Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

a question about "owning" a process or a server

5 views
Skip to first unread message

S Claus

unread,
Apr 27, 2009, 4:10:19 AM4/27/09
to
Hi all

here is another a bit dumb question. What does it mean in practice
when in an organization someone "owns" a process or a server? What
kind of responsibility would such a person have for the process or
server?

Thanks in advance,

Jerry Stuckle

unread,
Apr 27, 2009, 11:15:46 AM4/27/09
to

Absolutely nothing. Their responsibility is strictly what their job
responsibilities say they are. In practice, this could be almost
anything - or nothing.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

S Claus

unread,
Apr 28, 2009, 3:41:43 PM4/28/09
to
> jstuck...@attglobal.net
> ==================

Thanks Jerry, but the concept of "ownership" is referred to for
example in the Wikipedia article about Business analysis as follows:
There are 6 elements of CATWOE
...
Owner - Who owns the process or situation being investigated and what
role will they play in the solution?
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_analysis)

So is the person who owns a process or so the main person responsible
for it - or can the meaning be more generic depending on what is being
"owned" (i.e. whether a service, server, process, etc)?

Jerry Stuckle

unread,
Apr 28, 2009, 8:12:37 PM4/28/09
to

My answer stands. "Ownership" does not necessarily relate to
responsibility. The "owner" can take as much or as little
responsibility as his/her job description requires.

And don't believe everything you read on the internet - especially
Wikipedia. Although much of their content is good, it is often one
person's opinion.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

Charles Calvert

unread,
Apr 28, 2009, 10:11:25 PM4/28/09
to
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:10:19 -0700 (PDT), S Claus
<sa...@temporaryinbox.com> wrote in
<9592f189-b15b-43a0...@i28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>:

In theory, they would have ultimate responsibility for the process,
server, etc. and presumably corresponding authority. In practice,
this will resemble any other situation of responsibility, where the
actual amount of responsibility vested in the individual and exercised
by the individual will vary wildly with the situation.

Basically, it's a new buzzword with no more intrinsic meaning than any
other term.

--
Charles Calvert
Moderator - alt.computer.consultants.moderated
Submission Address: ac...@celticwolf.net
Contact Address: accm...@celticwolf.net

0 new messages