In a survey, 80 percent of respondents said the ACS was irrelevant. Their main gripe: present demands from IT professionals are a far cry from their counterparts 37 years ago but the organisation just didn't get it.
The ACS was swift to respond and in a letter to IT Manager Australia, it said: "As a professional body in which the strategic decisions are made by volunteers, our priorities and areas of focus are set by our members."
Richard Hogg, the society's national president, encouraged IT professionals to get involved if they felt change would make a difference. "I would remind people that we are not a union, but we are greatly concerned about the welfare of our members and have initiated a number of programs to provide short and longer term assistance to them," Hogg said.
IT professionals shouldn't forget that the ACS is run by people who are prepared to give up their own time to raise the profile of the IT industry, tech professional Bob Watson said in an e-mail interview.
"Often it is a few who will guide the many....A great example is that we are all prepared to vote, but how many of us would want to be a politician?" Watson said, adding that as a charity driven organisation, the ACS also provided hardware to the disabled.
If the ACS was so ineffective, would a rival IT society fare better--IT Manager Australia asked in a follow-up survey.
"No!" said IT consultant Kris Grigg. "As the IT industry's only professional body in Australia, the ACS should be a pre-requisite for technology-related employment."
Grigg was among the 40 percent of respondents who said Australia doesn't need another computing body.
Grigg said employers should believe that ACS members have a certain (recognised) level of competency, just as "the standing accountants who achieve CPA (certified public accountants) membership have in the financial sector."
He believes external parties also have role to play in generating interest in the society. "Universities and other institues of higher education should also promote the benefits of the organisation."
However, in reality, what matters are skills and knowledge, and not one's affiliation with computing groups. As Jill Shapiro, human resource manager at technology services company Dimension Data, said: "Being a member of the ACS is not important when determining the 'right fit' for a position at our company."
2%
4%
Stats stats and more stats.
The correct questions are not being asked:
What percentage of people who said it was irrelevant were eligable for membership?
What percentage of people who said there should be another body were not eligable for membership?
The correct qustions are:
What proportion of SUCESSFUL IT sections/departments/companies employ ONLY ACS members?
Or better still - have some type of test to actually show the quality of ACS and non ACS members.
There are so many people who think they are capable of working in IT - who aren't - which is why the ACS will not let them in. According to the ATO a profession requires that to be employed you need to be a member of a Professional organisation to be employed. Therefore we need the ACS!!!