Careers - when to stop
Discussion
Hello
Been working at a large corp for majority of past decade. Individual contributor role, good variety of work. Senior position opens up on team, and having managed teams in the past am reluctant to get back into all that aggro. Deciding that the team ethos and culture is going to change one way or the other i've decided to move laterally to another team. I think this may raise eyebrows in the sense of hmm, not very ambitious, why didnt he go for that senior role on same team etc.
Has anyone else experience of this? I've had a tough year and am not particularly interested in moving up, have no need for more money (already salary sacrifice max pension contribs) and frankly was thinking my next move would be to drop down to a four day week, then three.. am mid 40's.
I feel i'm in a good position, busy enough but not too busy, good variety and not feeling need to constantly go "up" the ladder.
Anyone else got experience of this and is it career suicide? Not sure i even care any more. IT related field, obvs, and 20+ years in.
thanks
Been working at a large corp for majority of past decade. Individual contributor role, good variety of work. Senior position opens up on team, and having managed teams in the past am reluctant to get back into all that aggro. Deciding that the team ethos and culture is going to change one way or the other i've decided to move laterally to another team. I think this may raise eyebrows in the sense of hmm, not very ambitious, why didnt he go for that senior role on same team etc.
Has anyone else experience of this? I've had a tough year and am not particularly interested in moving up, have no need for more money (already salary sacrifice max pension contribs) and frankly was thinking my next move would be to drop down to a four day week, then three.. am mid 40's.
I feel i'm in a good position, busy enough but not too busy, good variety and not feeling need to constantly go "up" the ladder.
Anyone else got experience of this and is it career suicide? Not sure i even care any more. IT related field, obvs, and 20+ years in.
thanks
You sound exactly like a close friend of mine, who works for a big investment bank in London.
He liked the nuts and bolts of his job, was good at it and ended up line managing about 40 people.
So he took a sideways step to a job that doesn't involve line management, but probably means his chances of being promoted further are now minimal.
But when I saw him last he seemed very sanguine about this.
I asked if he feared this might shorten his time at the firm and he shrugged. He knows he is good at what he does, it's up to them if they agree.
He liked the nuts and bolts of his job, was good at it and ended up line managing about 40 people.
So he took a sideways step to a job that doesn't involve line management, but probably means his chances of being promoted further are now minimal.
But when I saw him last he seemed very sanguine about this.
I asked if he feared this might shorten his time at the firm and he shrugged. He knows he is good at what he does, it's up to them if they agree.
Sounds familiar. I've ping-ponged back and forth between management and non-management. The happiest people I see are:
a) Good techies who have dodged management roles
b) Bad techies who have lucked into management roles (before being fired)
The unicorns are people who are both good at tech and enjoy managing. Most of the good techies would rather be playing with the tech instead of listening to the latest whinge from one of their staff.
Decent firms recognise that being highly experienced and skilled technically is just as valuable as managing a team. If not more so. In the sense that you can't graft 15 years' development experience onto someone who isn't technical, but you can usually give someone technical enough basic management skills that they can do an okay job at it, even if a "charismatic natural born leader" might be better.
The poorer firms tend to have a promotion path of "junior dev, senior dev, team leader, out of touch manager". One theory I heard espoused is that because you used to be a dev you are a better manager - in reality your knowledge gets so far out of date you are no better off than someone who never wrote a line of code in their life but is prepared to take the time to understand the challenges of software development. A ex-developer manager who is too weak to protect their devs from distraction and interference is worse than a strong generic manager who understands the damage that being pulled in multiple directions does to a developer's productivity.
What I am waffling about is that if you are at a firm where only managers are valued and techs are treated like a commodity - it's the firm that is the problem, not you.
a) Good techies who have dodged management roles
b) Bad techies who have lucked into management roles (before being fired)
The unicorns are people who are both good at tech and enjoy managing. Most of the good techies would rather be playing with the tech instead of listening to the latest whinge from one of their staff.
Decent firms recognise that being highly experienced and skilled technically is just as valuable as managing a team. If not more so. In the sense that you can't graft 15 years' development experience onto someone who isn't technical, but you can usually give someone technical enough basic management skills that they can do an okay job at it, even if a "charismatic natural born leader" might be better.
The poorer firms tend to have a promotion path of "junior dev, senior dev, team leader, out of touch manager". One theory I heard espoused is that because you used to be a dev you are a better manager - in reality your knowledge gets so far out of date you are no better off than someone who never wrote a line of code in their life but is prepared to take the time to understand the challenges of software development. A ex-developer manager who is too weak to protect their devs from distraction and interference is worse than a strong generic manager who understands the damage that being pulled in multiple directions does to a developer's productivity.
What I am waffling about is that if you are at a firm where only managers are valued and techs are treated like a commodity - it's the firm that is the problem, not you.
Sounds a bit like me. Been with big corporation for a long time. Now happier doing tech stuff at start-ups. More interesting and dynamic without bothering too much about climbing the corporate ladder for a nicer job title.
I'll probably close my career by collecting trollies in a supermarket car park.
I'll probably close my career by collecting trollies in a supermarket car park.
Edited by Aunty Pasty on Friday 17th September 14:49
Its your choice and I think its great that you are thinking about what you really want
my only caution would be to ensure that your role scope is something that will continue for a long time
Someone I worked with was of the same mindset as you but their job was outsourced and their life changed a lot when it did
my only caution would be to ensure that your role scope is something that will continue for a long time
Someone I worked with was of the same mindset as you but their job was outsourced and their life changed a lot when it did
Seniority rarely means being happier at work, earlier this year I decided being a director was no longer fun at all. I did disuss with my then employer about going back to an individual contributor role but they were reluctant as my performance was good and the teams reporting to me were also performing well.
In the end I left to an entirely different industry but in the same field of data engineering and I'm back being an individual contribtor for a little more money, 20+ hours a week less work and pretty much zero stress.
It really comes down to are you happier leading a team, defineing strategy, dealing with people managment issues etc or are you happier being hands on.
In the end I left to an entirely different industry but in the same field of data engineering and I'm back being an individual contribtor for a little more money, 20+ hours a week less work and pretty much zero stress.
It really comes down to are you happier leading a team, defineing strategy, dealing with people managment issues etc or are you happier being hands on.
Ive been higher and changed companies and took a lesser role. Now I manage a department within a store in retail instead of GM of an entire store.
I probably have more experience than my line manager though he has more of the current companies ways (which are chalk and cheese to my old company)
I do the same job of 4 other managers roles on 4/5th of the working week so do a 4 day week compared to their 5 with the pro rata pay but im still kinda cantering.
its a job and a salary right now. The next level up is only 25% increase in pay and involves managing people on my level who are average at best and really only staying becasue they are stuck and used to the money and a bit institutionalised to the company. TBH most would struggle outside of it.
Im happy where I am and upper management are happy with me. Infact they keep asking what my plans are for the future.
Big fish in a little pond is fine you don't have to climb "the layer cake"
I probably have more experience than my line manager though he has more of the current companies ways (which are chalk and cheese to my old company)
I do the same job of 4 other managers roles on 4/5th of the working week so do a 4 day week compared to their 5 with the pro rata pay but im still kinda cantering.
its a job and a salary right now. The next level up is only 25% increase in pay and involves managing people on my level who are average at best and really only staying becasue they are stuck and used to the money and a bit institutionalised to the company. TBH most would struggle outside of it.
Im happy where I am and upper management are happy with me. Infact they keep asking what my plans are for the future.
Big fish in a little pond is fine you don't have to climb "the layer cake"
BMWMike I could have written that post. It was frighteningly similar to my feelings. My manager about to move on, some think I should go for it, including my wife, but I’m convinced it will make me miserable. I run a banking client who I really like, the tech at our place is world class but the company itself is a bit odd. I’ve no wish to move closer to the bit I don’t like by joining the management layer.
I’m in IT, programmer. That’s it. Not “senior”. Not “manager”.
Been at this since 1991, 53 now. Luckily my employer pays by what you do etc, not job title. I have no desire whatsoever to get into managing people or teams etc, especially now. I want to sort of wind down into part time work eventually.
Been at this since 1991, 53 now. Luckily my employer pays by what you do etc, not job title. I have no desire whatsoever to get into managing people or teams etc, especially now. I want to sort of wind down into part time work eventually.
I can relate to some of the posts here. Just turned 40, I only started having to manage junior colleagues in the last year or so as usually have strategically dodged management roles whenever it came to a point in my career where that was the next step for progression. It's not always the best option for career development but so far has not hurt me too much from a £££ perspective. Changed roles around 4 years back, nice pay jump and meant avoiding working myself into the ground for a promotion that would not of paid as well.
I am probably back in a similar position again though not as fazed by the idea of management these days but....it has its perks when it comes to sharing the workload by delegating but typically I prefer the idea of being a 'do-er' and getting stuck in the weeds with a role rather.than managing others...I think sometimes it's a fear that whatever I delegate won't be done either the way I want it done or not to the standard....but that can be covered by having a good team, good training etc
I think for some roles eventually you have to accept some management responsibilities etc Op to your original qu, I think the answer is 'it depends'...if you are niche/specialised and in demand maybe it's not such a risk.
I am probably back in a similar position again though not as fazed by the idea of management these days but....it has its perks when it comes to sharing the workload by delegating but typically I prefer the idea of being a 'do-er' and getting stuck in the weeds with a role rather.than managing others...I think sometimes it's a fear that whatever I delegate won't be done either the way I want it done or not to the standard....but that can be covered by having a good team, good training etc
I think for some roles eventually you have to accept some management responsibilities etc Op to your original qu, I think the answer is 'it depends'...if you are niche/specialised and in demand maybe it's not such a risk.
Edited by VR99 on Tuesday 21st September 13:31
I don't work in IT, but I am of a very similar mindset, mainly that I have absolutely no interest in line managing people or being a 'Manager' in general.
I had to change career paths quite drastically to avoid the route of moving into management but still moving up in salary, but it was worth it in my opinion.
Some people really enjoy it and thrive when they manage people, teams, departments, or areas of a business, but others will hate it, and there is nothing wrong with choosing either path.
I had to change career paths quite drastically to avoid the route of moving into management but still moving up in salary, but it was worth it in my opinion.
Some people really enjoy it and thrive when they manage people, teams, departments, or areas of a business, but others will hate it, and there is nothing wrong with choosing either path.
I interviewed a chap a few years ago.
It was for a lateral move.
I asked him why he was interested in the lateral move and what his next logical move was in his company.
He was being feted for the next level up, but really wanted to avoid take it.
Always stuck with me why. He said they wanted him in his boss’ role (VP) so his boss could move up.
Would give him responsibility for 7 global sites. His boss was divorced. The previous VP was divorced and had had a heart attack. The two other VP level guys were divorced (one of them twice), another heart attack (or similar, cant remember) involved as well.
He said I really like my wife and don’t want to die on a plane or in a hotel on other side of the world.
Wouldn’t be looked on favourably if he didn’t take the role he was being groomed for, hence making a lateral move outside the company made sense.
It was for a lateral move.
I asked him why he was interested in the lateral move and what his next logical move was in his company.
He was being feted for the next level up, but really wanted to avoid take it.
Always stuck with me why. He said they wanted him in his boss’ role (VP) so his boss could move up.
Would give him responsibility for 7 global sites. His boss was divorced. The previous VP was divorced and had had a heart attack. The two other VP level guys were divorced (one of them twice), another heart attack (or similar, cant remember) involved as well.
He said I really like my wife and don’t want to die on a plane or in a hotel on other side of the world.
Wouldn’t be looked on favourably if he didn’t take the role he was being groomed for, hence making a lateral move outside the company made sense.
This is a really interesting thread. Great seeing other people's points of view and I'm another in the camp of now side-stepping further jumps up the ladder, to an extent.
I think it comes down to how we're brought up, or nurtured, or steered in the early days of our studying and careers to think that climbing the ladder is what we should do.
Why exactly does anyone want to move up the ladder? It's either for status, achievement or salary, isn't it?
Some would say further job satisfaction and career opportunities, but they're not exclusive to management so it has to be one of those first 3 for me.
So, take all that apart and you're either doing it for the salary or the status in reality. If the salary isn't the driver then that only leaves status and you've got to be a special kind of person to be so driven by that that you'd take on a job you don't really want.
I think it comes down to how we're brought up, or nurtured, or steered in the early days of our studying and careers to think that climbing the ladder is what we should do.
Why exactly does anyone want to move up the ladder? It's either for status, achievement or salary, isn't it?
Some would say further job satisfaction and career opportunities, but they're not exclusive to management so it has to be one of those first 3 for me.
So, take all that apart and you're either doing it for the salary or the status in reality. If the salary isn't the driver then that only leaves status and you've got to be a special kind of person to be so driven by that that you'd take on a job you don't really want.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff