Re: [OT] user psychology
on Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 10:38:12AM -0600, ktb (xyf@nixnotes.org) wrote:
> I've been searching around the web for some documentation on how to deal
> with users from the perspective of a systems administrator. I'm finding
> a lot on account management and user policies but not much by way of
> dealing with people. I'm interested in educating myself about the different
> approaches sys admins take and the success or failure of these approaches.
>
> As you can guess I've recently inherited a network. I'm having no
> problems with the technical side of administering the network but am
> finding myself increasingly taking more of a hard-line with regards to
> users and I would like to decide where I want to draw the lines.
The "Nemeth" books (Evi Nemeth, et al, Unix and GNU/Linux system
administration manuals, aka the "red", "purple", and "green" books)
cover this issue somewhat nicely, if in overview. The book is often
viewed as highly technical, however I find there's much of the "soft"
side of administration presented, stuff that only comes with years (or
decades) of experience.
Might help if you'd indicate what sorts of issues you're running into.
Helps to remember that the users are the reason _you_ have a job. At
the same time, there are things users can do or request which aren't
cost-effective uses of time.
If you're running into issues (space, cpu, and network are the biggies)
of insufficient resources, sometimes the answer is simply to provide
additional resources.
Another useful tactic is to arrange things so that users are
self-enforcing. Most commonly, this means avoiding common resources
(this encourages overuse, see Garrett Hardin's "Tragedy of the
Commons"), and instead assigning specific, exclusive resources, wether
to groups/departments, or individuals.
How specifically you do this depends greatly on your users, number of
users, resources, and specific needs.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Integrity, we've heard of it: http://www.theregister.co.uk/
Reply to: