What would *you* do?
October 6, 2009 - 9:56am
I think I would be up front
I think I would be up front with them how you feel. Let them know that from your experience level that you see problems in the future with handing over all the codes that could lead to some series problems in the future.
I don't think I would resign just yet, but if they want you to remain the lead tech then they should really respect and honor your opinion in these matters. This may be an door that has been opened to you by the Lord to move away from that position. I would voice your opinion and let it be known with the elders of the church and pray before a decision is made. Tough one. I will be praying for you also on this.
October 6, 2009 - 10:42am
I agree with Techmate
Make sure they all know how you feel.
Call a meeting of all people involved with systems at the church, and approach the issue from a neutral viewpoint, but basically, systems should be under your control or not. If the church does not see any value in having someone experienced in *their* systems available to them, then someone else (perhaps the associate pastor) should take responsibility.
They need to understand that you are a volunteer; that you understand the system inside out, and that you are willing to continue only on the understanding that you are in control. You don't give sermons on Sundays - they shouldn't play with computers at this level.
It says in a certain book I'm aware of that "a man cannot serve two masters". The same goes for computer networks; you can't have two differing groups messing with them, as otherwise the situation you mention will happen.
I think that any future action you take should be for the good of yourself and the church. The fact that they lost a senior pastor isn't pertinent to this issue.
Regards,
Pete.
October 6, 2009 - 1:44pm
Pertinence comes in multiple flavors...
You're right, it's not directly pertinent to the issue itself. But it *is* pertinent to the reactions people can have about this issue, and affect how it gets handled. When a shepherd departs, the flock is a little more nervous, a little more flighty, perhaps a little more prone to overreaction. The times are unsettling, and unsettled people can make rash decisions.
So far, I haven't made any pronouncements, just reiterated that I don't want anything on the network or the systems that I wasn't involved with putting there, because of possible side effects on troubleshooting issues; if I know it's there, I can account for it when problems arise. I don't know how well or long that will fly, though.
October 7, 2009 - 12:25pm
It's all about relationships
Hey Arlen, sorry you had to go through this. It's obvious you've put countless hours into this network and when someone trumps your efforts it is hard to take. Sorry about that.
I can only reiterate what others have posted before me. Call a meeting and talk through the issues. Explain your frustrations and listen to leadership's concerns. For some leaders it's much easier to call tech support and be guaranteed a solution in a week than ask a volunteer who can probably get to it later that night. It's crazy, but some people are like that.
It's no fun to work really hard at something only to have someone else, who does not understand even the basics, undo what you've done. However, the heart of the issue is not networks or service contracts, it's relationships. Remember Ephesians 4:26, In your anger, sin not. I'm going to venture you can substitute "frustration", "confusion", "fear of rejection", or whatever negative emotion you happen to be dealing with. It seems the church (as an institution) is often remarkably unaware of the feelings of others. Believe me, I understand the appeal of the "Up Yours!" response. Instead, pray about it, voice your concerns, and always remember take the high road when dealing with others.
Blessings!
-NP
October 15, 2009 - 2:53pm
Just a follow-up
I stepped down. Not because I threatened to and they called my bluff. Far from it, I didn't say anything about that.
It's just that they decided (again without co-ordinating with tech) to lock the worship team out of either of the computers they regularly had to use to print out their sheet music, locked me out of the office I shared with finance, and deleted every single sound file from the sanctuary computer.
That sort of made my position clearer to me than anything else had done. I can keep working in the face of neglect, when there's active opposition from the people you're working for, then it's time to go.
A little disappointment, but no hard feelings at least on my part.
Just thought you'd want to know how it played out.
October 15, 2009 - 3:19pm
What about common courtesy
I'm sure it's a relief that it's all sorted, but a shame that they didn't even give you the common courtesy of saying that your services would no longer be required. That would at least have given you time to arrange a structured handover of knowledge to whoever took over.
Odd that the issue was related to one person being locked out of their computer, and now entire groups are locked out of theirs. Still, it was looking like time to move on for you...
Pete.
October 18, 2009 - 2:12am
For some reason, I can't put my name on the start of a thread, so I'll have to say it here: this is Arlen.
OK, here's the deal: I've maintained the office computers and network in my church on my own time and often at my own expense for several years (I'm neither bragging nor complaining with that line, you'll see the relevance later). It's Windows-based (yes, I know, but that's what they were comfortable with) we're on XP, with one XP-64 system for the treasurer. The net is a mix of wired and wireless, with the wireless set up to only allow known machines to connect (I've never turned down any church member who wanted to connect, the block is just there to keep the riff-raff away from the church financial records). After an incident where one person installed an "anti-spam" toolbar on IE which actually produced spam (including porn spam from a server in CZ) on the desktop (and another where a well-meaning but gadget-happy associate pastor removed the firewall that tipped us off about that toolbar because he didn't know how to configure a shiny new Wireless Access Point to co-exist with it, therefore the firewall *must* be defective) I locked down the systems so no one but a Tech Team member could install things on the machines.
Recently, instead of waiting a few hours for me, the office called ATT about a network issue. The ATT tech came in, pulled out the DSL modem we had just months before purchased (on the recommendation of ATT) and replaced it with a different one, one with wireless access capability, and stuck it in the middle of the network, effectively splitting the net in two and leaving only one machine (of the three) fully functional, *and* without leaving us the access code so I could configure the interloping modem properly to work on the network. After several hours, I managed to hack into the modem, change the way it was wired in, and configure it properly so the entire network is functional again, but....
The same person who engineered all this claims it's my fault, because I'm not able to immediately drop what I'm doing and fix things, and is demanding all the access codes to install whatever she wants on the systems and the networks.
I've been oscillating between giving her all the codes and then resigning as tech team lead (because I *really* don't want to have to fix the mess that may result from this, as she's the one who installed the toolbar mentioned above) or slamming the door with, effectively, an "Up Yours!" response.
I'm trying to separate psychology and ego from this (it's unavoidably there because I've hand-built the systems in use today, and even paid for one of them out of my own pocket when church funds ran low) because no matter what I've done with it, it's the church's network, and the church's computers, and the church as a whole is feeling a little delicate at the moment anyway, having just lost our senior pastor. I don't want to add to the trouble by starting a fight over it.
So, how would *you* handle this?