Across the board, the number 1 worst attribute that I see working with the
PLUG, technology teams, and mentoring (at or around year 3 in academics,
and year 3 - 10 in IT/linux professionalism) = arrogance.
What exactly is arrogance anyway. Where is this found? Why?
It's the place in the discussion where one person dominates assuming that
their position or knowledge is greater (without investigation). This is
also referred to as "OneUpManShip".
It's the place in the presentation where students and PLUG peers write off
the person who has taken on the role to "present on the subject" based on
their ability to verbally spiel acronyms. This is referred to "Minimizing".
It's the place in the team dissemination of project roles and tasks where a
member's enthusiasm is downplayed based on experience. This is referred to
"Dues Hierarchy".
This is the place in the interview where the employer fails to realize all
they need to do is very the work history, since everything for a Linux
professional is motivated by and driven from an ethical systems
administrator viewpoint (not any communications with or responsibilities
disseminated from the employer); just as we are woken from sleep to work on
or check systems; and jazzed beyond belief by a well engineered hardware
server like IBM Blade (can you say Fiber channel switched backplane?)...
There are a great many examples where an ego based emotional assumption of
or judgement is placed on our peers, our work, and even ourselves at one
point or another.
The ability to understand linux systems requires a certain type of systemic
theory; which can be daunting for some people; such systems integration can
be hard to troubleshoot [and successfully negotiate within] without
inherent abilities but can be done with a great deal of complex experience,
however this is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. So the people who do well at what we
do, are usually those that find that they inherently find this easy.
It is, however, far from easy, since most of us work long hours, without
adequate physical exercise and balanced stress free environments. The sheer
amount of responsibility and ultimate reliance in all shops on the unique
abilities of the Unix/Linux systems administrator are daunting to most once
they get a full view.
However, we each learn standard process applied across the OSI stack and/or
fed through the kernel/memory/processor for systems or DevOps applications
performance and integration, security or troubleshooting.
Standard process, which includes a few easy to learn rules, relies on logs
and linux tools, completely supplants any experience, past systems history
knowledge (available on/in the server), most visio documentation or
RunBooks (which should not exist unless something cannot be known by server
view alone).
Ironically, to people who are not linux-ish, the statement that "The Server
IS the documentation" seems incredibly arrogant, when in fact, it
simplifies all the arrogant posturing and 7 deadly sin based profit from
the misunderstanding of unix/linux administration and engineering.
We all intimately understand the concept of "obnosis" or Knowledge by
Observation - rather than what is imparted via formal rote learning and
scholastic pursuit.
What do you think? Is the adage "There is NO substitute for experience"
correct or can anyone using standard process (as opposed to documented
process) and NIX command line skills (yet bringing no experience) get to
the finish line at the same time?
http://wiki.obnosis.com <
http://wiki.obnosis.com>
--
(503) 754-4452 Android
(623) 239-3392 Skype
(623) 688-3392 Google Voice
**
it-clowns.com <
http://it-clowns.com/c/index.php>
Chief Clown
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)