While I agree with Steve that we are "problem solvers" (and per the discussion board, creative ones at that), I disagree somewhat with some of his other statements. While managers may not be interested in hearing the root of the problem while the system is down, the moment you bring it back up they DO want to know what happened, and more importantly how you will prevent it from ever occurring again.

Unfortunately, managers often want to avoid funding the actual solution. For instance if you have a server running out of disk space, you'll get nickled and dimed to the nth degree with "can't you just remove some of the data to free up space" instead of getting a budget to asses the actual need for space and bring in the additional hardware to allow for growth. (We hope your company is growing if your space is! :hehe: )

I've experienced most of what others have already addressed.

- I help create solutions to business needs

- I help resolve problems when they occur

- I attempt to pro-actively provide solutions to upcoming issues

- I get called "negative" if I point out a problem that's likely to occur, regardless of how many solutions I bring to the table

- I get called "negative" if I point out the risks of following a particular path (some managers really don't understand risk evaluation and risk management)

- The relative force of the "negative" appellation appears to be in direct proportion to the cost of the proposed solutions

- I'm not supposed to work on anything without a ticket. (However, I can create my own tickets :w00t: )

Fortunately, I don't work for the government. I applied back in my younger days and was rejected; my counselor told me it was because I was too smart. "The hiring managers won't hire you because you'd have their job in six months." I never did learn to dumb down the applications; I think now that was a very good decision.