Ask Slashdot: Comparing the Value of Skilled Admins vs. Contributing Supervisors 171
HappyDude writes "I've been asked to manage a department in our IT group. It's comprised of UNIX, VMWare, Citrix, EMC and HP SAN Admins, Technicians and Help Desk personnel. The group covers the spectrum in years of experience. I am a 20-year Admin veteran of Engineering and Health Care IT systems including UNIX, Oracle DBA, Apache HTTP/Tomcat, WebSphere, software design plus other sundry jack-of-all-trades kinds of stuff. Although I consider myself a hack at most of those trades, I'm reasonably good at any one of them when I'm submerged. I also have 10 years of Project Management experience in Engineering and Health Care related IT organizations. I do have formal PM training, but haven't bothered to seek credentialing. I'm being told that I'll be worth less to the organization as a supervisor than what I'm making now, but the earning potential is greater if I accept the management position. Out of the kindness of their hearts, they're offering to start me in the new position at the same wage I'm currently making. Does this make any sense, Slashdot? "
Read on for further details.
HappyDude continues: "I think their rationale is crap; the primary reason behind their valuation is that I have no leadership experience. I would be a 'rookie' supervisor with no more value than a 4-year grad coming in off the street. It seems a couple things are missing from their calculations. One is that they don't give me credit for the 'global' projects I've led to complete success (completed on time, under budget, all goals met, blah, blah, blah). Apparently PM doesn't have anything to do with leadership in their eyes. My current employer doesn't actually understand what PM is and has no one with the skills I have who actually practices it other than me. How would you recommend I 'educate' our HR department about what real PM is all about and convince them that it surely does satisfy their leadership experience requirement? The other thing missing (in my mind) is a fair valuation of my current skills, or of the worth of a supervisor skilled in almost all of the trades I'll be managing. They use 'market' analysis data from a third party when gauging salaries, probably like most employers do... but I know individuals in my field who wouldn't even talk to these folks for a starting wage less than 25% greater than what I'm currently making. HR suggested if I could provide adequate data that contradicts or adequately augments theirs, they would reconsider. How would I go about gathering that kind of data, from reputable sources, that would even stand a chance of these people's paradigms? As a final request, can anyone please provide me with first-hand knowledge of salary ranges for the two positions described? Maybe I'm all wet, but I think I'm a steal at the wage I'm being paid right now."
Program Manager? (Score:5, Insightful)
Truth be told, most program managers, me included, are pretty shitty at leadership and management. If you take the job, remember that the only thing that matters is making yourself look good. To do that, make your boss look good. That means solving his boss' problems. Technical skills keep me from getting fired, but sucking up to my boss' boss and communication skills are the reason I have been promoted well beyond my management abilities. Good luck.
I am a 70/30 Working/Supervisor in IT (Score:5, Insightful)
I am worth a ton to my organization as a working supervisor. Not only do I know the work that's being done quite well, but I'm also more well respected by my employees because I'm in the thick of it with them.
While I don't always have to put in the same amount of time into various projects that they do, I still have a part in the work and keep fresh on my skills, something I personally disliked in every single "solely personnel manager" I ever had--one of the reasons I left my last job in fact.
While you may be worth less, depending on your work/supervision balance, they're right, your potential is much higher. If you're seriously interested in management, take the job. As long as the team is cohesive and fairly drama free, you should be able to do very little extra.
If you're going to be doing the same amount of work you always were and now have an additional amount of supervisory work to do (1:1s, PTO forms, tracking comp time, developing documentation for new hires/exit process, etc, etc, etc, etc) then you would certainly be getting the short end of the stick.
However, you must realize that if you pass up this job (assuming you're currently employed there and it's a "promotion") that they will be unlikely to provide you the chance again in the future. You will be ignored as management material and others will grow up faster around you forcing you to exit for another organization.
Best of luck. I enjoy my current role as it gives me the flexibility to get away from the code and into something else but also keep my skills sharp and my interests high.
YMMV.
You are being played (Score:5, Insightful)
They are taking advantage of you. Speaking as someone who went from technical to management (operations and projects) then back to an engineering role, I can tell you that if you do the job well you should be making more as a manager. That isn't a popular opinion around here but it is true. Note that I said if you can do the job well. Too many people get thrust into management roles who do not have the talents or training to do them justice. Properly executing a management role will take more effort and more hours than most technical staff ever spend on their jobs.
You should be getting at least a 10% bump in pay. They are playing you.
Re:Get some offers (Score:4, Insightful)
It depends on the industry. My company is starving for good program managers, product managers, and developers. The only area where we see a glut of qualified applicants is in QA.
Rule of thumb: if it pays the same or less, don't (Score:4, Insightful)
Rule of thumb: if it pays the same or less, don't do it. That is, if you don't hate what you're currently doing. If they want you to do this, they'll pay more. If they don't, why the fuck are you going there in the fist place?
Re:Get some offers (Score:5, Insightful)
They ARE right: PM != leadership (Score:5, Insightful)
Leadership - doing the right things. Infusing "vision" into the project and being able to "sell" that vision to stakeholders, picking the means and adjusting the priorities based on the team (capabilities, their state at any given time, etc.)
Note: I'm not saying the same person cannot do both in the same time. But based on the confusion I'm seeing in your post between the two and the emphasis on PM, I'm inclined to think you may have a deficit in regards with leadership. (I certainly may be wrong.)
BTW, one thing I noticed in regards with a "exclusively PM attitude persons": they speak about their team members in terms of "resources"; if anyone in the team gets named, it's for giving a name point to a "resource contention" or blame for the delays in the project.
They also use "project goals" most of the time and for them the "project vision" is a blah-blah paragraph of the "project plan" document; as such, they also hate to switch between approaches in the middle of the project, even if mandated by unforeseen circumstances (chosen technology doesn't actually support the vision) or opportunities to add something better to the outcome of the project.
Re:You are being played (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You are being played (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll agree with this. When I work for a manager that is actually skilled in management, I can produce at least twice as much work and at noticeably higher quality than when I am working for a manager that is bad at their job. The sad part is that people actually skilled at management are far and few between.
Sad but true. I was very successful in my management endeavors but I am very happy to have found a position that pays just as well but lets me be mostly technical. I still do some project management and I'm often put in leadership roles on a project basis, but really doing the job of a manager well takes far more effort and is far less fun. A good manager should be a facilitator. In many regards I thought of myself as working for my staff rather than them working for me. It's a very taxing job and there is very little reward other than on the monetary side and the good feelings one gets from mentoring, developing staff, and helping them overcome obstacles.
Yes, this (Score:5, Insightful)
What you do is take the position so you have the title. Then you take your resume, beef it up and THEN look for solid offers for positions elsewhere.
Agreed. Lots of good comments on this page but I think this is one of the most insightful.
I'd take it a step further, however. I saw another comment that said you should be getting at least a 10% increase, with which I agree. You also commented you are being told the earning potential is greater if you go for a supervisor position. Run with that. Sit down with the powers that be and say, okay, earning potential is greater, let's put some metrics around that. Give me some measurable KPIs which I have to meet. If I meet those figures within six months, I get a 10% pay increase. Don't get too hung up on the exact figure; if they agree with this idea but make it eight percent, you're still good. Point is, are they willing to play ball with some good measurable performance definitions? If they do go for this, make sure you understand the criteria you have to meet to get your pay increase, and have at least one mid-point review with your direct manager to assess how well you're doing at accomplishing those specific goals or metrics that will get you your pay increase.
The bit about "you're worth more to us in your current position" sounds pretty suspect. If they won't go with the suggestion in my previous paragraph about putting some hard metrics around "if I achieve A, B, and C, you give me more money", then do what silentbozo says and get prepared to look for another position. But take the supervisor position anyway; it's going to improve your resume, regardless.
By the way, I've also seen some comments about "project management" does not equate to "good leader of people". Very true. Which leads to my final point.
You might want to consider some kind of safety net. I've known people who have moved to a very different position within the same company and nobody's been too sure how they'll do. So they have a mutual agreement - revisit in six months, and if either you or your new manager is unhappy, you get to go back to your old position. If you're really that valuable to them, they should at least be willing to contemplate the idea.
Re:Program Manager? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would think there is one other thing that matters - gaining experience.
Sure, submitter is very likely getting screwed over on pay, and is likely expected to do more than the job description requires, but after a couple of years doing it? He can start sniffing around and if he's good at it, stands a good chance of getting some kick-ass offers. He can in turn take a copy of that back to his current employer, and drop it off right next to his resignation letter.
It's a foot in the managerial door (if that's where he wants his career to go), which IMHO is pretty tough to get in the tech field these days. While management is the suck (also IMHO), it's a good way to stay in the field and get promotions as one gets older, especially in the upper 40's.
Re:Get some offers (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed with sibling, but I have a different reason:
Sure you can get someone desperate in the door, but they damned sure won't hang around too long.
I usually sit in on hiring decisions, and honestly? We immediately write off those who are obviously overqualified, specifically because they will only hang around long enough to find something better, and will then bail out the very moment they do.
As far as GP? I'd say take the offer as it stands, get the experience and the resume entry, then jump ship the moment something better opens up.
Re:Business Value (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an IT director at a Fortune 500 company. $46M budget. 300 people counting contractors.
You need to understand how salaries are handled at your company for job transfers. At my company, at some times we can give nothing, some times we've been able to price to market, some times we can give a little bit. All depends on the current philosophy of HR and status of the salary reserve. Is your manager doing the best they can?
If the level is the same (both jobs are coded level X internally), no raise is legit. I can assure you that higher levels are much more accessible as a manager than a sysadmin. But it may take 2-3 raise/promotion cycles to get you where you deserve to be. I have a woman who it will take at least 5 years since I'll never be able to give her more than 10%/year, and it may take a decade if she keeps earning more promotions from me. I wish I could get a 10% raise every year for a decade. You will get much better ratings and raises as an underlevelled, underpaid manager than you will as an appropriately levelled, fairly paid sysadmin. One thing I look at is that new managers crash and burn fairly frequently. It is much more humane not to give a big raise/promo off the bat since then I have to demote the person and strip their pay away 6 months down the road. If they don't accept this voluntarily its a very scarring process. Or if let them retain the level/pay they often end up getting laid off eventually because they're now uncompetitive against their peers at the higher level once I get them back to their old job. This is VERY, VERY company specific -- you need to understand the compensation culture.
It's pretty easy to get an entry-level IT manager (as your HR group has noticed, especially recently). Lots of experienced IT managers and directors on the street right now too. Much harder to get a techie with your type of skills.
If you want to make 25% more, you should get a job elsewhere. If your company and your manager are trustworthy, you should take the job. This is your shot. If you are just going to be an average manager -- probably not worth it. If you're going to be a great manager, this could be the path to great things. If IT management is all clogged up above you due to the economy making subsequent promotions unlikely, I would really think twice unless you really think you're a potential management superstar (I'm guessing not based on your background). Oh, and arguing over 5% as a manager is stupid.
The flip side is, can you survive with who will get the job if you don't take it? This happened to my sister-in-law. Not the right time so she passed -- ended up with a post-MBA know-nothing who didn't understand the group and made her life miserable for the next 3 years. The good old days may already be gone.
Re:Get some offers (Score:5, Insightful)
Too much bureaucratic crap that basically condemns you to pay increases that are pegged to your base salary, and not to any real world metric of what you're worth.
/Thread Closed.
The author's HR department most likely has their hands tied. It doesn't matter if you can tell them that you're a 50 year veteran of anything--if their list of approved positions that qualify for pay increases aren't met there is nothing they can do.
This is one of the unfortunate side-effects of worker protection laws. If they give a woman for instance the position and they negotiate out a certain wage--and it turns out she is getting paid significantly less then she can sue for pay discrimination. If however *everybody* gets paid exactly the same based on a very clearly codified pay/raise schedule then they are legally immune. HR is full of paranoid bureaucrats, they would rather lose talent than risk a lawsuit (It's easier to lose their job for a discrimination lawsuit than it is to lose their job for the company losing their potentially talented employees to better offers.)
The author should be lucky they can even get on a new (higher paying) track at all. My brother in law works for a company that has no promotion track. He just found out that his assistants can't be promoted to full fledged agents since they aren't getting paid enough. So even if he thought one of his assistants should get a recommendation for a promotion the company is incapable of giving it due to the wage rate for the new position being slightly outside of any raise limits -- and their current position at the maximum pay for the position. In other words the only way they could get the promotion would be to quit and get rehired.
I'm so glad I don't work for a large corporation.
Re:Get some offers (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Program Manager? (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's face it...if you didn't have to work...were independently rich, you'd not be sweating at the factory so to speak.
So, any move you make, should be motivated by how you will increase your salary.
Most of us, usually have to change jobs every 2-3 years in order to climb the ladder, and well....increase salary.
Unless you are going out on your own, contracting....you have to work within the W2 framework...promotion, and associated increased pay.
If you're taking a position of more responsibility...ask for more pay. You'll find out really fast how valuable you are. They COUNT on you not asking...especially in this job market, you are expected to be asked to do more and you be too timid to ask for me.
What can they do besides say no. If they were gonna fire you...they would have. If they think enough of you to promote you...they can and will pay you more money.
Learn to bargain.....it is quick becoming a lost art it seems in the US. Know your worth....ask for it. Ask for more than you think they'll give...and they'll negotiate with you.
If you don't ask for more 'gruel', Oliver...you stand no chance of getting an more....
A little humility goes a long way.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am a health care CIO and a seasoned PMP and there are several aspects of your post that concern me. The first a general attitude that you know better than everyone else. I'm not saying I'm the best leader or even a good one, but I expect my managers to have some humility with their employees and I do my best to maintain that as well. IMHO, humility is the beginning of respect and the beginning of great leadership. Many of the best decisions I have ever made have come from ideas generated by my management team. How will you ever even know about those ideas if you already know more than they do? A leader's job is not to know everything, but to know all of the options and to choose the best one. Your employees will never feel comfortable bringing forth ideas with the kind of attitude that permeates your post.
The other thing that concerns me is that you seem to think management/leadership is the same thing as PM. As a PMP, I definitely recognize how PM can develop and sharpen leadership skills but they are no where near the same thing. When managing a project, you are aligning resources to accomplish specific tasks to complete a specific project. A good project manager will inspire the team to work cohesively and productively. I have seen very few good project managers. Managing a team that is juggling many tasks every single day is very different. You are responsible for their success, for their morale and engagement. It is no longer checking off tasks on a to do list like what you have experienced in PM. The few paragraphs I see above give me doubt that you have the attitude and interpersonal skills to develop the necessary relationships with employees to motivate them to perform at their best.
Lastly, your current skills, while still valuable, diminish in value when you switch over to management. That is because you should be spending much less time performing the actual work, and more time managing your team and collaborating with other management. I started out as a software developer spending 90% or more of my time writing code. The day I moved over into management, that dropped to almost zero. My software development skills went from being my strongest asset to one of my weakest overnight. Low performing managers have a difficult time with this and try to hang onto work they have no business doing.
I know this post is harsh. However, if you are serious about moving over to management, then you need to hear these harsh realities. I hope you can incorporate this feedback into your strategy. I wish you the best.
Re:Get some offers (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing is... even if it doesn't work out, you have offers. You could actually take the other org up on their offer, you get the $$$ either way.
Not just played, they think he is stupid! (Score:2, Insightful)
About 15 yrs ago, I switched from being the lead developer on a team to being 100% management. My role made it so I didn't have time to code anyway, so it was just the VPs way of telling me it was expected that I wouldn't code anymore. He took my cube name-plate and duct-taped it outside my new office and told me to remove the compiler from my PC - loudly, so all my guys could hear it. No raise and I didn't want that job.
I took that as a hint. Got my resume in order and started interviewing outside. Found out that I was worth double my current salary, if I accepted a shitty commute of 45 minutes. I set my start date at the new job to be 6 weeks out and gave the company 4 weeks notice. I hoped they would escort me from the building immediately. They did not. They offered $20K more and a company paid lease car. I declined - never stay in a position once they know you've interviewed with outside companies. NEVER.
* if you stay without any change in compensation or role, they know you'll never leave
* if you stay with a small bump in pay, you are money driven and HR hates those people - you will be moved to unimportant projects and fired.
* if you stay with a title change, you are a rube.
You need to leave.
Whenever a boss says they are doing you a favor related to pay or position, you need to leave. You've earned whatever they are offering. It is a competitive world and they think you are cheap.
You need to leave this team, and maybe this company.
You need to leave this team, and maybe this company.
You need to leave this team, and maybe this company.
You need to leave this team, and maybe this company.
For me, leaving was the best thing I've done. 10 yrs more and I retired. I've been retired 5 yrs now, travel, lots of free time, AND I have a few pet coding projects that get all they time I can stand. I didn't hate that job, but the new job was 100x better, which lead to another job less than a year later designing very large scale systems. The budgets were $50M-$500M. Working on larger projects isn't aways fun, but when was the last time you signed off on buying (5) $4M servers and (30) costing $200K ea or $200K for a UPS? Don't get me started on all the network gear, DS-3 lines and $20M in software. At this job I designed projects for wireless, wifi, laptops, speech systems, GPS, mapping, routing, broadband, large scale VoIP, HA, redundancy, disaster recovery and had huge teams working together on all sorts of projects spread across thousands of locations and 20 different countries. It was a pretty damn cool job.
You should leave. Even if you discover that the new job sucks, coming back 8-15 months later to the old job will get you a bump, you'll appear as an outsider with "new ideas" and still know the insides - I've seen that lots of places.
You should leave.
Re:Program Manager? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bottom line for any job....MONEY.
Wrong. The bottom line for any job is at least somewhat enjoying what you're doing there. If you do not enjoy what you are doing, you end up being a prick manager or a really difficult co-worker and generally a miserable person to get along with. People who work "for the money" just make a lot of extra work for everyone else.
Money is a consideration that needs to be balanced as any other pro/con of a job (Benefits, Vacation, Overtime, Job Duties, Reporting Manager, etc.). If you work just for the money, it leads to a really bleak future both at work and away from it.