Technology job titles
I have a slight disagreement with another person in my company on the proper job title for someone in charge of an IT department - and whether it's and IT department or not.
This other person thinks in terms of "IS" as in Information Systems, as in MIS without the M.
I keep saying the "new" term for MIS is IT as in Information Technology, and nowadays IS means "Information Services" as in the folks that take care of where all the paper files are stored, and maybe also takce care of scanning paper documents into a document management system.
What is the "feel" out there for IS versus IT. Is this place where we have the servers and programming staff and take care of the network infrastructure and keep the ERP system running the "IT department" or the "IS department?"
Would the guy in charge of that department be the "IT Manager" or the "IS Manager?"
Or would "Manager of Information Technology" or "Manager of Information Systems" be more appropriate in your view?
What does YOUR company use? MIS, IT, IS or something else?
This other person thinks in terms of "IS" as in Information Systems, as in MIS without the M.
I keep saying the "new" term for MIS is IT as in Information Technology, and nowadays IS means "Information Services" as in the folks that take care of where all the paper files are stored, and maybe also takce care of scanning paper documents into a document management system.
What is the "feel" out there for IS versus IT. Is this place where we have the servers and programming staff and take care of the network infrastructure and keep the ERP system running the "IT department" or the "IS department?"
Would the guy in charge of that department be the "IT Manager" or the "IS Manager?"
Or would "Manager of Information Technology" or "Manager of Information Systems" be more appropriate in your view?
What does YOUR company use? MIS, IT, IS or something else?
dhsindy
Well, we have an IT Department headed up by a CIO (Chief Information Officer). The IS way just seems old fashion or me.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
How about Mgr ITS?
Manager IInformation Technology Systems
Manager IInformation Technology Systems
MIS = what you call an unmarried young lady
MIT = what you protect your hand with while cooking
MIT = what you protect your hand with while cooking
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
So someone that manages the department that has both IT and IS functions would be the... ?
I suppose that distinction giltjr drew would apply to the "C" level, too, where there's the CTO and the CIO. One handles the strategery regarding leveraging technology to improve the business function while the other handles the processes that provide analysis, presentation and preservation of information in general, whether it be technology-based or not?
There's an actual definition for "MIS" out there that I've seen, that actually is an academic discipline - the business side of technology as opposed to "computer science" which is the science behind the technology. It used to be the department that was in charge of the mainframe systems and the application programmers that supported the business systems running on the mainframe, as well as all of the peripheral equipment. That basic structure still stands, with servers, pc's, networks and the Internet all balled together along with their support and maintenance instead of, or in addition to, the mainframe systems.
I suppose it comes down to how the job description is written...
If the job description leans more IT than IS then I'd hope the title is IT and not IS, because that would tie into salary survey data, too, AFAIK.
Who gets paid more - an IT manager or an IS manager?
I suppose that distinction giltjr drew would apply to the "C" level, too, where there's the CTO and the CIO. One handles the strategery regarding leveraging technology to improve the business function while the other handles the processes that provide analysis, presentation and preservation of information in general, whether it be technology-based or not?
There's an actual definition for "MIS" out there that I've seen, that actually is an academic discipline - the business side of technology as opposed to "computer science" which is the science behind the technology. It used to be the department that was in charge of the mainframe systems and the application programmers that supported the business systems running on the mainframe, as well as all of the peripheral equipment. That basic structure still stands, with servers, pc's, networks and the Internet all balled together along with their support and maintenance instead of, or in addition to, the mainframe systems.
I suppose it comes down to how the job description is written...
If the job description leans more IT than IS then I'd hope the title is IT and not IS, because that would tie into salary survey data, too, AFAIK.
Who gets paid more - an IT manager or an IS manager?
"Many IT professionals are climbing the career ladder with the ultimate goal of becoming a CIO. But the CIO job doesn't necessarily result in the most recognition or the highest salary. Chief technology officers are getting better raises, and VPs of IT earn more than executives who hold only the CIO title, according to InformationWeek Research's annual salary survey."
http://www.informationweek.com/800/salary.htm
http://www.informationweek.com/800/salary.htm
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Indeed, how many people you manage is a much greater influence on your pay.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I thnk those people you consider just "overhead" employees would take exception to the concept that they're not workers, especially if they're non-union. ;)
The concept that if you don't directly contribute to the bottom line (sales, production) you're "just overhead" is an ancient one that has got to go. Everyone that has a role to play is a worker, and their jobs have value, even the receptionist in this day-and-age of automated attendants has value.
Everyone is part of "overhead," even all of those C-level execs. Whether it's direct labor, indirect labor or non-product labor, it's labor overhead.
"Manager" means department-level, not director-level. If you have budget and policy decision-making responsibility for a department, you're a "manager" whether you have project-oriented subordinates or not. Even if you don't have direct reports and only supervise consultants, if you have budget and policy responsibility for a department, you ARE a "manager."
Below "Manager" would be "Supervisor," which is usually reserved for those that directly supervise hourly workers, or some sort of a "lead" person, which could apply to professional as well as non-professional people, as in "project leader" or "lead operator."
The concept that if you don't directly contribute to the bottom line (sales, production) you're "just overhead" is an ancient one that has got to go. Everyone that has a role to play is a worker, and their jobs have value, even the receptionist in this day-and-age of automated attendants has value.
Everyone is part of "overhead," even all of those C-level execs. Whether it's direct labor, indirect labor or non-product labor, it's labor overhead.
"Manager" means department-level, not director-level. If you have budget and policy decision-making responsibility for a department, you're a "manager" whether you have project-oriented subordinates or not. Even if you don't have direct reports and only supervise consultants, if you have budget and policy responsibility for a department, you ARE a "manager."
Below "Manager" would be "Supervisor," which is usually reserved for those that directly supervise hourly workers, or some sort of a "lead" person, which could apply to professional as well as non-professional people, as in "project leader" or "lead operator."
ASKER
OK, I'll close it. I was kind-of hoping for more than what I got, but...
> Below "Manager" would be "Supervisor,"
similarly. title then dept, no longer IS, you can spell it out or abbreviate
Mgr, IT
Supv, IT
similarly. title then dept, no longer IS, you can spell it out or abbreviate
Mgr, IT
Supv, IT
(although those like Supervisor probably will use alternate part of sub-organization to their smaller group)