Career path for IT pros

[ykgoh]

Like many geeks, I enrolled in IT programmes in polytechnic and university because I liked programming and technical stuffs.

But reality sets in after entering the industry. It seems to me that in Singapore, one cannot hope to continue doing technical work after 5 years or so even as a senior engineer. The only route of progression in many companies for IT pros is to take on project management and be a project manager or team lead, which requires a totally different set of skills to do a different set of tasks e.g. manage people, manage vendors, plan project schedule, draft contracts. Technical skills are not valued much once beyond certain career stage, except enabling one to come up with a more accurate man-effort estimations through technical experience.

I wonder if my understanding is correct. Do all geeks have to bite the bullet and learn to do project management. Or there exist alternative career paths in certain industry or organizations for techies to continue doing hands-on works.

 

[d3n]

i switching to ecommerce Sales after 12 years in IT (6-7 years programming exp, remaining ecommerce support).

 

[davidktw]

Like many geeks, I enrolled in IT programmes in polytechnic and university because I liked programming and technical stuffs.

But reality sets in after entering the industry. It seems to me that in Singapore, one cannot hope to continue doing technical work after 5 years or so even as a senior engineer. The only route of progression in many companies for IT pros is to take on project management and be a project manager or team lead, which requires a totally different set of skills to do a different set of tasks e.g. manage people, manage vendors, plan project schedule, draft contracts. Technical skills are not valued much once beyond certain career stage, except enabling one to come up with a more accurate man-effort estimations through technical experience.

I wonder if my understanding is correct. Do all geeks have to bite the bullet and learn to do project management. Or there exist alternative career paths in certain industry or organizations for techies to continue doing hands-on works.

I think we need to be realistic. IT programmers are like construction workers in the construction industry. It doesn't mean they are not important, but experience technical leaders play much more important role when they lead. There are roles such as consultants, architects, techleads that are still technical roles but still requires your intimate technical skill sets.

I don't think this is Singapore only, it is everywhere. Even in US, good leadership staffs is still a much yearn for characteristic in the IT industry. It is not as if good leadership quality is in born. It also need to be trained and acquired through experiences.

If you want to be a low level coder forever, sure then don't expect good pay. Look at things around you, it is not as if we have a large needs for low level assembly coders ? Why ? Because compilers are getting more features and more advance. Because time and effort don't justify to code in a error prone language. Is this an excuse ? certainly it is, every good developer should be professional and productive and powerful. But the sad truth is such tomorrow most likely is not going to happen. There is a lack of good developers and hence automation is necessary. Automation in many "smart" decisions and better programming languages and better frameworks will bridge up the need to have really good developers to get decent software up. That means your skill set as a veteran software developer will not be as worthy as decades back. It means you have a lot of skills that can be used to train greenhorns are not exercised.

In my opinion, I rather you be a teach lead or even rise up to be an architect or consultant or even a CTO to lead with strong technical background instead of doing all the machine work. That means you will hav multiplying effect in the company you work in where you are worth more and your needs to the company is much appreciated than a software developer. It is easy to find people that follow instruction well, but it is not easy to find people that gives instructions well.

For me, even after 10 years of working in this industry, while I still is pretty much hands-on, I lead because I know the team that I lead will have better coding practices, better architecture due to my experience working in various industries projects. In the end, these people will have better chances to improve themselves than just day-in-day-out coding to requirements. The company I am in will benefit from my willingness to bring up the proficiencies of my team.

Even from a technical standpoint, project management is an approach to have your idea get implemented. Ask you a simple question, who do you think have more say over the architecture of a project, the consultant/software architect, or a lowly engineering ? I'm not sure about you, but I do have various creative architecture and practises when coming to software development. I would love they are implemented to my vision. The only way they can be done is when I have authority.

Think about what I have shared

 

[ykgoh]

Thanks davidktw for your insight and advice.

Certainly I agree with you that on the need for leadership. And personally, I have no trouble with taking on a technical lead role while advising fresh programmers, developers and engineers.

Just to clarify that my problem with senior positions currently in some organizations is that they become divorced from technical considerations primarily due to IT outsourcing.

Their jobs revolve around going for meetings, gathering business/user requirements, writing them down in project documents (e.g. high level use cases), drafting contracts and liaising with vendors (SME software houses, IT companies or other major system integrators) who figure out the actual technical implementation and configuration. These are tasks that business graduates with understanding of business processes can do, even without technical or engineering knowledge that IT/computer engineering graduates possess.

There is no technical or engineering considerations whether an implementation is feasible or desirable. In some cases, the system analyst or project manager does not design or define how a requirement will be developed. This constitutes IT project management in many companies.

I'm not sure if this means for techies, they should stick to a career path in system integrators and software vendors for technical hands-on work. Otherwise, as discussed above, many organizations today only have project managers and system analysts as middlemen to communicate their business requirements to outsourced vendors who do the actual work.

 

[d3n]

Thanks davidktw for your insight and advice.

Certainly I agree with you that on the need for leadership. And personally, I have no trouble with taking on a technical lead role while advising fresh programmers, developers and engineers.

Just to clarify that my problem with senior positions currently in some organizations is that they become divorced from technical considerations primarily due to IT outsourcing.

Their jobs revolve around going for meetings, gathering business/user requirements, writing them down in project documents (e.g. high level use cases), drafting contracts and liaising with vendors (SME software houses, IT companies or other major system integrators) who figure out the actual technical implementation and configuration. These are tasks that business graduates with understanding of business processes can do, even without technical or engineering knowledge that IT/computer engineering graduates possess.

There is no technical or engineering considerations whether an implementation is feasible or desirable. In some cases, the system analyst or project manager does not design or define how a requirement will be developed. This constitutes IT project management in many companies.

I'm not sure if this means for techies, they should stick to a career path in system integrators and software vendors for technical hands-on work. Otherwise, as discussed above, many organizations today only have project managers and system analysts as middlemen to communicate their business requirements to outsourced vendors who do the actual work.

do u have an idea that by doing the above as highlighted, u are actually moving up 1 level or a few levels already?

that is already career progression.

if you are stuck on hands on. you are forever the same level cos there is no progression to speak with.

this is like army...

the officers (like real world, the management) will arrow the specs then the specs will arrow those below them to perform tasks.

if u only like hands on... your skills will only be limited to technical skills and you will not progress far since you are only valued with your technical capabilities and you have 0 business skills.

do you think you are still valuable to a company since you are only technically inclined but not both technical and business?

your pay will also stuck.

anyway not sure how long u started working already. but in case u worked just not long.

IT development is not well appreciated in singapore companies, now a lot outsourcing.

so if u want to stay in this area and dun want to step up.

good luck to you.

i long moved from programming to support and next year I will move out of IT doing Sales... leveraging on my ecommerce experience.

 

[ykgoh]

do u have an idea that by doing the above as highlighted, u are actually moving up 1 level or a few levels already?

that is already career progression.

Not sure if I accidentally hit a raw nerve or something, but you sound agitated. Anyway, as a fresh grad software engineer, I was already doing those things which my project manager made me do. I also did the coding and everything.

In my previous jobs, as a fresh grad engineer/developer, I didn't have the luxury of having nicely written specifications and use cases dropped on my table, and I only stare at my IDE churning out codes without having to do anything else. I met users face-to-face and wrote technology evaluation reports for them as well. Maybe the practice is different in different companies.

Just that I observed many engineers once moving on to project management role, they drop everything technical and focus only on paperwork, even though they are project managers in the IT field.

I have come across managers in their 40s and 50s whose technical knowledge is still stuck at C++/VB, almost nothing about Java or .NET, much less about cloud computing. Web service and WCF are foreign to them, but mapped network drives and raw TCP sound more familiar. Methodology is still waterfall method (don't laugh though it sounds like something 20-30 years ago). Amazon is a place to buy things online, and not AWS.

Some have lost track of technological development in the last decade, but they make the technical decisions and architectural design in projects, as shocking as it sounds.

I think my point is that even as IT project managers, we need to keep abreast of newer improved technologies, and at least still know how to fire up an IDE and build a project in our spare time. Nobody can understand a technology unless they have touched it a bit somehow.

if you are stuck on hands on. you are forever the same level cos there is no progression to speak with.

this is like army...

the officers (like real world, the management) will arrow the specs then the specs will arrow those below them to perform tasks.

if u only like hands on... your skills will only be limited to technical skills and you will not progress far since you are only valued with your technical capabilities and you have 0 business skills.

do you think you are still valuable to a company since you are only technically inclined but not both technical and business?

your pay will also stuck.

Certainly, PMs do not do coding on a day-to-day basis. PMs have to delegate the coding work to the engineers lower down the rank. But his engineers would also depend on the PM's technical competency to make wise and reasonable technical decisions and blueprint before they build and deploy something.

Imo, an IT PM is an engineer-cum-manager: he/she manages project and people with technical/engineering knowledge/experience. As said before, some IT PM transforms into 100% business manager only and become sloppy and irresponsible when it comes to technical considerations and decisions. They only care about making sure the Work Breakdown Structure and Gantt charts are filled in, meeting minutes are documented and filed, but not whether the system will really work or not.

anyway not sure how long u started working already. but in case u worked just not long.

IT development is not well appreciated in singapore companies, now a lot outsourcing.

so if u want to stay in this area and dun want to step up.

good luck to you.

i long moved from programming to support and next year I will move out of IT doing Sales... leveraging on my ecommerce experience.

My previous reply notes that most organizations outsource their IT systems and operations, except having some system analysts or project managers as middlemen or liaisons to manage vendors. I was wondering where the technical work today is still being done (e.g. system integrators like NCS, Accenture?) where technical skills are still valued as a core competency of their staff precisely that what they do as their main business.

 

[davidktw]

Thanks davidktw for your insight and advice.

Certainly I agree with you that on the need for leadership. And personally, I have no trouble with taking on a technical lead role while advising fresh programmers, developers and engineers.

Just to clarify that my problem with senior positions currently in some organizations is that they become divorced from technical considerations primarily due to IT outsourcing.

Their jobs revolve around going for meetings, gathering business/user requirements, writing them down in project documents (e.g. high level use cases), drafting contracts and liaising with vendors (SME software houses, IT companies or other major system integrators) who figure out the actual technical implementation and configuration. These are tasks that business graduates with understanding of business processes can do, even without technical or engineering knowledge that IT/computer engineering graduates possess.

There is no technical or engineering considerations whether an implementation is feasible or desirable. In some cases, the system analyst or project manager does not design or define how a requirement will be developed. This constitutes IT project management in many companies.

I'm not sure if this means for techies, they should stick to a career path in system integrators and software vendors for technical hands-on work. Otherwise, as discussed above, many organizations today only have project managers and system analysts as middlemen to communicate their business requirements to outsourced vendors who do the actual work.

I suppose that would be because you are in the end-user(EU) environment. The fact that EU doesn't have well structured IT departments is because very often they do not have sufficient influx of assignments to maintain an elaborate department. Normally their main job is to facilitate the business domain of the company and infrastructure necessities. It is not in their desire to flourish the department into the technological aspect of the IT industry. They are still very much at the Enterprise level for stability and foundation.

You are also right, this is an egg and chicken problem. Without right assignments and direction, the IT department will not built up properly. Without the right personnels with the right skill sets, the IT department will end up need to outsource works in vendors, either because they are searching for products offered by vendors or they are not willing to spend extra to train up the in-house tech team for versatility that may not be fully utilised. You must also understand that the need to have a good IT team is not just train and forget. It is an on-going process in the business where people will leave and greenhorn will come. Training and process is necessary to have good skilful people constantly around. Only really large MNC with large businesses portfolios make sense to have an in-house tech teams as good as vendors side because it will be more responsive on long run to get things done.

So your problem is you are still green. For really experience IT personnels, they don't mind in the EU environment where they are be more stable and feed on their experiences, but for the younger folks, I highly do not recommend in-house tech teams as their nurturing ground because the exposure is rather limited. You can join any developing house or SI, of SME or MNC size, and they will have more to offer due to the range of businesses they may be involved in.

 

[davidktw]

Not sure if I accidentally hit a raw nerve or something, but you sound agitated. Anyway, as a fresh grad software engineer, I was already doing those things which my project manager made me do. I also did the coding and everything.

In my previous jobs, as a fresh grad engineer/developer, I didn't have the luxury of having nicely written specifications and use cases dropped on my table, and I only stare at my IDE churning out codes without having to do anything else. I met users face-to-face and wrote technology evaluation reports for them as well. Maybe the practice is different in different companies.

Just that I observed many engineers once moving on to project management role, they drop everything technical and focus only on paperwork, even though they are project managers in the IT field.

I have come across managers in their 40s and 50s whose technical knowledge is still stuck at C++/VB, almost nothing about Java or .NET, much less about cloud computing. Web service and WCF are foreign to them, but mapped network drives and raw TCP sound more familiar. Methodology is still waterfall method (don't laugh though it sounds like something 20-30 years ago). Amazon is a place to buy things online, and not AWS.

Some have lost track of technological development in the last decade, but they make the technical decisions and architectural design in projects, as shocking as it sounds.

I think my point is that even as IT project managers, we need to keep abreast of newer improved technologies, and at least still know how to fire up an IDE and build a project in our spare time. Nobody can understand a technology unless they have touched it a bit somehow.

Certainly, PMs do not do coding on a day-to-day basis. PMs have to delegate the coding work to the engineers lower down the rank. But his engineers would also depend on the PM's technical competency to make wise and reasonable technical decisions and blueprint before they build and deploy something.

Imo, an IT PM is an engineer-cum-manager: he/she manages project and people with technical/engineering knowledge/experience. As said before, some IT PM transforms into 100% business manager only and become sloppy and irresponsible when it comes to technical considerations and decisions. They only care about making sure the Work Breakdown Structure and Gantt charts are filled in, meeting minutes are documented and filed, but not whether the system will really work or not.

My previous reply notes that most organizations outsource their IT systems and operations, except having some system analysts or project managers as middlemen or liaisons to manage vendors. I was wondering where the technical work today is still being done (e.g. system integrators like NCS, Accenture?) where technical skills are still valued as a core competency of their staff precisely that what they do as their main business.

I think you have quite correctly identify the problem with the IT industry. It is traversing at a new age speed. The problem at the moment is diversification. There are too much subjects at hand and there are too much people involved in creating new frameworks and new solutions and exploring new technologies. Even for the same subject, you find several parties doing similar things with a niche of their own. End up you get several different frameworks/libraries doing similar things. As technologies consumer, you need to be able to select the right libraries/frameworks/products for your use cases.

This skill set is not possible for people that are no longer relevant in the industry. Your observation about seniors still on solutioning and yet their skill set are no longing evolving is a real problem. Some are holding on to the post because of their statuses and networking or the company is still using old technologies that require their existence. Your track is a new and evolving one, your need to keep on improving yourself and keep yourself relevant in the market will bring you further into the new future. That is something I strongly believe in my career roadmap too.

The nature is harsh on everyone, those that are no longer relevant will be sieve out. The only choice an individual have is to keep improving and keep abreast of the current. I'm sure you will find a better career roadmap if you join the technological creating or integrating side of the IT industry. It seems like you have the intention to excel and EU is most likely not the best option for you at the moment. Even for me, I still wouldn't nor will I enter the EU playground. It's not exactly technology that is focus there; It's something else These places most likely wouldn't get the right set of supervisors that will recognise the talent among their subordinates in the right manner.

 

[d3n]

Not sure if I accidentally hit a raw nerve or something, but you sound agitated. Anyway, as a fresh grad software engineer, I was already doing those things which my project manager made me do. I also did the coding and everything.

In my previous jobs, as a fresh grad engineer/developer, I didn't have the luxury of having nicely written specifications and use cases dropped on my table, and I only stare at my IDE churning out codes without having to do anything else. I met users face-to-face and wrote technology evaluation reports for them as well. Maybe the practice is different in different companies.

Just that I observed many engineers once moving on to project management role, they drop everything technical and focus only on paperwork, even though they are project managers in the IT field.

I have come across managers in their 40s and 50s whose technical knowledge is still stuck at C++/VB, almost nothing about Java or .NET, much less about cloud computing. Web service and WCF are foreign to them, but mapped network drives and raw TCP sound more familiar. Methodology is still waterfall method (don't laugh though it sounds like something 20-30 years ago). Amazon is a place to buy things online, and not AWS.

Some have lost track of technological development in the last decade, but they make the technical decisions and architectural design in projects, as shocking as it sounds.

I think my point is that even as IT project managers, we need to keep abreast of newer improved technologies, and at least still know how to fire up an IDE and build a project in our spare time. Nobody can understand a technology unless they have touched it a bit somehow.



Certainly, PMs do not do coding on a day-to-day basis. PMs have to delegate the coding work to the engineers lower down the rank. But his engineers would also depend on the PM's technical competency to make wise and reasonable technical decisions and blueprint before they build and deploy something.

Imo, an IT PM is an engineer-cum-manager: he/she manages project and people with technical/engineering knowledge/experience. As said before, some IT PM transforms into 100% business manager only and become sloppy and irresponsible when it comes to technical considerations and decisions. They only care about making sure the Work Breakdown Structure and Gantt charts are filled in, meeting minutes are documented and filed, but not whether the system will really work or not.





My previous reply notes that most organizations outsource their IT systems and operations, except having some system analysts or project managers as middlemen or liaisons to manage vendors. I was wondering where the technical work today is still being done (e.g. system integrators like NCS, Accenture?) where technical skills are still valued as a core competency of their staff precisely that what they do as their main business.

not agitated. this is my normal way of typing online. there is passion in my style of typing.

but having been in the IT industry for 12 years, I seen enough.

there is no prospects as developer.

why? cos even if you are constantly upgrading yourself, end of the day, the company decides to outsource out the development work, you are then obsolete in the company or rather become a liability to the company.

if u dun move up into PM managing outsource vendors doing the development work... you will find yourself very hard to compete with vendors... who is asking to be paid lesser.

what i am trying to tell you is in short, passion is passion, end of the day, bringing food to the table is more important.

learn new skills (not only IT skills) and make yourself valuable to your existing company and also to potential employers in future. Make yourself marketable. Cos the company will ask, why should I hire you when I can outsource the development work to India for example at a fraction of its cost.

 

[ykgoh]

I think you have quite correctly identify the problem with the IT industry. It is traversing at a new age speed. The problem at the moment is diversification. There are too much subjects at hand and there are too much people involved in creating new frameworks and new solutions and exploring new technologies. Even for the same subject, you find several parties doing similar things with a niche of their own. End up you get several different frameworks/libraries doing similar things. As technologies consumer, you need to be able to select the right libraries/frameworks/products for your use cases.

Which is why it's important for IT project managers even if they're no longer doing the coding to be informed about new technologies that are better and more modern to improve the systems they produce end of the day. Some are passing fads, while others truly bring improvements to the systems they are built on. But nobody has the time to learn everything, so people have to bet on choosing the right technology to master. Being informed lessens the risk of making a bad choice.

Project managers cannot just simply let go of the technical knowledge and think it's the tech lead or engineers problems to figure out how it can done and pick up the pieces after making promises to clients/customers/users in the meeting room. It's trivial for anyone to agree to all user requests, and to do it blindly without inklings of the technical implications is even riskier.

But in IT industry, it's common to cover up management problems with technical solutions or workarounds. The PM fails to manage user expectations, agree to any requests to please them and he returns to instruct the engineers to work OT to rush out some unorthodox adapters, workarounds or bridging systems to make a system work, or at least create the illusion of a working system.

Frameworks, architectures and best practices all go out of the window while doing so. Engineers wonder whether their PMs know what they're doing sometimes.

This skill set is not possible for people that are no longer relevant in the industry. Your observation about seniors still on solutioning and yet their skill set are no longing evolving is a real problem. Some are holding on to the post because of their statuses and networking or the company is still using old technologies that require their existence. Your track is a new and evolving one, your need to keep on improving yourself and keep yourself relevant in the market will bring you further into the new future. That is something I strongly believe in my career roadmap too.

It takes a certain personality and aptitude to be good in IT, and being open-minded about new knowledge and proactive in learning are key traits. But too bad this is not realized widely and many people join IT programmes in schools to be IT professionals later on. Many can learn something once in school, but the ability and inclination to unlearn and relearn is much rarer. This is what keeps an IT professional fresh and relevant.

I had one senior engineer suggesting coding something in ASP (not ASP.NET mind you) in 2008, and using the deprecated Visual SourceSafe version control system. I met experienced engineers who refused to learn J2EE (now Java EE) citing performance issues, but prefer to simply cobble together a few PHP scripts. Yes, and they prefer URL-encoded key-value pairs rather than JSON for data passing. Go figure.

I always felt transported instantly 10-15 years back in time when they mentioned that. Thankfully, they didn't suggest CGI with an Apache server and Java applets. I was also handed a code base to "enhance" dating back to early 2000s for a rich desktop client written in Java Swing that could only run on JRE 1.4.

Some IT professionals are only good with certain technologies and they hang on to them for dear life, thinking they can just learn them once and keep reusing them for all current and future IT projects.

The nature is harsh on everyone, those that are no longer relevant will be sieve out. The only choice an individual have is to keep improving and keep abreast of the current. I'm sure you will find a better career roadmap if you join the technological creating or integrating side of the IT industry. It seems like you have the intention to excel and EU is most likely not the best option for you at the moment. Even for me, I still wouldn't nor will I enter the EU playground. It's not exactly technology that is focus there; It's something else These places most likely wouldn't get the right set of supervisors that will recognise the talent among their subordinates in the right manner.

Thanks for the advice. Maybe it's more of matter which companies I join, rather than having no future in IT industry at all. I started this thread because I was lost, and wondering if there is any career path at all for someone who takes technical work seriously.

 

[d3n]

Thanks for the advice. Maybe it's more of matter which companies I join, rather than having no future in IT industry at all. I started this thread because I was lost, and wondering if there is any career path at all for someone who takes technical work seriously.

good luck to you.

the grass is greener outside Singapore if you want someone to take you seriously in your technical skills. That's all I can tell you.

 

[ykgoh]

not agitated. this is my normal way of typing online. there is passion in my style of typing.

but having been in the IT industry for 12 years, I seen enough.

there is no prospects as developer.

why? cos even if you are constantly upgrading yourself, end of the day, the company decides to outsource out the development work, you are then obsolete in the company or rather become a liability to the company.

if u dun move up into PM managing outsource vendors doing the development work... you will find yourself very hard to compete with vendors... who is asking to be paid lesser.

what i am trying to tell you is in short, passion is passion, end of the day, bringing food to the table is more important.

learn new skills (not only IT skills) and make yourself valuable to your existing company and also to potential employers in future. Make yourself marketable. Cos the company will ask, why should I hire you when I can outsource the development work to India for example at a fraction of its cost.

I see a lot of good advice here. It's also a reality check for me. In the end, it's also not just what I want to do, but what the market demands and is willing to pay for.

As foreign IT talents flood the tech market, the value of tech skills declines accordingly. But in all honesty, all industries face the same problem with globalization, that someone somewhere else on the globe is willing and able to do the same work for a cheaper price. Just that the pace of change in IT industry is more striking and brutal than others. I get your point.

 

[d3n]

I see a lot of good advice here. It's also a reality check for me. In the end, it's also not just what I want to do, but what the market demands and is willing to pay for.

As foreign IT talents flood the tech market, the value of tech skills declines accordingly. But in all honesty, all industries face the same problem with globalization, that someone somewhere else on the globe is willing and able to do the same work for a cheaper price. Just that the pace of change in IT industry is more striking and brutal than others. I get your point.

just dun think you are throwing away your technical skills by moving on to a PM role.... your technical skills is your assets. your technical expertise can be leverage by the company in the new role.

just like the new role I will be doing... I got zero experience selling ecommerce products. but because of my programming background... as well as 4-5 years of ecommerce support background, I was accepted into the new role doing sales. Why? Cos the new company I am joining is leveraging on my experience so I can learn the ropes very quickly. They dun need to train me technically how to speak to clients. They just need to train me how to do sales.

And when I talk to clients, I will be more confident as well and understand them better from technical point of view... so I don't have to give the clients a standard reply then go back check with technical team (can be done or cannot be done) then give a firmer reply to client. Time is money. I can give a reply to the client by passing the internal technical team on the spot!

 

[ykgoh]

just dun think you are throwing away your technical skills by moving on to a PM role.... your technical skills is your assets. your technical expertise can be leverage by the company in the new role.

just like the new role I will be doing... I got zero experience selling ecommerce products. but because of my programming background... as well as 4-5 years of ecommerce support background, I was accepted into the new role doing sales. Why? Cos the new company I am joining is leveraging on my experience so I can learn the ropes very quickly. They dun need to train me technically how to speak to clients. They just need to train me how to do sales.

And when I talk to clients, I will be more confident as well and understand them better from technical point of view... so I don't have to give the clients a standard reply then go back check with technical team (can be done or cannot be done) then give a firmer reply to client. Time is money. I can give a reply to the client by passing the internal technical team on the spot!

The technical team will have an easier life, since you probably only promise customers things that are possible with the product/technology.

I personally have met IT sales people from MNCs no less who have zero knowledge of their products they're selling. Every question directed to them about a specific feature elicits a blank look, and "I need to check with my solution architect / support engineer" response. It really makes me wonder if I can trust their words that their products will work as promised. Frankly, they don't instill much confidence.

 

[voiceoflove]

The technical team will have an easier life, since you probably only promise customers things that are possible with the product/technology.

I personally have met IT sales people from MNCs no less who have zero knowledge of their products they're selling. Every question directed to them about a specific feature elicits a blank look, and "I need to check with my solution architect / support engineer" response. It really makes me wonder if I can trust their words that their products will work as promised. Frankly, they don't instill much confidence.

afterall his just a sales guy...a sales guy only need to sweet talk/ psyco customer

 

[davidktw]

afterall his just a sales guy...a sales guy only need to sweet talk/ psyco customer

That would be the basic feature of yet another salesman. A good salesman is one that sell responsibly At no point where overselling gives good reputation to the vendor, nor does it makes good impression of the individual to the industry. A good sales is one that sells and his support can deliver.

 

[tokyofairies]

Anyone into Database/Data warehousing route?

There are so many things about the IT industry I wanted to share. But if I bare my mind, I may be seen as unfriendly. But those are the brutal truth I feel.

 

[stupidbodo]

Anyone into Database/Data warehousing route?

There are so many things about the IT industry I wanted to share. But if I bare my mind, I may be seen as unfriendly. But those are the brutal truth I feel.

I'm interested to hear more from you. I'm not in data warehouse industry but I am using a couple of amazing product for my startup. What do you think about running scalable ML queries? Besides using mahout.

 

[Littlewild]

Like many geeks, I enrolled in IT programmes in polytechnic and university because I liked programming and technical stuffs.

But reality sets in after entering the industry. It seems to me that in Singapore, one cannot hope to continue doing technical work after 5 years or so even as a senior engineer. The only route of progression in many companies for IT pros is to take on project management and be a project manager or team lead, which requires a totally different set of skills to do a different set of tasks e.g. manage people, manage vendors, plan project schedule, draft contracts. Technical skills are not valued much once beyond certain career stage, except enabling one to come up with a more accurate man-effort estimations through technical experience.

I wonder if my understanding is correct. Do all geeks have to bite the bullet and learn to do project management. Or there exist alternative career paths in certain industry or organizations for techies to continue doing hands-on works.

I used to have the same question in my mind.

In my firm, the typical progression path is Associate Software Engineer -> Software Engineer -> Software Engineering Analyst -> Software Engineering Senior Analyst -> Team Lead -> Associate Manager -> Manager.

Notice how the roles transform from a Senior SE Analyst to a team lead and then over to the management path.

But that doesn't mean you stop being technical. It just means you need to acquire a new skill set for people/project management.

However, it is difficult to be good at just either one of those. It's like mastering both English and Chinese at the same time. Most people end up speaking passable English and Chinese, few are truly fluent in both.

There is definitely value in remaining technical as you progress, but the expectation (at least in my organization) is that you should pick up management skills to eventually lead/manage a team of developers.

When you are being evaluated by the success of your team instead of just yourself, you will find that management skills are just as important as technical skills. Unless you are of John Carmack calibre, I doubt you will be writing any modern enterprise solutions by yourself. Your success will also depend on your team mates and your project management skills.

 

[davidktw]

I used to have the same question in my mind.

In my firm, the typical progression path is Associate Software Engineer -> Software Engineer -> Software Engineering Analyst -> Software Engineering Senior Analyst -> Team Lead -> Associate Manager -> Manager.

Notice how the roles transform from a Senior SE Analyst to a team lead and then over to the management path.

But that doesn't mean you stop being technical. It just means you need to acquire a new skill set for people/project management.

However, it is difficult to be good at just either one of those. It's like mastering both English and Chinese at the same time. Most people end up speaking passable English and Chinese, few are truly fluent in both.

There is definitely value in remaining technical as you progress, but the expectation (at least in my organization) is that you should pick up management skills to eventually lead/manage a team of developers.

When you are being evaluated by the success of your team instead of just yourself, you will find that management skills are just as important as technical skills. Unless you are of John Carmack calibre, I doubt you will be writing any modern enterprise solutions by yourself. Your success will also depend on your team mates and your project management skills.

Well said. indeed the industry need more leaders than mere workers. And it is exactly right that leaders doesn't move one away from technical skill sets. In fact one need to be even more skillful technical and more knowledgable since only those with strong technical foundation can teach their peers and also their team.

Leaders will soon realise their ambition to deliver good products is not just one person effort. To have a good team and good deliverables is to have a powerful team which only be lead by good tech lead.

群不能无首，能担当一个好的首领必须是个智者