RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)

<SPAN

class=409585720-25062001>Alex,
<SPAN

class=409585720-25062001> 
<SPAN

class=409585720-25062001>   Touche` ,  I didn't think about the managers CYA ability.  Most don't get their jobs by being good, they get there by knowing how to blame people and look good by comparison...   They were most definitely in a lose-lose situation.   I am glad for them that they got their point across finally.
 
--Chris <FONT face=Arial
size=2>Chris.Bowes_at_Kosa.com
 

  <FONT face="Times New Roman"
  size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Hillman, Alex   [mailto:Alex.Hillman_at_usmint.treas.gov]Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001   5:45 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:   RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)   I
  suggest CYA as much as possible and escalate the issue and begin search   for another job. Also if you are an FTE - now is a good time to go on   vacation or become sick.  Because if something breaks damagement knows   much better how to avoid responsibility than we (at least most of us) are. For   example it can be said that you did not explained an issue well enough etc.   And you will show your e-mail to the damager of the damager who knows even   less about Oracle.
  <FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial
  size=2> 
  Alex
  Hillman (incredibly rude and cinical)
  <FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial
  size=2> 
      

    <FONT face=Tahoma
    size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Bowes, Chris     [mailto:Chris.Bowes_at_kosa.com]Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 5:06     PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:     Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)     In a perfect world or even a sucky world, yes.  But the     nightmare scenerio that was laid out wouldn't allow proactivity on their     part. The inconvenient time thing was due to the fact that the proactive     items they wanted to to do were rejected.  They had a table that was     diagnosed with too small extents and they wanted a bigger extent size.      They submitted paperwork and a non-tech management type said 'no'.      Does he disobey the rules and risk getting fired?  They made other     requests for day-to-day events and possible problems.  They were     rejected because "you cannot do that many changes".  Do they risk their     jobs and do what is needed, knowing eventually someone *WILL* find out and     at that point they can/will be terminated for insubordination and failure to     follow process or at least slapped down big for it?      In all situations I had seen until here, I would say, yes,     proactivity is a must and I know that we can look at any one item and get     around rules that get our way.  When it becomes a corporate culture,     you really need to get the policy eliminated.  The way to do that is to     allow the people who can make these stupid decisions suffer.  He simply     said "OK, if that's the way you want to play it, then I'll do what you     say.  I will follow your rules and not fix things I see wrong because     *you say I can't*.  Of course, you wouldn't know a database problem if     it jumped up and bit you and said, 'Hi I am a database problem', but that's     irrelevant.   I will do it your way and fix it when it breaks and     you're franticly signing off on the same paperwork you rejected x     days/months ago.   Just don't expect a friendly call at 2 am when     it happens..." 
         I agree, we need to be proactive,     however, the way I read this issue, they were proactive and lots of times     when they made suggestions, they were rejected and their proactivity was     rendered moot by people who have no clue.  When that happens, it is     wise to make them feel some pain for the decisions they make.     --Chris Chris.Bowes_at_Kosa.com     

      Received on Mon Jun 25 2001 - 16:11:04 CDT