This economy has hit many sectors pretty hard. I'm constantly hearing about friends getting laid off from their jobs, friends of friends that got fired, significant others out of work, and employees getting no hours at an hourly job.
Today, we had to let a coworker go in my department. Not just a coworker, but a friend. Now, I know times are tough and this recession is making it difficult for most companies to get by, but in the service industry, "service" is key. If you don't offer the "service" to the client that they expect, you don't have a client.
The company I work for, and more specifically the department, offers IT technical support both on-site and remotely. Our client's are far from computer literate and take a great deal of hand holding to get through the simplest of tasks.
Today, the company had no choice in letting this coworker go. We are feeling the economical crunch, this employee was a recent hire, and the availability was not there. I understand these reasons, and agree that there was no other choice as of today. Having said that, I believe this could have been avoided if it was addressed before today.
As I said before, we offer on-site and remote tech support. When we are not on-site or billing for remote support, we are in the red. We have been slow the last few months, but we've kept our head above the water longer than most. This means we had time to better asess the situation and prepare for this. We knew it could happen, because it was happening all around us. I believe management completely dropped the ball. Rather than being proactive and calling clients to see how everything was going and if there was any service we might provide, they hoped for business to pick up. Hope is good, but it doesn't pay the bills.
Now, you may think that management would let the worst employee or the over paid employee go. Not in this case. This employee was neither of those and was in fact willing to work after hours, weekends, and showed a level of dedication that even management lacks. This employee could show the utmost level of patience with the clients, while completing other tasks. You never had to ask twice when you needed a task done, the clients never felt talked down to, and this individual also came up with ideas to improve and organize the company; thus saving money in a more substantial way than laying off a part time employee.
I guess I'm just ranting here, but I was hired at this company to turn things around. And now that we finally have most of the holes filled, like building a compitent staff, management turns around and starts doing things the old way. How can you fix something when the "powers that be" wont let you?
In the IT service industry, you have to keep on top of things. Otherwise, you get left behind. An IT company cannot run like it did 5 years ago (it can't even run like it did 2 years ago). If management doesn't get on the ball, we will be left behind.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Multiplayer Console Gaming
There's no better way to game, than to game with friends. I remember my friends and I playing the first Halo for days on Xbox. Sadly, however, those days seem to be coming to an end.
Multiplayer games seem to be moving away from the split screen and moving to online game play. All new games, on Xbox 360 or Sony PS3, are being released with a max of two players per console. This means, I have to gather multiple TV's and consoles in order to play with 3 of my friends.And while, we can always play online together, it's not quite the same as hanging out with them in person.
Don't get me wrong. The advancement of these games have come so far so fast, that the consoles can't really support 4 players at a time. I love the new graphics, physics engines, and huge online multiplayer experiance. But at the cost of that personal interaction?
With the local multiplayer match, I get to see my buddies face when I pwn him with the butt of my rifle. And him accusing me of screen cheating. (Excusses... Excusses...)
You would think that game developers would be able to find a happy medium someplace. I mean, do they think gamers don't have friends IRL? I'd gladly give up some of the graphics to be able to see my friends frustration when I lob a grenade at his feet.
I guess I just have to buy another Xbox and a second Gears of War....
Multiplayer games seem to be moving away from the split screen and moving to online game play. All new games, on Xbox 360 or Sony PS3, are being released with a max of two players per console. This means, I have to gather multiple TV's and consoles in order to play with 3 of my friends.And while, we can always play online together, it's not quite the same as hanging out with them in person.
Don't get me wrong. The advancement of these games have come so far so fast, that the consoles can't really support 4 players at a time. I love the new graphics, physics engines, and huge online multiplayer experiance. But at the cost of that personal interaction?
With the local multiplayer match, I get to see my buddies face when I pwn him with the butt of my rifle. And him accusing me of screen cheating. (Excusses... Excusses...)
You would think that game developers would be able to find a happy medium someplace. I mean, do they think gamers don't have friends IRL? I'd gladly give up some of the graphics to be able to see my friends frustration when I lob a grenade at his feet.
I guess I just have to buy another Xbox and a second Gears of War....
Labels:
console,
gaming,
multiplayer
Friday, May 22, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)