As much as I'd like to say that IBM is faultless and standing proud above the competition, I can't say that in good conscience. Sometimes I feel nothing but frustration towards IBM and their desire to make things so unnecessarily complex and difficult. This is especially true when it comes to customer support, though in fairness to IBM this seems to be a common trend with most hardware or software vendors these days.

As a result I sometimes see support as a "wall". Not because a wall is a fundamental element to any building providing both reinforcement and safety for the overall structure, but simply because that's what it feels like my head is banging against when I'm talking with them.

The reason for this rant is because I've recently been handling a support issue around a failed firmware upgrade on a SAN switch, and after bouncing emails and calls around via official channels I'm still no closer to answers than I was after five minutes with Google. It's therefore time to resort to more "unofficial" means by which to get results. I know I left that cricket bat around here some place...

Ultimately I see the reason for this frustration is simply down to the bad practices put in place for large support organisations. Calls are handled on a quantity basis, driving people towards the goal of closing the call quickly rather than resolving the actual issue. As a result more emphasis seems to be on avoiding the provision of support rather than actually finding the cause of the problem. Such get-out clauses usually include some unrelated element not being on an interoperability list, or a particular piece of firmware not being smack up to date. This requires less time and effort on the part of the support team, and is therefore more "efficient". Well it was upgrading to the latest level of firmware that broke the switch on this occasion, so at least I've sidestepped that reason for dismissal this time around.

You'd think as an IBM Business Partner we'd get some kind of priority access or dedicated support line compared to normal IBM customers, but no. What we do have however is experience with the system, knowing what will be asked for and when, how best to work the system to our advantage, and who to beat over the head with a cricket bat when we're not getting results.

As such the benefit our own support team provides becomes a lot more apparent; Ownership of a problem, and so minimising the hassle involved in determining a solution. Even if all our support team is doing is managing the support call on someone's behalf, if we have remote access we're removing that additional hassle of running around collecting logs like some obsessive-compulsive lumberjack. I'm sure that most people given the choice would prefer to be getting on with the work that was planned for the day, rather than tied to a phone listening to Celine Dion punctuated by statements about how important their call is.

So that's good stuff for our customers, but sadly that doesn't help me. I'm the one handling the call on the behalf of the customer, tapping the bat in time to Celine Dion...