When I first read this, it sort of ticked me off. Sure, I’ve been called a fucker before, that’s not so much the problem. I agree, inflexible policies are a pain in the ass. I’ve bitched about them before here on my blog as well as within the podcast.
But then I sat back, read it a little bit more and became quite amused at the entire post. It cracked me up. The bravado that Scoble displays in this post is akin to an old cartoon where the big-bad chihuahua shows how tough he is while standing next to the big bull dog. LOL! You rebel you! LOL!
Hey Robert… if you want to show some real bravado… be transparent about it WHILE you’re doing it — not after you’ve left the company. That’s chicken shit if you ask me.
Heck… even better yet… show a little professionalism and approach your IT department, state your business case and work WITH THEM to resolve your issue. There’s ALWAYS an exception to the rule, EVERY business knows this and has mechanisms to deal with it.
It’s basic risk management, you know this. If the business need is greater than the risk, the risk is then acceptable or measures are put in place to minimize the risk until it is acceptable. That Verizon Wireless Card may very well have been an acceptable risk — who knows.
But along with inflexible policies, it’s always bothered me when folks use the addage, “it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission” when an attempt was never even made.
Come on man… work with me.
I did post about how I was getting around IT with my Verizon Wireless card when I worked at Microsoft.
By the way, you do realize that Microsoft’s entire early history was all about giving IT the finger, right? After all, that’s what was so transformative about personal computers. They took power out of the hands of IT folks and put them into the hands of workers.
Same with wireless devices that route around IT infrastructure limitations.
Did you call them fuckers then?
Yep, I’m aware of how things have come to being from big iron to the desktop and how Microsoft was a large enabler there.
But there’s a big difference too between a policy and a limitation. Sure, policies might be in place due to an infrastructural limitation… but does that make IT folks “fuckers” because of it?
I find it hard to believe that IT at Microsoft runs the business. IT is an enabler (or should be) If the IT Department IS running the show at Microsoft… then they have even bigger problems.
I kept my potty mouth under control when I work for a global public company with customers all over the world who may be offended by such language.
Well, when I call someone a f***er, it’s aimed at the specific behavior I’m talking about. I worked with smart people, they understood what I was poking them about. I really didn’t care why that limitation existed. It certainly doesn’t exist on my Verizon Wireless card or on my home network. So, I’m sure if they wanted to they could have figured it out. It wasn’t a business priority, though. So they get called nasty names. They are used to it when interests don’t align.
Believe me, I could come up with numerous names myself going the other way. But… that’d be too easy.
Just as you pointed out, business priorities don’t always align. Blame the business — not the IT Department.