For Christ's sake QF! Who does your IT? [QC offer to under 18]

[juddles]

Sorry for being emotive in the title, but really, Qantas need to get their sh_t together. I love Qantas, but they fail in the easiest areas to NOT fail.

How hard is IT these days? As in using that magnificent beast that is the internet and electronic data matching / analysis / understanding that should be central to any company in today's age.

Such simple things are beyond them.

Let me get to my gripe:

My daughter is a QFF member. Any member has to state their date of birth. She is under 18. She has a flight coming up in a few days, travelling solo. And she was just sent an invite to spend $39 to get QP lounge access.

I am half tempted to get her to buy this, then see if they let her in solo to the QP.

 

[whughes3]

I think a better question would be "who writes the specifications for Qantas IT"? IT people can only include system features they are asked for.

 

[juddles]

I think a better question would be "who writes the specifications for Qantas IT"? IT people can only include system features they are asked for.

whughes3, I completely agree and understand you. The flaw in QF is somewhere between management and the technicians. I have no doubt that those that "do things" do it competently - it is not hard if given specific parameters. But at the end of the day, the end-user should be able to -god forbid - use it!

 

[GoldCanyon340]

whughes3, I completely agree and understand you. The flaw in QF is somewhere between management and the technicians. I have no doubt that those that "do things" do it competently - it is not hard if given specific parameters. But at the end of the day, the end-user should be able to -god forbid - use it!

I've said this before but, including today's website debacle, I don't think anyone at QF is playing a User Acceptance Testing role. Or perhaps they *are* just playing at it and that's the problem?

 

[astrosly]

There is a common misunderstanding that anything to do with technology is always done by an IT person. These days IT provide the technology framework (e.g. email application, SMTP) and non-IT provide the content (list of email addresses, email body).

Generating a mailing list for a promotion? Most likely a person who would not identify as being in IT.

 

[Flying Fox]

Maybe somewhere deep within the QFF T&C's we have all agreed to be Beta testers for their s/ware?

Then again, maybe MH's web site company got awarded the QF contract!

 

[juddles]

There is a common misunderstanding that anything to do with technology is always done by an IT person. These days IT provide the technology framework (e.g. email application, SMTP) and non-IT provide the content (list of email addresses, email body).

Generating a mailing list for a promotion? Most likely a person who would not identify as being in IT.

Sorry astrosly, but that line grates on me a bit. I know that most of the population are (quite rightly given their other tasks) unable to keep abreast of "technology". Isn't there an internal emphasis on "IT" people to protect/inform non-IT people of what is possible / what happens / limits / capabilities, etc? What you suggest is that IT people can throw any responsability back at people who have no clue ( and never will) about IT?

 

[astrosly]

Sorry astrosly, but that line grates on me a bit. I know that most of the population are (quite rightly given their other tasks) unable to keep abreast of "technology". Isn't there an internal emphasis on "IT" people to protect/inform non-IT people of what is possible / what happens / limits / capabilities, etc? What you suggest is that IT people can throw any responsability back at people who have no clue ( and never will) about IT?

Ideally, yes, in practice, no. Especially a large organisations there are many areas of the business that don't engage with IT in such a fashion as you would like. That is my experience and I am aware of many instances in my career, even recent, where technology decisions and actions are made without informing IT or checking what is possible/happens/limits etc. Yet we are supposed to be all seeing-eye on such matters.

I am hardly suggesting that IT "throw" the responsibility back at people, I am suggesting that every technology output you see wasn't necessarily done by an IT person so don't immediately blame IT folks for such things. That type of blame grates with me a tad.

 

[juddles]

Ideally, yes, in practice, no. Especially a large organisations there are many areas of the business that don't engage with IT in such a fashion as you would like. That is my experience and I am aware of many instances in my career, even recent, where technology decisions and actions are made without informing IT or checking what is possible/happens/limits etc. Yet we are supposed to be all seeing-eye on such matters.

I am hardly suggesting that IT "throw" the responsibility back at people, I am suggesting that every technology output you see wasn't necessarily done by an IT person so don't immediately blame IT folks for such things. That type of blame grates with me a tad.

But how can a huge organization offer a service to a member of their FF program that doesn't qualify? A simple age filter should prevent that? Who is responsible for that? It is one, technology-enabled check......

 

[MEL_Traveller]

But how can a huge organization offer a service to a member of their FF program that doesn't qualify? A simple age filter should prevent that? Who is responsible for that? It is one, technology-enabled check......

The head of IT - presumably an executive - should have been aware of the strategic implications of any products on offer.

The IT person doing the change? They may not have ever been to a Qantas Club, let alone know there's service of alcohol. They're given a list of things to do and they go ahead and do them.

 

[Must...Fly!]

You're all assuming that when the corporates got around the table and thrashed out this idea, they knew under 18s are not allowed in to a QP

Hardly anyone in an airline actually knows their own product.

 

[juddles]

....The IT person doing the change? They may not have ever been to a Qantas Club, let alone know there's service of alcohol. They're given a list of things to do and they go ahead and do them....

I must live in a different world. If I had a client X wanting thing Y, I would make it my professional pride to understand the whole game....

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I must live in a different world. If I had a client X wanting thing Y, I would make it my professional pride to understand the whole game....

The IT person actually doing the change is probably at an entirely different pay grade to you! They may not even be on site depending on which part of the system is being updated, and how old that part of the system is.

But that doesn't excuse the head of IT taking responsibility. They will ultimately approve the package of work before it gets sent to be actioned.

But errors happen. And while not ideal, perhaps there's only a very small window of risk here. The person buying the pass would be subject to another check at the lounge entry to determine eligibility to enter. Only if they clearly looked over 18 would they be allowed to proceed without an ID check. So there's a small window of passengers who might look over 18 - but were under - who then also decided they were going to go to the bar and order a drink. And they'd then have to pass a final check by the bartender who is not supposed to serve persons under 18.

 

[JohnK]

Not defending anyone but it is not possible to test for each scenario. Yes age check may sound logical but that's with hindsight.

P.S. I investigate and fix bugs and have seen some really simple bugs get through UAT from very experienced people with years of business knowledge.

 

[oz_mark]

Not defending anyone but it is not possible to test for each scenario. Yes age check may sound logical but that's with hindsight.

P.S. I investigate and fix bugs and have seen some really simple bugs get through UAT from very experienced people with years of business knowledge.

With all the data reporting and extraction tools around these days, some things never go near IT people.

I'll give an example. There's a lot of financial modelling that goes on in Excel spreadsheets. Many of them have never been near an IT person, and who knows how much testing has been done on them.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

I'll give an example. There's a lot of financial modelling that goes on in Excel spreadsheets. Many of them have never been near an IT person, and who knows how much testing has been done on them.

I've definitely seen a lot of this in my career. The abuse of VBA in Excel and pseudo apps created by people with no background in IT or computer science is a blight on the industry.

 

[Guvner]

Blame I.T all you want. A marketing person would/should have signed off, and ultimately set the parameters, on an offer sent to customers. If anything its a QA fail.

 

[astrosly]

With all the data reporting and extraction tools around these days, some things never go near IT people.

Indeed. A marketing/loyalty staff member may have asked someone with access to a reporting tool for a list of email addresses for people travellilng solo in the next 5 days where there is a QC lounge and is not an UM. Doesn't ask why they want the list, they give them the list with the parameters as per the request.

 

[Flying mermaid]

I remember many years ago going to an IT conference and listening to a presentation by the head of IT at Defence. They had had an amnesty and various user areas had owned up to having their own gear. They wanted to do their own thing and not wait for IT, or have IT imposing standards. These areas had managed to buy everything including mainframes while hiding them in the purchase orders as armaments!

In this modern age where everyone has the power of the old mainframes on their desk, pretty easy to do things! At the end of the day blame Qantas, because it is their mistake, but not necessarily the IT people.

 

[nickfromeastryde]

Not going to comment on this case but need to ask the question of a supposedly ASX top 50 company - how on earth can system maintenance/upgrade/DR test (whatever they are doing today) take a full business day?

I am going to comment, their IT processes and quality appear really poor