5 ms·

IT here. We have the hardware debate with the business guys relentlessly. Understand that the business guys just see it like this: If <replacement parts> + <Tec

IT here. We have the hardware debate with the business guys relentlessly. Understand that the business guys just see it like this: If <replacement parts> + <Tech time> is less than the cost of a new machine, then repair the old one. Additionally 'why throw out something that works?' These two thought processes lead to some harmful decisions regarding hardware. I've seen 5-7 year old machines being used by people who bring in millions.

Nimi 13y ago
Sounds like you tried to confront them with the argument that "investing another 1000$ in this guy's machine will change your bottom line in the millions". What did they say in response?
- smackfu 13y ago
  Usually the problem is that you have factual savings vs. theoretical profits. And theory loses to facts.
- johngalt 13y ago
  I've tried various angles, some more successful than others. The 'increased productivity' pitch fails universally. I never even mention that anymore. On average it has a negative impact. Managers are too jaded to that pitch. Their 'I'm being sold something' antenna goes up. It's not that they have some cogent counter argument, it's just that the discussion stops. If you want to make the hardware situation better. I recommend these two approaches. 1. Loss aversion. Detail what an unplanned outage costs. Lost work, man hours, even lost business if it's bad enough timing. Business guys have a respect for the missing nail that lost the war. 2. Cheapness. Buying a $1000 laptop every two years is better than a $2000 laptop every four. Better average hardware and less paying guys like me to fix broken machines. Business guys are more likely to write small checks. Paradoxically you are spending the same amount of money, but you can sell it to them like you are spending less. Above all be respectful. They aren't idiots, they may have issues to worry about that you aren't aware of.

Nimi 13y ago

Sounds like you tried to confront them with the argument that "investing another 1000$ in this guy's machine will change your bottom line in the millions". What did they say in response?

smackfu 13y ago
Usually the problem is that you have factual savings vs. theoretical profits. And theory loses to facts.
johngalt 13y ago
I've tried various angles, some more successful than others. The 'increased productivity' pitch fails universally. I never even mention that anymore. On average it has a negative impact. Managers are too jaded to that pitch. Their 'I'm being sold something' antenna goes up. It's not that they have some cogent counter argument, it's just that the discussion stops. If you want to make the hardware situation better. I recommend these two approaches. 1. Loss aversion. Detail what an unplanned outage costs. Lost work, man hours, even lost business if it's bad enough timing. Business guys have a respect for the missing nail that lost the war. 2. Cheapness. Buying a $1000 laptop every two years is better than a $2000 laptop every four. Better average hardware and less paying guys like me to fix broken machines. Business guys are more likely to write small checks. Paradoxically you are spending the same amount of money, but you can sell it to them like you are spending less. Above all be respectful. They aren't idiots, they may have issues to worry about that you aren't aware of.