Who comes up with these titles?!
There was a time in the Information Technology field when a title was something to be proud of. There was hierarchy in the field. I remember when I was first a techician, I called my parents to tell them that I was a network technician and no longer just an operator. Operator wasn’t a bad position, in fact most “network engineers” today are just plan operators. Here is my classification that will someday make it into Webster’s Dictionary.
Operator- An individual that performs routine tasks and maintenance. The duties can be related to backups, running routine scripts (thank God for cron, network health monitoring, and/or handling some System Administrator tasks.
System Administrator- Glorified Operator. The tasks differ because the System Administrator is responsible for providing tasks and duties to the Operator. User management is the ultimate responsibility.
Network Technician - Responsible for maintenance of the information infrastructure. Responsibility includes network drops and troubleshoots network related issues.
Network Engineer - Now this is a multipurpose title today and could have more uses than comet, but it shouldn’t be that way. A Network Engineer used to be a title that represented a person that integrated network equipment into an infrastructure. To be more specific, when I was a technician I used to have to be on-call when ever a network engineer was bringing a new site up online. Troubleshooting and Integration are two different operations within the network world.
When I was a network technician I was allowed to troubleshoot routing issues, however if i needed to make changes I escalated to get approval. As an engineer you make configuration changes and introducing another router or switch to the environment really takes someone with experience that knows what they are doing.
Network Architect- The role of a network architect is basically keep an overall picture of the infrastructure and design solutions to best provide to the overall mission of an organization.
Solutions Architect- The role of a Solutions Archetect is the same as a Network Architect, but not as narrow. A typical Solutions Architect may work for a professional services outfit and be responsible for researching and designing solutions that are not limited to routers and switches.
I just rattled off most of the titles that have been around for the last 10 years. All of them are summed up today as a network engineer and that is what makes the field frustrating. I remember looking at a resume of an individual who was a Senior Network engineer. I was really impressed with his resume so I brought him in for an interview. When doing interviews I allow the person I am interviewing to control the topics we discussed. This interview exposed the fact that this individual never configured any routing protocols, and could not give me one any sized project that he lead.
With that little of experience you shouldn’t have the right to put network engineer on your resume but people do. In fact, it should be embarrassing to use the title Senior Network Engineer if you cannot perform with mastery of routing, switching, and advanced networking tasks. If you have been a network engineer for 20 years and you still cannot perform these tasks then I am sorry, you are still a Network Engineer.
Specialization fits in the same category. Do not call yourself a Sans Engineer if all you know how to do is manage a Sans switch. Please do not call yourself a VOIP engineer if all you know how to do is configure a call manager platform. You must know the technology and become a reference of sorts on the protocols and inter-working of your craft.
Which reminds me, I once interviewed a person who had a countless number of the word “Expert” on his resume. His title he claimed was “Solutions Architect of the America’s”. See why I had to bring him in for an interview? To make a long story short, he barely knew any of the information he represented on his resume. He was basically a project manager of all the said “designs” that were listed on his resume. I found humor in interviewing him, but sadness in what this field has actually become. Someone will hire this guy with dreams of grandeur, and be thoroughly disappointed and maybe bitter. It will reflect on the rest of the network community.
I misrepresented the term hierarchy when in fact all of the titles and duties that I presented above are autonomous of each other. Needless to say that a good technician would not neccessarily be a good engineer. Most organizations interchange these duties when in fact all you are doing is creating guys that are proficient in the art of cut and pasting when it comes to newly introduced configurations. And a good Network Engineer may not be suited in the art of troubleshooting, however they may been very good at integration.
I once hired an engineer that knew networking inside and out. I never had to proof his configurations. He knew all advance routing protocols and was very proficient in all other technologies he was expected to know. He was a very poor troubleshooter. If it was a BGP issue he would most likely find the issue, however if it was a reported issue that the root cause was not known, he could not deal with eliminating other variables that may or may not be network infrastructure related.
I could use myself as an example, if you want a patch cable made you may get one faster if you ordered one online then wait for me to make one. If you ask for a 10 foot cable, you may get one 8′ feet long by the time I was done making it. I can not express enough the importance of a good network technician. I have had the privilege of working side by side with a lot of them during my career.
Soon we will be required to submit to lie detector tests and have full background investigations. All because individuals cannot properly classify themselves. You heard it first from the Professor.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
I have always had a problem with this, probably because I know I’m an idiot and most people who profess to be experts usually fall short even in my eyes. I have often found that many people who actually know what they are doing shy away from titles unless they are funny like ‘Super Genius’ or something similar, while people who don’t wear that damn thing like a badge and a gun.
I will say as a Successful Graduate of your interview process, yours was the first interview where anybody ever asked me a relevant question. It was a lot of fun, actually. Many times I have to guide the interviewer and answer questions they should have asked.
Now I know you gave me my own rope from which to hang myself. Very clever, I will keep that in the rolodex for future use.
I still get a chuckle over the Sr. designation on my badge though. I guess if you’re the only one, you get to be senior… and you know its going on my resume!
Incidentally, I still am not a network engineer as far as regular stuff goes, but I most certainly have learned more in less than a year than I have cobbled together over the last 10. I can now have intelligent conversations that were not possible on Jan 1st.
I appreciate the opportunity even if it is colder than a well diggers ass and nobody watches SEC football.
February 13th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Professor,
“Solutions Architect of the America’s”…classic! Hey, the title “Network Engineer” is a broad one, and yes it is thrown about quite freely. I’ve run into Server Administrators who’ve only configured a routing protocol on Windows Server 2000, yet they call themselves Network Engineers.
With that being said, “with great power, comes great responsibility.” So, if you’re going to call yourself an Engineer, you better had know your stuff because the operators, technicians, and administrators are going to look to you for guidance.