IT Teched Off at the WSJ
|
Playing on the gap between what employees do with their work computers and their IT departments' wishes that they wouldn't, The Wall Street Journal ran an article titled, "Ten Things Your IT Department Won't Tell You" July 30. Situation sound familiar? Really, how could it not be: There is no question that for a good lot of employees, their work computer is a "home away from home" where they shop for birthday gifts, watch YouTube and IM with friends to make evening plans, even when they have the full knowledge that it goes against their employers' policies. Is it because employers and IT departments are green meanies, control freaks and generally no fun whatsoever? The WSJ seems to know that this is not the whole picture: Partly, they want us to work while we're at work. And partly, they're afraid that what we're doing compromises the company's computer network -- putting the company at risk in a host of ways. So they've asked their information-technology departments to block us from bringing our home to work. And yet, the WSJ proceeded to inform readers of 10 ways they could get around their IT departments, from surfing blocked sites without leaving any traces to carrying on IM chats without downloading software, while only giving brief mention to the security risks at hand. Predictably, IT professionals not pleased. Running responses with titles including "Taunting the CIO," "Sanity Check: Did The Wall Street Journal sabotage businesses...?" and "The Wall Street Journal's Irresponsible And Dangerous Attack On Corporate IT" the vast majority called the article unequivocally damaging, naïve and a CSO's worst nightmare. The web log, An Information Security Place said "the WSJ needs a smack upside the head." Andy IT Blog, wrote an open letter to the WSJ reporter, Vauhini Vara, As a security professional my days are filled with trying to protect the assets of my company. I strive to educate my users to practice safe security and not do things that will put the network or the company at risk. Your article has just thrown lots of work out the window. Yet, others took a more far-sighted approach, reasoning that users already know how to do all of this stuff as the information was available elsewhere but also that perhaps its time for IT departments to take steps to bridge the gap between what users want and what they know is safe. Ceasing framing the issue as a "Users Versus IT" war, helping users take part in safe personal computing--from shopping to emailing to IM-ing in their workplace downtime, and for CIOs and corporations to recognize that an iron fist is not going to keep employees happy were some of the suggestions that stood out in responses, and in all likelihood, are the trains of thought that will keep IT departments relevant in the Enterprise 2.0 hereafter. |
For more IT Careers and Workplace News, check out eWeek Careers
Comments (4)
There is a difference between blocking content, applications, and utilities that a person needs to efficiently do their job; and blocking things that have nothing to do with the job.
Most I.T. departments are pathetically slow about evalutating, approving, and installing requested software or accesses; either due to lack a personnel, lack of knowedge, lack of skills, or just plain paranoia.
Communication of needs from users to the I.T. department is often a barrier. Far too many I.T. people do not have a adequate knowledge of the business processes they are supposed to be supporting, and far too many users are clueless as to the resources needed to support them; leading to mutual antagonism.
When I was going through the University of Maryland getting my BS in Computer Information Systems Management, the one common theme that threaded through all the classes was that meeting the needs of the users was the critical success factor that determined whether an I.T. department was doing it's job properly. Here we are 20 years later and that way of thinking just never seems to have taken root in most places.
Posted by Michael D. Houst | August 14, 2007 1:53 PM
I've worked with an SMB for the past 19 yrs and it has grown significantly since then. Everything was manual when I started, while we've recently graduated to the dot net framework. The level of computing expertise with the latest wave of new employees is rather intimidating for me. But I'm one of those people who came in because of a mass exodus of people wanting things different and left to begin another center. As one that has not been formally schooled in computing, it becomes a painful exp today with the lack of understanding that i have with the multiple platforms/OS's and dot net programming and procedures to follow.
The long and short of it, I am a glorified user, one who can use computing to company advantage, but also, one that isn't sure of things behind the prompt! And i don't want to be responsible for bringing down the company because I wasn't sure about some pirated software i just had to have, or a cute little snipet of code to render email more personal that had hacker's code riding piggyback. It would seem to me that with the current atmosphere of hacker's, whatever their motivation (self-indulgence; I'll show the world they can't stop me; Bill Gates thinks he's good?) it just makes sense to protect the company you work for, your bread & butter, if you will.
There will always be someone, somewhere, that will know more than others, know how to make it work better or, know how to make it stop working ... why would anyone ever invite them into the workplace to PLAY and wreak havoc!?!?
Whatever happened to "best practices?" I guess the WSJ would never use that??? Huh? Or maybe they have their own policy's, their own policing system ... YA THINK!?!? And perhaps, sitting atop their multi-layered firewall w/a ton of software
to prevent DOS and hackers from having their way, the WSJ thinks everyone has that kind of revenue to support similar measures? What are they thinking? Or, are they?? m w s
Posted by Michael W. Smith | August 14, 2007 2:01 PM
I would strongly encourage every WSJ employee and each employee of every WSJ advertiser to keep copy of article by their computer and every day to use at least two of the tips on company time.
I think the results after about 3 weeks would make a great human interest story for the Wall Street Journal and just the type of fodder the enquiring minds of WSJ readers are clamoring for.
Posted by J Guberman | August 15, 2007 9:47 AM
The techmeisters have to deal with the reality of current technology and stop whining for gosh sakes.
Hire people who are creative enough to figure out how to both maintain security and to allow for highly normal activities of the human drone at work. Just like we need people to figure out some other kind of energy besides coal and oil. All that stuff we teach our little kids about "lifelong learning" being the objective of schooling - it all rings hollow when I read you whiners.
Posted by Cynthia Berger | August 17, 2007 6:15 PM