-win in my book.You on the other hand are suggesting to steelkit that (s)he(?) should continue down the path of "going over the boss's head". This can be effective, true, but is very very risky. In order for it to work, you better make damn sure, at the end of the day, you boss is packing a brown box or you are boning your boss's boss. Cause if that middle manager knows anything about 'the game', she will be gunning for you for as long as you work for her. Screw people on a personal level and they don't invite you out for drinks anymore. Screw people on a professional level and you mess with someone's livelyhood. A tech manager that doesn't understand tech is going to hide that secret as best they can. And if you reveal it, you better be able to finish the job.quote:
It is NEVER a waste of time to ALWAYS do your best.
Exactly. But ALWAYS do your best what? I say do your best to suckle your boss, not do your best to suckle Dr. Codd. He's not going to care and doesn't pay you much anyway. I'm not suggesting you sacrifice you own personal growth in understanding technology, rather, you just let the pilot fly the plane and privately keep track of what's good and what's not.quote:
To say otherwise is like suggesting a NYC firefighter should skate on the next building fire 'cause it's not as big an emergency as September 11th was. You sure as hell wouldn't want to be in that burning building, would you?
Not fair, Rob. And then you play the emotional 9/11 card? Jeez-Louize. I must have really struck a nerve, for you to lash out at me like that. Technology is very different than real work. I tried to draw that distinction earlier. Very rarely does the Fire Chief know less about fire than you. Very rarely does the chief of surgery know less about surgery than you. Quite frequently, the technology middle manager knows less about technology than you...Look man, everybody has a different M.O. And who am I to say what's whats best. All I know is that political stress on the job is something that can be avoided, and for me, its worth it. And the more I learn about this biz (and I've got much more to learn) the more I realize that 'doing things the right way' is stricktly reserved for the lies written up as case studies in trade mags. Oh and I've read some bogus articles about projects I have been involved in....Cynical, bitter, jaded? maybe. Survivalistic? That's more like it.Jay White{0} |
|
|
|
aiken
Aged Yak Warrior
525 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 14:09:31
|
| My outlook here is that every organization has an underlying philosophy. In very large organizations (like the government), smaller fiefdom's have their own philosophy.My theory is this: if the organization's philosophy doesn't support doing things the right way, you've got two choices: try to change that philosophy, or do things the way they want it. Trying to convince them to make a special exception in their approach to things, just for your project, is by far the most difficult and least likely to succeed approach.We all know there are tradeoffs for every decision. If their organization philosophy is to accept higher long-term risks, lower long-term performance, and higher long-term costs in the name of faster time-to-delivery, less retraining and personnel management, and less risk of looking bad... well, that's their decision. All you can do is try to make people put those tradeoffs on the table so everyone knows on what basis the decision is being made.After that, you can either battle to change the whole outlook of the place (tough, but doable), or accept the role you've got to play as less than ideal and, as Jay says, try not to get emotionally involved in a project that you know will have problems down the road.If you do decide to fight to change organziational philosophy, TQM is a good place to start. It's buzzwordy and fluffy enough that middle managers love it in the beginning ("My new motto is quality!"), but effective enough that they often accidentally end up in a position where they are forced to actually follow through (nobody wants to say "I've given up on that 'quality' thing!").Cheers-b |
|
|
|
Onamuji
Aged Yak Warrior
504 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-30 : 14:24:18
|
reading this thread made me feel happy ... knowing I'm not alone... that even if I left the place I'm at now I would most likely end up in a place that is just like it ... we can never run away from our problems ... for our problems are not with other people ... they are in ourselves ... this one is *for you*  |
|
|
|
AjarnMark
SQL Slashing Gunting Master
3246 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-04 : 20:36:35
|
Jay, being that I'm one of those "mercinary", "contractor types" I can't find the words to tell you what a warm feeling I got reading your response above. Unfortunately, I have to concede that you described a set of the contractor world, but I'm sure you'd also concede that there are quality contractors out there.As for your comments quoted here:quote:
Tech is a strange business. If you were a plumber, most likely, your boss is a ex-plumber that was so good at it, she got a promotion. Your foreman understands all the "hot is on the left; cold is on the right" stuff. However, in this biz, most likely your boss graduated college with a History degree or something.Just keep one more thing in mind. If you do it her way, and it fails, costing the business much money, she gets fired. If you squash her and do it your way, and it fails, costing the business much money, you get fired. Sometimes doing things right is much more risky ....
I'd like to say that 1) You make a great point about how the tech world can really differ from so many other jobs. The truly unfortunate thing, though, is that a good salesman does not necessarily make a good sales manager (or fill in any other profession) because the responsibilities of managers are very different. It's nice when the manager understands their underlings' jobs, but many a good employee got promoted to management and soon thereafter fired for being incompetent when they should have been left in their original position and rewarded for being good at it.As for your assertion that doing things your boss's way and if it doesn't work she'll get fired, I disagree. In the corporate politics I've been involved in, the boss is typically more adept at political maneuvering than the employee, and the boss finds a way to spin it to still come out looking good. You either need to get good at the politics yourself, or get a close ally who is.But, being that steelkilt's scenario is federal government, it's unlikely that anybody will get fired. Reassigned, maybe, fired, unlikely. Steelkilt, I'm doing contract work for a city government and understand the various fiefdoms. You haven't said who your boss is in this scenario, but it sounds like the lady of issue is not your boss. I have found it very handy to work with the one who is my boss to exercise his political knowledge/influence (or baseball bat) to help us "come to an understanding" of how things will be handled.I strongly encourage you to follow Merkin's advice, figure out how to put things in the terms that the listener understands and is interested in. And make allies where you can. When you propose the complete redesign, maybe you can find a way to spin the reasoning so nobody loses face (or as little as possible) in the process. Find out who knows the background and pump them for info. I find that some of my best sources of info are other developers, and my own boss. I have learned to ask questions about the past project (specifically WHY was it done this way) as a matter of curiosity and "helping me to understand better, so I can do a better job for you".And I hope you'll keep us posted! There's nothing like a good drama. Or is it a tragic comedy?Edited by - ajarnmark on 09/04/2002 20:37:47 |
|
|
|
byrmol
Shed Building SQL Farmer
1591 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-04 : 21:12:41
|
| Steelkilt,First you are NOT alone... I read the 2nd paragraph and instantly thought GOVERNMENT.....That is all the information I needed to feel your pain...I like Merkin's advice.. but go a step further and mention MONEY!!!The savings that are generated by a well built DB system is almost immeasurable.. As a DBA/programmer, one of the outcomes of a good system is the firing of employees. It is one of the first questions I ask the client AFTER they have given the go ahead..(A man has to put food on the table)I was working on a rather large financial DB when I asked the Client, how many people are getting sacked after I finish this project.Besides the look of sheer horror (How dare you ask that..) he admitted about 30 people.This is a moral implication you will have to get used too.. between you and me, beer & <other substances> are an excellent solution to this...Good luck...DavidM"SQL-3 is an abomination.." |
|
|
|
rharmon
Starting Member
41 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-04 : 21:57:21
|
It's not that much better in the private sector or with well trained management. I'm hitting my 6 year aniversary this month with a Fortune 500 tech company. These have been 6 of the hardest years of my life.I came to this company in tech support, and was promoted to development on internal systems. From my first day as an architect, the political work has been much harder than the coding. I cannot blame the company, as I've worked with a lot of developers from this company and others. I read in this months installment from Ralph Kimball on Intelligent Enterprise "we designers are genetically selected because we have an unusual tolerance for complexity. Almost all of our designs are too intricate and too complicated." We live in the most complicated portion of most industries, we're drawn to complication like managers to buzz phrazes. Most likely, it's this capability and passion that brought us to this industry in the first place.Our jobs are very similar to any corporate hatchet man. We're here for one of two reasons, to generate more revenue or to cut costs. Either way, we're treading on someone's turf and it does indeed upset them.It seems a great number of us are dealing with tenuous logic at the management level, I say, "DRIVE IT LIKE YOU STOLE IT!" If we all get terminated at the same time, we'll all know where the openings are and we can just trade jobs.  |
|
|
|
JustinBigelow
SQL Gigolo
1157 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-05 : 00:37:41
|
quote:
Ever read Pirsig's musings on Quality?
No, I don't read musings. Nor do I read critiques, analyses, white papers, or compendiums. What I do read: Maxim magazine, anything from a fortune cookie, the occasional traffic sign, and pop-up books. While everyone has provided invaluable personal reflection on the subject let me solve this problem with the following quote....quote:
When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, looks you crooked in the eye and asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye, and you remember what ol' Jack Burton always says at a time like that: "Have ya paid your dues, Jack?" "Yessir, the check is in the mail."
'nuff said!Justin Have you hugged your SQL Server today? |
|
|
|
rihardh
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
307 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-05 : 03:32:52
|
| Steelkit:Your article tells me that you must be quite young and fairly unexpirienced in such situations. Otherwise you wouldn't be writing this article afterall. As I understand it, you know how to do things right, but you're not the man in charge. If this is the case, stick to "Page47" advice and go with the flow. A verbal confirmation of the top management is worth nothing when the going gets tough. If you would have it in writing, you would be in charge of the project anyway and people would have to listen to you no mather what. If the current situation in your company is as bad as you describe and the woman is still in charge, she must have strong arguments to be there. Don't mess with her yet. Take your time.Management and professional skills are worlds you can't compare.Robvolk:I fully agree with you with a little "but" in it. There are companies and there are "companies". If you are fortunate enough to work for people who understand what you're talking about and appreciate your work, than it's the right attitude. "But" if you're stuck in a situation as "Steelkit" describes it, then I would reconsider your theory. I beleive you are in your 30's and have lots of experience in handling management. "Steelkit" fails on both terms. The only weapon he has is professional skill. I wouldn't send him to war only with a knife when the oposition has artilery.Page47:Thanks for describing real world situations. I beleive that everyone in this thread agrees with you in some part. We should communicate on similar terms more often. |
|
|
|
nr
SQLTeam MVY
12543 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-05 : 04:06:22
|
| You can always migrate an existing system to a new design (rash statement I know).If all access is provided via stored procedures then you can access any data as long as the data is correct - doesn't really matter about the structure - just some are easier and more efficient than others.You are in a strong postion as you can implement whatever you want - so keep the old people happy by implementing something on top of their system then migrating it to a good design later.Tell them it will mean a longer migration path and that you will block any changes in the meantime as it will mean complicating an already incorrect design. You will then find that you can prioritise migration of parts of the system to cater for urgent requirements.I'm in a similar postion except that I'm told by the people here that they don't want to make the system simpler as they want to make sure that they have to do overtime. Similarly they don't want serious bugs fixed as they need to keep the support work. They want to keep as much in dts as possible as there is not so much expertise in it - and when they have to change a dts package it means a large and long regression test.Oh - and they can blame it all on the people who designed the system and left.I'm about to resign.==========================================Cursors are useful if you don't know sql.DTS can be used in a similar way.Beer is not cold and it isn't fizzy. |
|
|
|
rkc01
Starting Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-05 : 08:57:02
|
| This has been the most interesting thread I've ever read here, (or anywhere for that matter). It's got intrigue, passion, wit, and cynicism. There's even a hero and antagonist. Done right, it might make a good movie. I see Nicholas Cage in the role of steelkit. All kidding aside, there's little I can add to the conversation that hasn't already been said. Good luck to you steelkit and kudos to the rest of you, well done. |
|
|
|
Next Page
|
|
|
|
|
Politics threaten my redesign, what would you do?