Prezado (as), Prezado Roberto, A avaliação de uma pesquisa deve ser neutra por isto não apresentei opinião.
Se no entanto olhar para a questão queda de faturamento o meu ponto de vista como investidor fica claro. Não compro ações de empresas cuja a rentabilidade cai ano a ano. Se em 2006 a estratégia de capital intelectual era ruim, hoje é pior ainda. Sem emprego e trabalho não existe carreira. Do ponto de vista financeiro a pesquisa da CW mostra que é absolutamente inviável um profissional acima de 35 gastar tempo e dinheiro em formação de TI. Em outras palavras ele deve se preparar para ser empreendedor após os 30. A pergunta que não quer calar é como competir com gente de alto conhecimento e experiência apenas com profissionais menos experientes ? Cordialmente Ricardo Mansur On 10/7/09, Roberto Cohen <[email protected]> wrote: > Perdão, mas... > > O foco deve ser na *CARREIRA*, não no *EMPREGO*. > > ;-) > > EL Cohen > PS: Afinal, qual sua opinião, conterrâneo?! > > > > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 7:00 PM, MansurR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> Prezados (as), >> >> Prezada Olivia, >> >> Recomendo ler o post CARREIRA PROFISSIONAL EM TI. VALE A PENA INVESTIR >> TEMPO E DINHEIRO >> NELA?<http://itgovrm.blogspot.com/2009/10/carreira-profissional-em-ti-vale-pena.html> >> no >> http://itgovrm.blogspot.com/ para entender melhor a questão do emprego. >> >> >> Cordialmente >> Ricardo Mansur >> http://itgovrm.blogspot.com >> http://twitter.com/itgovrm >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Olivia A. Vassalo <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Sent:* Monday, October 05, 2009 3:46 PM >> *Subject:* RE: [itsm_br] ITIL Certificaton Scheme - Para profissionais ou >> para Fornecedores? >> >> >> >> Mas cohen, >> >> Como comprovar sua competência, quando se é ainda “nova” como eu e somente >> um curriculo por si só, as vezes não diz tudo? >> >> Fui declassificada em processos seletivos por nao ter feito uma faculdade >> de renome, por exemplo. Ja ocorreu por duas vezes chegar a ultima etapa e >> estar concorrendo com participantes que tinham até menos experiencia que >> eu, >> mas estudavam em universidades como PUC, ITA, etc. >> >> Estou procurando trabalho no momento, e me estou me deparando exatamente >> com esse tipo de problema. Por não ter certificados (ainda) além dos da >> graduação e do pós graduação, não sou selecionada. >> >> Olivia. >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Roberto Cohen >> *Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2009 11:18 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [itsm_br] ITIL Certificaton Scheme - Para profissionais ou >> para Fornecedores? >> >> >> >> Gustavo, >> >> >> Um profissional para ser competente não precisa de certificação. >> >> Conheço um jornalista que é gerente de serviços de uma >> >> mega-empresa multinacional prestadora de serviços de TI. >> >> E ele foi escolhido não pelas suas medalhas - as quais deve ter - >> >> mas por sua competência. >> >> >> Abraços, >> >> EL Cohen >> >> http://twitter.com/robcohen >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Gustavo Tavares <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Olá ITSM-Br, >> >> Na última >> discussão<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/itsm_br/message/5537>que eu >> participei aqui na lista levantei algumas questões que, na minha >> visão, são importantes para avaliar a atuação dos profissionais que >> trabalham com o ITIL; mais especificamente o ITIL v3. Na discussão eu >> questionava a posição assumida pelo ITIL v3 como *formulador* da >> estratégia da organização. Sua orientação aos *market spaces* e a >> definição de *strategic assets* que possibilitariam a organização se >> posicionar em situação de vantagem no mercado. Infelizmente a discussão >> não >> prosperou. Ela acabou se limitando a aspectos e abordagens que já são >> consenso entre os praticantes, ficando os desacordos restritos mais as >> questões de semântica do que de conteúdo. >> >> Gostaria agora de, se me permitem, levantar *mais uma* polêmica a respeito >> do ITIL v3. Na verdade mais a respeito dos acessórios do que da biblioteca >> em si. Antes de mais nada um *disclosure*: já trabalhei em consultoria >> especializada em ITIL (uma Accredited Trainer Provider) e hoje trabalho >> também como consultor de um projeto baseado principalmente no ITIL. Mas >> apesar de defender o ITIL, primeiro como fornecedor e agora como >> consultor, >> tem um aspecto que sempre me incomodou: O porque das barreiras e >> restrições >> do modelo de certificação profissional? *Porque um profissional que deseja >> se certificar como Practitioner ou Manager precisa, obrigatoriamente, >> passar >> por um curso de formação de uma associação registrada?* >> >> Hoje um profissional que deseja se certificar como *Practitioner *ou * >> Manager* (V2 ou V3) precisa, antes de mais nada, passar por um curso >> ministrado por uma ATP. Destes cursos de formação, o mais barato não sai >> por >> menos de R$ 3k. Um profissional com 10, 15 ou mais anos de experiência em >> operações de TI, que durante os últimos 5 ou 10 anos tem tentado aplicar o >> ITIL à sua organização não pode simplesmente se inscrever para realização >> de >> uma prova (com o preço médio de U$ 150) e comprovar os seus >> conhecimentos.Ele tem - obrigatoriamente - que passar por um curso >> ministrado por um profissional que não necessariamente possui o mesmo >> conhecimento e experiência que ele. >> >> Vejam, não estou tocando aqui em um ponto da minha história particular ou >> fazendo um desabafo. Os cursos de formação dos quais eu participei sempre >> foram ministrados por instrutores muito mais qualificados do que eu. Mas a >> idéia de que: somente um conjunto de empresas, que pagam uma certa taxa >> anual, possuem condições de ler e interpretar os conhecimentos de um >> conjunto de livros é um tanto quanto arrogante. Quer dizer que só a partir >> do momento que você paga uma taxa à EXIN você consegue ler, interpretar e >> ministrar treinamentos baseado em um conjunto de conhecimentos publico? >> Seria mais ou menos algo como Kaplan e Norton dizerem o seguinte: Ninguém >> que leu os nossos livros entende de Balanced Score Card a não ser que nos >> pague uma taxa. *Concordam com esta minha linha de raciocínio?* >> >> Em outras palavras: O modelo de certificação é orientado às necessidades >> dos fornecedores ou dos clientes? Ele é criado deste jeito justamente para >> garantir uma reserva de mercado para os ATP? Não seria uma incoerência >> muito >> grande que um conjunto de conhecimentos público que prega o atendimento >> das >> necessidades do cliente desconsiderar a necessidade do seu mercado para >> manter uma estrutura de comercialização que privilegia os fornecedores? >> *Enfim, >> o que vocês acham destes pontos por mim levantados?* >> >> Um outro *disclosure*: Não forneço e nem vou fornecer no futuro serviços >> de treinamento em ITIL. Ou seja, não levanto esta lebre por conta de >> dificuldades que eu encontro no mercado. Eu não trabalho e nem vou >> trabalhar >> neste mercado. Sou consultor e atualmente estou empregado. >> >> Abaixo um outro texto que fala um pouco sobre isto e principalmente sobre >> a >> complexidade que o ITSM traz para os ambientes de TI. Acho que ajuda um >> pouco esta nossa discussão... >> >> []'s >> >> Gustavo Tavares >> Lkdin: www.linkedin.com/in/gustavares >> Via6: www.via6.com/gustavares >> >> *Killing the Goose: The Commercialization of ITIL* >> July 16, 2009 >> By David >> Mainville<http://www.itsmwatch.com/feedback.php/http:/www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.php/3830306> >> >> *The commercialization of ITIL is making it overly complex, bureaucratic >> and less effective, writes ITSMWatch columnist David Mainville of >> Consulting-Portal.* >> >> Like most good things, the development of IT service management (ITSM) >> processes was born out of necessity. Back in the early 1960s the computer >> started moving out of the lab and into the heart of mainstream business. >> Back then only the largest and wealthiest firms could justify having a >> computer due to the immense costs associated with purchasing, maintaining >> and operating these behemoths. >> >> These early computers were as finicky as they were expensive. The >> hardware, >> operating systems and programs of the time were still in their infancy and >> “uptime” was measured in hours. The business, which was footing the bill >> for >> these systems, was becoming ever more dependent upon these machines and >> started demanding a better return on their investment (and they haven’t >> stopped since). >> >> The sheer volume of outages demanded that a methodology be developed for >> managing incidents, getting to the root cause of problems and for >> mitigating >> the impact of making changes to the system. And thus an entire industry >> was >> born. Enterprise Systems Management or as it is now known, IT Service >> Management evolved to meet this challenge. This multi-billion dollar >> industry launched a whole suite of jobs, processes and tools all designed >> to >> improve the reliability, availability and serviceability of the computing >> environment. >> >> And it worked! The people, process and technology helped nurture computing >> from its infancy to a mature adult where data centers became fully >> automated >> “lights out” environments with “uptime” measured at 99.999%. >> >> And most of this happened before ITIL was even conceived. >> >> As most of the readers know ITIL was first published in 1989 by UK >> government’s Central Computer & Telecommunication Agency (CCTA). Like all >> good work it stood on the shoulders of those who came before―it didn’t >> actually invent the processes―but it collected the best practices already >> in >> place and documented them into a framework all could freely access. >> >> Access to these best practices was becoming increasingly important due to >> another development in the IT industry, the introduction of distributed >> computing. By the early 1990s the mainframe environment could be described >> as the mature, reliable and boring “grown-up” of the IT industry. The >> mainframe got the job done but with it was a degree of bureaucracy that >> the >> business had to accept. Things changed radically when distributed >> computing >> burst onto the scene. >> >> *Distributed Computing* >> >> Distributed computing was everything the mainframe wasn’t. It was fast, >> bold, exciting and promised lower costs and faster implementation times. >> Distributed computing was a young rebel; and a rallying cry against the >> stodginess and bureaucracy of the mainframe. It was the latest celebrity. >> Well, celebrity has a way of fading. We quickly learned that while >> distributed computing had a lot of promise it was still very immature. >> There >> were very few tools to manage the environment and the support processes >> developed in the mainframe era were viewed as old fashioned and as >> roadblocks to getting the job done. >> >> George Santayana once said: “Those who cannot remember the past are >> condemned to repeat it”. Well, the IT industry not only forgot its past, >> but >> it went out of its way to ignore it. Support costs for distributed >> computing >> skyrocketed. Without the right tools and processes, the people costs went >> through the roof as duplicate IT departments were formed to manage this >> new >> environment. >> >> Once again, out of necessity, the IT industry responded. New support tools >> were developed, organizational structures were rationalized and once again >> process was in vogue. Except now, we were able to leverage the documented >> frameworks such as IBM’s IT Process Model, HP’s ITSM model, Microsoft’s >> MOF >> and, of course, ITIL. >> >> ITIL’s role in communicating the value of process to a new generation of >> IT >> professionals cannot be ignored. The fact that we now speak a common >> service >> management language has helped the industry pull together in a common >> direction. The fact that vendors have developed tools that can support and >> automate the processes has helped improve efficiency while reducing >> support >> costs. Now that senior management are aware of ITIL, well, this is both >> good >> and bad, but more on that later. >> >> *ITIL Backlash* >> >> So, how can I say that ITIL’s success may result in a backlash against >> ITSM? Because I believe that ITIL is turning its back on the past. This >> public domain collection of best practices built by dedicated volunteers >> is >> now on the fast track to becoming an overly commercialized, complex, >> bureaucratic and expensive endeavor. >> >> This may sound hypocritical coming from someone who is an ITSM advocate >> and >> a partner in a consulting and training company that leverages ITIL best >> practices. But it’s my very passion for service management that is at the >> root of my argument. I have learned over my 30 years in IT that it’s >> fairly >> easy to design a process or buy a tool. If you want success in ITSM you >> have >> to do the hard work. >> >> It’s not enough to design an incident management process and install a >> tool >> to support it. You need the dedication and governance to make sure people >> understand why they have to enter an incident; that they enter the right >> information into the incident record; and that someone uses the >> information >> for continual improvement. The same could be said for any of the ITIL >> processes. >> >> The commercialization of ITIL is taking focus away from doing the hard >> work >> and is placing it on certifications, compliance schemes and on taking >> something relatively simple and making it overly complex and bureaucratic. >> The introduction of ITIL v3 has placed the focus squarely in the >> stratosphere with the introduction of dozens of new processes, roles and >> CMDB-like data-stores. Schemes are being designed to “certify” a vendor’s >> tool compliance to ITIL. What does that even mean―other than a chance to >> impose additional cost on the vendor? >> >> I made a comment earlier in this article about the fact that senior >> management’s awareness of ITIL is both a good thing and a bad thing. It’s >> always good when dedicated IT executives place focus on improving IT >> services; it’s good for IT and it’s good for the business. But if these >> same >> executives see additional bureaucracy, exercises in empty process design, >> added costs for training and re-training … well, they may just come to the >> conclusion that ITSM is just another management fad straight from the >> pages >> of a Dilbert cartoon. >> >> It wasn’t long ago that the mainframe, and the people who managed it, were >> ostracized because of their perceived bureaucratic and process heavy >> approach. The business took a detour into distributed computing because it >> offered the promise of freedom and better time to market. Will the >> business >> look at ITIL as the right path or just another road block put up by the IT >> department? Will the business feel the need to take another detour away >> from >> the bureaucracy? >> >> I’m not knocking process at all. Effective and efficient processes are >> required to manage the complexities of today’s computing environments. But >> I >> think its time that we take our heads out of the clouds and focus on the >> core of what makes an it organization run. A successful IT organization >> needs to fix incidents and provision service requests and they need to do >> it >> faster, cheaper and with a focus on customer service. To do that requires >> only a handful of well designed processes, the necessary tools to automate >> and a focus on execution. >> >> I believe there is a real danger of an overly-hyped and commercialized >> ITIL >> leading people down the wrong path having them focus on the wrong things. >> This of course will result in failure and lead to a backlash against the >> very thing that can help IT be more effective in supporting the business. >> Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. Let’s learn from our mistakes >> and >> apply process in a practical, lean and pragmatic way. Let’s focus on our >> customer, namely the business, and help them do things faster and with >> better quality. >> >> The last thing any IT professional needs is a backlash against the very >> thing that will improve the delivery of services to our clients. >> >> *David Mainville is CEO and co-founder of >> **Consulting-Portal*<http://www.consulting-portal.com/index.php> >> *, an ITSM consulting and ITIL training company focused on helping Fortune >> 500 and mid-size companies assess, design and implement robust IT Service >> Management processes. Consulting-Portal also offers a full curriculum of >> ITSM education including: ITIL, ISO and CobiT.* >> >> >> >
