In a recent note, Laura Prill said: > Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 11:26:49 -0600 > > We currently have a discussion going on in our shop about transferring PTF > maintenance duties for one third-party product to an administrative group > that happens to include one former sysprog with SMP/E experience. Because > the others in the group do not have systems backgrounds, I am concerned > that this decision could come back to haunt us in the long run, and that > it also may open Pandora's box for other third-party products where the > administrators are definitely non-technical. However, I do not want to > stand in the way of a good idea by overreacting, if my concerns have no > basis. > You're prudently cautious about designing a process around momentarily available talent. Beyond that, SMP/E expertise is a skill that can be mastered and even taught. Assuming your installation allocates resources for training.
Would it make sense to have a central resource of SMP/E expertise whose responsibilites are divided among systems and (third-party) applications? I envision conflicts assigning priorities if you do this. OTOH, the administrative overhead and latency for problem reporting and corrective service installation/validation/testing become unpleasant if all must be routed through Systems Programming. -- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
