Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe I’ve just found the wrong companies but it strikes meas funny that there are so many companies that I have worked for that have no idea how to use the software programs they have purchased. I am not a technology geek by any stretch of the imagination and I don’t really find it useful in many applications, I prefer the old school way, going to a physical file, looking at the documents, getting what I need and moving on. I know in today’s world,it is just not that way.
Having said that, I have no college degree and have onlylearned by doing, I’ve done many different types of jobs in different industries and have worked in the same positions as those that do have degrees, though obviously they really did not need them, (a different rant for a differentday). Over the last ten years, I have worked for four employers both large and small employers each utilizing theirindustry specific software. Software that is supposed to make things muchsimpler, yet none of the companies actually used the systems the way theyshould be used. I could figure it all out, not sure why they could not., they all had IT departments, I do not have any computer science training and at all four companies’, I wound up showing them how to use the systems to the fullest advantage, I did this to make my job easier not theirs BTW.
Now I am working as an independent contractor and am utilizing an app at an e-business, I amappalled at how poorly it works, jobs are double booked, confirmations are sentfor jobs that don’t exist, app fails many times . I just want to go back to old school, paper,pen , files and telephone, maybe a type writer.
Edit:
Oh ok, you edited your original post. I was like "... whoa." And no, it's amazing to me how many people have progressed in their careers and have gotten by based off of nothing other than their smiles or because they had enough money to do something. This is apparent in not even knowing the internal processes of their own business/team.
This happened at my last place of business. The owner who created the company and its idea didn't even understand how her own programs worked nor what we did - it made no sense. If you're saying, "No, she must have known WHAT you guys were doing for HER company." No. No she did not. She'd ask us why we did x or why y needed to be done in the database. The database we used in Access was built by a relative of hers and obviously catered to her type of business and she had to request certain things be built into it. Still, she had no idea what anything actually did, and would always ask us what they did.
Amazing.
Last edited by Jjury15; 02-13-2015 at 04:15 PM..
Reason: Post revised.
True, but you might be mixing issues. That is, the IT folks may well know how the software works, but have no control over how it's actually used. And then the users, who are buried in their processes, often don't know how the software works. And then there are the managers who refuse to use the software because it's below their position.
Example. We have a business process software that formats and routes various products for review and signature. Not the easiest but functional. However all of our managers, who are supposed to actually sign things in the software still insist on getting a preview hard copy and personal briefing before they will sign in the automated system. In other words, they still insist, because of their position, of doing everything manually, and then repeating in the automated system. For 90% of the work packages, this is nothing more than ensuring everyone pays homage to their authority before it goes to the next step.
True, but you might be mixing issues. That is, the IT folks may well know how the software works, but have no control over how it's actually used.
A thousand times this. Our users will print a page from our practice management software and then enter the data into another section of the same program. There's no need to do that. It can be carried over at a click of a button but they won't listen.
We have another user who prints a report on paper, scans it back to herself and then attaches it to an email to send. We've shown her a dozen times how she can just save the report and attach it. We put in faxing from the desktop 3 years ago, but people still print, then take the printed paper to the fax machine to fax. You can lead a horse to water, etc.
Technology is nothing more than a tool. It can be designed well, or poorly. It can be utilized well, or poorly. People can be trained to use it well, or not at all. That is what the real issue is.
Most companies do a poor job of analyzing the tasks most people do in the course of their day, and when any effort is made to look into that it is usually done by people who don't have direct experience with doing the tasks that need to be supported by the software. The decisions on what software is used is also driven by people who are more interested in getting data and reports than they are about the actual work process, and that frequently results in screed up priorities when new software and processes are adopted. I've been working in this area in one form or another for almost 20 years, and it drives me crazy seeing how poorly different technologies are chosen and utilized. At the same time, I make a lot of money just by looking at all sides of a companies needs and making common sense decisions, so I don't get too upset about it .
All of that said, I don't think any large company can, or should, go back to paper. I'm old enough to have worked with paper systems in a few companies, and it was awful. When I did accounts payable work the first thing I would do every morning was fill out a slip with the account numbers of all the files I needed fo the day. It would take me about 20 minutes to figure out what I needed and write up my list. I would then drop off the list and return to my desk to ait for the files to be brought to me (another 20-30 minutes). Then I could start to work. If I forgot to list any accounts I needed to work on that day - another 15 minutes. If got a call asking about a problem with an account - I couldn't give any answer for at least 15 minutes. Looking back it's pretty crazy compared to how things run today.
Some people at my work PRINT OUT EXCEL SHEETS then read it and type stuff in manually all the time. They take an hour to do a task that would take me 5 mins by using CTRL C - CTRL V. It drives me crazy.
Anyways, besides that, my company mostly automates things far enough that a person doesn't even interact at all. A job that uses to be done by hundreds is done by a program now, monitored by an employee, and adjusted by IT whenever needed.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,572 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57798
The biggest problem I see is that IT rolls out software and there is no training. People are expected to be able to make use of Sharepoint and OneNote, for example, as if it were Outlook or Word. Fortunately I have one person that has really gotten into it and has learned to do design workflows, and with my help
display data from our Java based SQL database management system, including individualized views for the various employees to help them do their work.
Most others here just use it s a filing system, a substitute for the old file explorer. When I discussed the possibility of getting some additional reports programmed the head of IT suggested buying some additional reporting software.
Blind application of technology in hopes to solve a problem... management without a firm understanding of how technology plays a role in work/productivity fall for it every time.
One budget says.. sure... buy more technology!
But the other budget, the one used for hiring expertise and training says... No way!
True, but you might be mixing issues. That is, the IT folks may well know how the software works, but have no control over how it's actually used. And then the users, who are buried in their processes, often don't know how the software works. And then there are the managers who refuse to use the software because it's below their position.
Example. We have a business process software that formats and routes various products for review and signature. Not the easiest but functional. However all of our managers, who are supposed to actually sign things in the software still insist on getting a preview hard copy and personal briefing before they will sign in the automated system. In other words, they still insist, because of their position, of doing everything manually, and then repeating in the automated system. For 90% of the work packages, this is nothing more than ensuring everyone pays homage to their authority before it goes to the next step.
or based on their experiences, they dont trust the IT systems. CYA
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
