Slashdot Mirror
Tech Or Management Beyond Age 39?
relliker writes "So here I am at age 39 with two contractual possibilities, for practically the same pay. With one, I continue being a techie for the foreseeable future — always having to keep myself up-to-date on everything tech and re-inventing myself with each Web.x release to stay on top. With the other, I'm being offered a chance to get into management, something I also enjoy doing and am seriously considering for the rest of my working life. The issue here is the age of my grey matter. Will I still be employable in tech at this age and beyond? Or should I relinquish the struggle to keep up with progress and take the comfy 'old man' management route so that I can stay employable even in my twilight years? What would Slashdot veterans advise at this age?"
Do what makes you happy, man. If you wanted to do management like you said, then go for it. The only reason people want money is for happiness. Getting happiness out of the job is a bonus.
You should choose the job that you enjoy the most, because a) A job that you enjoy is a pleasure, not work b) If you don't enjoy your job your performance will suffer, and hence you would be more likely to be laid off
Cover both bases. Why not? I have. I'm 53 and it just keeps on getting more interesting that way.
Cheers.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
Ageism in tech is very real, and even if you're not seeing it yet, you will in another 10 years. By that time it will be too late. Get on the management track while you can.
In Soviet America the banks rob you!
But if you enjoy both, the choice is clear; go with what will keep you employed longer. If you feel you can't keep up with the day to day in tech anymore ( a common concern ), then by all means jump to being the PHB.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Being about the same age, I too am starting to approach this crossroad. The choice for me comes down to one question. Which side am I better suited for? Technologically speaking, I find it easy to keep up so long as I'm willing to put in the effort. On the other hand, my lack of patience with the paperwork and seemingly endless meetings (not to mention a serious lack of people management skills) will probably doom any ambitions to pursue management positions beyond anything past a tech/project lead role.
So I don't have to think very hard to come to my decision. Techie I will remain and let others travel the manager role.
From the way you describe your choices, it almost sounds like you would prefer going management. I say if you're good at it, why not?
Over the long haul, following your passion is the way to go.
I have been at a similar crossroads, and went the management route. I am currently re-eavluating that decision since I get much more joy out of being hands-on and much less joy out of the routine administrivia that comes with being a manager.
If you get more joy out of managing than you do as a tech, then that's likely the way you should go.
Think about how many young people are being graduated all over the world today.
Think how are they eager to work for way less than you get.
Think how faster than you they are at learning new things.
Now where'd you put the only asset you have, i.e. experience?
Can you work people?
Can you lead people?
Can you fire someone?
Can you listen to everyone and make them get back to work afterwards?
Can you increase the productivity of your team?
ok, then go for management.
then you're management material. (Not completely true, but you mentioned that you see yourself doing this the rest of your career... and that you LIKE management... so...)
You have to know tech either way, whether you continue to be in tech or go in to management, you have to know the tech and update yourself continuously if you want to hold your own. With that in mind, if management does make you happy, go for it.
...always having to keep myself up-to-date on everything tech and re-inventing myself with each Web.x release to stay on top. With the other, I'm being offered a chance to get into management, something I also enjoy doing and am seriously considering for the rest of my working life. The issue here is the age of my grey matter.
That looks like some fear of what happens if you stay in tech. I've seen and worked with plenty of older workers in IT- if you are at a level where you feel like you can be on the level of a systems architect, you can do that (and possibly also some management at the same time). But if management truly interests you now then free yourself to move on.
But the grey matter thing... it seems like the best way to keep the grey matter grey instead of musty is work that makes you think. Is management going to be enough of a challenge for you? Will you enjoy solving those puzzles more?
What is the end of the path? Do you want to run a company someday? Linger in middle management in comfort? What's the steady state of each possible path before you?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Diversify to stay alive. Move into management, but keep current on tech. You will be much more valuable and more employable.
... back to the Technical Side. Management is a task that has no upside. If you suck at managing people, they're fire you. If you're great at managing people, they will increase your responsibilities, inching you closer to your Peter Point. (See "The Peter Principle" for context.) If you handle the heightened expectations, they will raise you to a higher management level, thereby eliminating your chance to contribute in your old way, or they will reassign you to fix some ailing project.
If you have made it this far in the technical world, it means you are competent at it. If you were a bozo, they wouldn't be discussing an alleged promotion. By all means get into management if you hate the technical stuff. That is your choice. But I would say--if you're hankering for management--that you take the safe road: become a software architect. This involves so much politics and human engineering that you might as well be a manager.
It's nearly impossible to maintain the energy and volume of coding that you do in your 20s.
As you get older, your energy and raw intelligence is going to fall, but your experience and wisdom is going to increase.
If you can, you need to find some way to channel and adapt to this change.
On the pure technical side, that is going to mean heading up from coding into higher level design and architecture, solving the conceptual level problems (with a reliably high level of correctness) of how a big system will work and then steering teams of people for the implementation. You'll still be coding semi-regularly, but if you're lucky you will only have to step in to solve the REALLY hard/interesting bits that the lower level people can't handle. Sometimes this means picking a specialisation and sticking with it, certainly.
If you aren't one of the technical elites in this way, management can be another way to utilise your experience and wisdom. This is especially the case if you've worked a lot with medium to large teams on projects, and you've gained an understanding of how to set up effective development teams. Management also carries with it a political/social/personality requirement. If you've got enough geek cred to know your field, but you can hang out with the sales and marketing people and be comfortable, then perhaps that is your direction.
Do you like children? If you don't, don't become a manager. A *lot* of the job is getting people to act like adults..
Similarly, do you have control over budgets and people? Who would you answer to? What would be the expectations from your boss over the next 6 months?
Is your boss competent? If not, trouble.
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. Don't sell out.
Being in management means you have to exercise your soft skills a lot more, and need to be dealing with people, inherently less predictable than code.
To be a good manager, just being an old techie isn't enough. If you are not a good manager, then it may not last as long as you like.
So, what is your reason to become a manager? What is your goal once you become a manager?
Just liking it, or thinking it will extend your career, is not necessarily enough to ensure your success.
Good luck...
Same age as you, and firstly I should say how fortunate you are to have this choice in the context of the current economy. Nice position to be in :)
My perspective: there are definite niches in tech, and if you find one you can become virtually irreplaceable. But if your skills are more generic (no matter how good), then ageism is a very real danger, as your experience and longevity become more expensive.
Most people on /. seem to have a different problem. They have someone trying to push them into management and they have no desire to go that route. But you say you enjoy it. So, in your position, I'd be going the management route. With a strong technical background and some management skills/business knowledge, you become a very valuable manager, and that will only increase.
One final point: if you try management full time for six months and find it's not really what you expected, will your company let you go back to the technical track? If so, then I'd say the choice writes itself. What have you got to lose?
The way you've framed this question makes it trivial: Management.
There are serious problem in keeping a solid career as a developer as you age. First, you DO age and get less agile. Second, there will always be entry-level hotshots who are as good as you after a couple of years work and that pushes your salary and employability down. Finally, even if you stay top of your game and you really are light-years more productive that a 21-year-old MIT or IIT graduate (or self-developed hacker) there is the discrimination angle.
I'm in this exact boat, but I hate management. I'm not good at it but if I pushed myself I think I could do ok, but never superbly and never with pleasure. But you *like* it? I envy you so, go to it!
The standards are looser too, since management is so hard. My belief is that 75% of securely-employed programmers in the US add zero or negative value to their organization, but in terms of direct programming managers this number has to be higher still. It's really, really, really hard to be a good manager. Good news though, if you are not good, fewer people will call you on it :-)
Basically, managers also have a career "track". Programmers do not, by and large, and oversimplifying just a bit. Programming is well-paid from the outset if you are good, and is a stimulating career, so it may not matter to you (I've decided it doesn't matter so much to me), but keep that in mind.
Are you still a geek? Do you still enjoy studying and reading everything tech with the resources to try them out? Then IT/Development is still probably where you want to be.
As a manager, you will still need to keep updated on new technology, but you will probably start taking a different (bird's eye) view to necessitate the distillation of all the new tasks you will need to juggle. Eventually, your ideas of implementation details will drift away as others will worry about them.
So you really need to look at yourself and decide what your goals are; and we aren't just talking career-wise. If you intend on raising a family, chances are you won't have the time to dedicate anymore to geek studies.
but the quotient of its deliciousness that counts...
A black hole is where God divided by 0
... you'll realize that, as soon as you take that first step into management, you're going to start being the butt of jokes.
Unless you're my manager, of course. I never make fun of him, nor of his lack of technical acumen.
#DeleteChrome
Most will despise with a passion, but do the management stuff. It's the right age (40-ish) Take a mgt class, become a people person.
.
Do for 2-3 years, i.e. get a couple of successful and unsuccessful projects under your belt....
then go independent, or start your own company. Then you'll get to choose exactly what you want to do, find a path to retirement and find a better balance between coding and business in general. Cause basically, you can't rely on corporations anymore... well unless your running it
While technical personnel are considered overhead, managers, especially middle managers, are even more so. As such, I personally feel that as a techie, you have the ability to maintain a higher level of job stability than in a management position, at least in the foreseeable near future considering the way the economy is.
At 35 and 15 years put in as a *NIX admin, I too am curious about going into management. However, I'd rather wait to ensure my employer is going to give me a better chance to grow as a manager without the pressure of worrying about losing my job due to cuts or the trimming down of departmental budgets. If you have that level of comfort with your employer, seize it and move to management as I'm sure you don't want to be servicing a downed server/network on a Saturday at the age of 60. Otherwise, I recommend you take some Business courses, perhaps get a degree or a business level certification that may help you manage better in the future, when the time is right.
Good luck!
If you're good at tech, stay with it. The economy is changing. Developers are increasingly able to go directly to consumers. If you don't have the creativity to take advantage of that, then by all means go management. It is the place for those that can't do. But if not, there's no reason why a good tech creator can't make his way in this world. This question always comes up, "management or development?". Personally, I'm both. I code, I consult, I manage consultants...you an actually do all of those and people will respect you more for it. Besides, we all know that once people get out of the game, no matter how good they were, they get out of touch fast and their decisions reflect that. Anyway, go with your gut. Go with what you're really best at.
Are you a people person first, or a technology person first? Is the team you work with the part of your day that matters most to you, or the challenge of the work itself?
Do what makes you happy. There's nothing wrong with a change. Just don't approach management as an easy way out. It's not, and the problems you'll encounter tend to be far more personal in nature than the average programmer/system admin type likes to think. You can't write a test suite and write the code to make it pass when you're dealing with people.
Life is short and you're about halfway through it. Choose wisely. It might not hurt to consider salary potential on either side of your decision as well.
You seem to imply that if you go into management, you won't have to stay on top of tech or have to re-invent yourself as much.....hmmmmm. When you manage people you have to know what you are talking about. You have to earn respect. You have to know enough to work with the person who knows more than you. You have to be flexible. (re-inventing) Glad you think management means comfy...I think you should try management. You may have a different opinion of management after you do it a couple of years. And that will broaden your horizon. Good luck.
I might be bit biased, coming from the management side myself. But I know how valuable a manager with tech skills can be.
So that'd be my tip, look long-term and think about the management angle. You'll still be able to stay on top of the info side, but you're not going to get fired if you don't read up on the latest API release the weekend it comes out.
What sort of books do you prefer to buy? Does your buying strategy include more "Minimal Perl" than "Blue Ocean Strategy? Do you prefer to spend on "The Definitive Guide to MySQL" or "Good to Great"? Which ones do you prefer to read nowdays? The answer to that question could point to the answer to your larger question.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Management is not comfy. You need to lead people AND keep yourself updated. Just don't bite off more than you can chew, otherwise, your employees will hate you for being incompetent management.
Which do you want to be?
#6495ED - cornflower blue
Make my life as a lifelong technologist: provide technical competence in management, with knowledge to help you explain things to me and to tell when I'm seriously confused.
Those who can do, do... those who can't do, manage!
(or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Cushy Job)
I am in your age group. Having turned 50 recently, I look ahead to what is the next Big Thing for me. I did the management tour early on in my late 30's and found it distasteful since it involves trying to motivate people to get the job done and coddling upper management.
As one poster said, It is trying to get adults who act like children to act like adults, and dealing with squabbles between developers, one who is is bound and determined to use Ruby and another who is just as determined to use something else, and trying to make everyone happy and productive and satisfy the sales weenies.
Although i hate to say it because it makes me sound like more of a gray hair then I am, it is really time to sit back and take stock. I don't know if you have a family or not but this is a crucial decision and they have to be taken into account since your decision ultimately effects them as well.
There is no pat answer for this, the answer has to come from you and your desires for your future. Although I am not sure I recommend it, if you are well known enough and have the hutspa to really sell yourself, do the ultimate sell out and become a consultant, it has worked for me.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Why?
#1 More pay, most techies have a "salary cap" for their position and can only reach a certain level, managers go all the way to the top aka CEO. Also when the company starts having losses the first ones they downsize are techies.
#2 You already have techie experience which will make you a good IT manager and become VP of IT or the CIO later.
#3 As you age it becomes harder and harder to understand new technical trends. Younger techies will oust you for jobs and promotions. Might as well switch to management and quit the IT ratrace.
#4 Managers have better benefits and the "golden parachute" clause in that if they fire you or lay you off, you get a nice severance package.
#5 Any company that is willing to promote a techie to a management position is a valuable company to work for, that way managers can do their jobs better than a manager without techie experience.
You'll have to take Darth Vader as a role model, but the "force choke" comes in handy to keep your underlings in line, and your new battle armor will protect you from assassination attempts by your underlings. :)
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Why don't you become a consultant? I mean the good kind, that still does technical implementations, on top of design. As a life long geek in my thirties, I've found that to be a good fit.
Many of the skills that make a good technical worker can make a good technical manager. You need to pay attention to details, keep track of a lot of different tasks, break up problems into manageable pieces, quantify risks and benefits, deal with unreasonable folks on occasion.
Some people claim that a good manager does not need to know much about the industry being managed. The idea is that a good manager can find the proper people that understand what they need to do and do it. I think this is true in an ideal world, but a technical manager who can dissociate himself from the technical aspects can make an exceptional manager.
There's an incremental financial benefit to management, but in the right organization you should be able to progress quite well in the technical track too.
All that said, I just saw this article:
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23800/
Personally the thought of managing more than a couple people is unpleasant to me. I could probably do an adequate job, but it would not be something that I'd relish.
Do that which is most likely to get you up in the morning. If you enjoy doing the technical and addressing technical issues, then do that. If you enjoy doing the managerial and addressing business and personnel issues, then do that. If you are energized spending the day on technical follow that path, whereas if you you energized by spending the day on managerial follow that path.
Being a few years older than 39 (I am 42) and having (1) been an individual technical contributor, (2) been a technical lead of large projects and (3) been the head of a fortune 500 hundred company's R&D division, I know that at the end of the day I am happier having spend the day on technical issues rather than people/management issues.
Keeping up on the latest technological advancements can be challenging, especially when it means evolving your area of technical expertise. If you enjoy the management as much as the technical and you are good at both, then I would say that it would be easier to go into management. However, do not be deceived. You will need to continue learning in order to remain useful. On the management side you need to have a broad understanding of recent technical (not to mention business) issues. In contrast, on the technology side you need a deep understanding of as subset of technical issues. If you want to stop learning and continue to be employed, then start practicing "do you want fries with that".
I have always been told I am a damn good technical person, but I knew I was even better at making other people more effective through leadership. So my only question would be, "Where are you the most effective"? That is where you should be.
A lot of people here have assumed you're a coder. However, without specifying what you do, or the type/size of company that you're at this can be a tough answer to accurately provide. Either way, if you want to stay technical, then I would suggest increasing your sphere of influence. Now if you enjoy banging away at the keyboard all day, there's not much in the areas of expansion for you. But let's say that you want more influence than just some aspect of a product.
Can you move from a design/task based position into a more architecture based role? I know plenty of engineers that are very technical, but have evolved their roles into a architectural position and leave the coding/designing/layout to their lieutenants. I'm at a midsize IT consulting company and while I used to handle any size engagement, I now have a team of 12 engineers in which the junior consultants handle the easy stuff, while I handle the larger datacenter-wide architectures. As they junior engineers can easily handle the "what vlan # should the customer use, or which switchports layout strategy should be used..."
My position is more of a 'hybrid' between the two that you have described. I'm more like a captain or a player/coach than a manager. I don't handle raises/promotions/reviews or the like, but I handle the training programs, lab budgeting and setting the technical roadmap for the team. I do have to assist the pre-sales efforts, but it's still technical as my role is one of convincing the customer of our value as well as the soundness of the design/architecture that has been put forth before them.
This role isn't officially in our job matrix, but I too wasn't 100% sure about going into management or remaining in the trenches.
If you enjoy management, then I would try for that. You will benefit from your experience and age much more than trying to keep up as a tech. Personally I like dealing with computers over people as they do what you tell them to (most of the time!) and don't have special needs or quirks. I also don't want to go to a ton of meetings.
It depends on your work environment. Where I work, the average age of the coders and sysadmins is over 40, so older techs fit in and it's generally a good place to retire. If you work for lets say, Google, like my fiance does, you will struggle to keep up as a tech as all the people are generally very young and don't give much respect to the older crowd.
You're too young. Wait until you are 5-10 years out from retirement before you wind down your career.
I'm 45 and I manage a pretty sizable network. From time to time a 20 yr old know it all will try to come in with the condecending attiude and try to push the old woman out of the way. That all ends pretty quickly when I'm not around to coach them, something melts, a thousand users are screaming, the CIO blasts them, it's all command line (and those boys hate command line), and they can't dig themselves out of trouble till I show up. They soon decide to take up a career in writing word templates for the clerical staff or something.
Middle aged, IT middle managers are a dime a dozen. They get laid off whenever the political environment changes. They have to resort to backstabbing and replusive kissing up to stay afloat.
At some point you will realize, you have two options to be mismanaged, or to mismanage. Until that time remain technical.
When you reach that point you can make a rational decision.
more cowbell
Personally I'd rather spend 8 hours a day rolling around on a bed of rusty cans and broken glass than enter management, but that said, we *need* managers who have a clue about tech, so if that's what you like then go for it.
Ownership Stake.
Don't take any position that offers no path to owning all or part of the business.
Directors and C-suite execs don't get there by promotion; they get there through investment -- taking an ownership stake.
Any other labor situation just makes you a wage slave.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I have wondered the same thing. I'm not yet at a decision point about it, but when I think seriously about the future, I worry about whether staying in hardcore development and architecture is going to be sustainable or not. There seems to be so much less room in the world for "senior" technologists than for equally senior managers, and I am not sure what that will mean for my career. I can not imagine how I would get on not being able to get my hands in there and solve the really hard problems, but I wonder if I'll have to step back from doing that simply to be able to stay in the game. As much as I would have a hard time contemplating a career in management, I would have an even harder time being an old, unemployed developer who can't get an interesting job b/c he's too "senior". Aging sucks. At any rate, for myself, I think I'm pretty committed to trying to ride the technical path as far as I possibly can simply b/c I care so much more about it. Here's hoping....
15 years ago. Ick. Now I'm back in tech and loving it. If you love management, and are good at it, than go for it. God knows, there are too few good managers. I was one of the bad ones, which is why I went right back into coding. I wasn't PHB bad, but I hated doing project management/personnel/fighting for resources. If you have the talent for that and want to do it, go for it. I wouldn't be too worried about your age when it comes to coding, however, as long as you love to learn new things you'll be able to stay current for your entire professional life. It isn't lack of intelligence that does in people, it's getting locked in their ways and refusing to accept new ideas.
I go in management five years ago and i'm pretty happy.
But be carefull, it's a job, and it requires skills. You can't just "go for it" without any skills. Managing 2 or 50 people can be very hard. Be prepared to be a psy, to organise, negociate, managing informations, communicate, moderate, motivate, and sometimes to deal with heavy relationnal problems (and it's not exactly like a relationnal database).
I woudn't come back in technical area.
It is obviously a personal choice, but the fact that you are asking here means you haven't really make up your mind. Personally, at the age of 39 (currently I'm 29) I'd be seriously looking at management. Not necessarily because you love it or for the money, but for the simple fact that staying on top of technology requires A LOT of time on self-study. As you get older, you have other priorities assuming that you are married with children (if not I suppose all bets are off, do whatever you wish :) ). But yea you have to keep in mind with ageism also. At the end of the day though, if you hate management or simply can't do it, don't force yourself doing something you hate (you don't have to LOVE your job, just don't hate it!).
Other's have already said it, but I'm adding another vote to the pile: go into management so we techies can have *one more* manager who knows his ___ from a hole in the ground. (My boss can't keep the concept of bits and bytes separate in his head. He's always asking me how many Terabits of space we have available on our SAN. I've politely corrected him maybe a dozen times.) Sorry for the selfish response. :-)
I have run into a slew of people who are in management positions because "I'm just not technical". These people are placeholders who screw over their teams, their projects, and their company because they have no idea WTF is actually going on. Don't get me wrong, I'm one of those techs who would be a -terrible- manager and I know it. There are ALOT of us out there who make great techs but even we wouldn't want to work for us.
There is a tremendous lack of -good- managers who have the tech expertise necessary to know a good project plan and techies from the BS artists and a pipe-dream. These are the folks who have a general idea of what it takes to complete a project, the skills (team) necessary for that project, and the business sense to build a project budget and justify it. On top of all that, they can manage people. If you can do that, and do it well, you are set.
If you are an HR person, BEWARE the IT manager who "isn't technical". They will cost you a fortune, drive off your best IT talent, and then demand a raise because they made so much progress despite the high turnover. "progress" being the fact that they spent tremendous amounts of money.
How secure is your job, employer and industry? How transferable are your skills?
I'm 5 years your junior (in a different industry, on a different continent), and I made a considered jump out of tech a few years ago. I regret doing so. I found myself in a specialised technical niche of a declining industry. I made a push to get into a project management role, where, if nothing else, I could get a few more generalist skills to write on a resume. Now I'm in a dull administrative role which I don't enjoy at all.
I've come to acknowledge that I get job satisfaction from solving problems. Now if I do my job properly, I don't see problems... and if I do, they're long-term problems that can't just be sat down and worked through. To run projects in a resource-constrained organisation, I need to be shameless in pushing people to do my work ahead of the other work they've been given... and that doesn't come easy to me.
The reasons for making the shift are still there - I could still be the tech guy with no transferable skills. Now I have some of the skills I would need to bluff my way into a comparable job elsewhere... but no interest in doing a comparable job elsewhere.
I don't have a good answer. Just don't burn any bridges unless you're pretty sure you're doing the right thing.
I made the decision to stay a techie when I turned 47. At 59 I have no regrets. The techie path is about discovering were your brain is and learning how to develop it. Management is about discovering where your ass is and learning how to protect it. My old fart techie friends are still coherent and sharp. The ones that went up the management ladder seemed to lose brain cells and IQ the higher they climbed. When I bump into these guys now, they always get around to asking if I can fix their windoze box.
holy crap?! you must be the oldest nerd ever.
You could be the tech guy they need while they cut "mid management" to save money.
I quit being a tech guy because after chemo, it hurt my hands all the time because of the nerve damage.
OTH, over the years, I've seen tech people cut and replaced with cheaper idiots (often after a request to "document everything you do").
OTH, I've seen people who documented everything (including myself) promoted.
It's a gamble.
Spend less than you make, and work at something you enjoy. I love helping people and tolerate/enjoy grinding process. I came to dislike "spend all your time learning, use it 2 years, then it's obsolete so do it all over again for a new skill".
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I'd say if you were trying to stay employed at some hip web design house or a game development company that may be true, but where I work there are lots and lots of older people still doing highly technical things.
I completely changed track and got a masters in CS last year at the age of 46 and managed to get a great job doing technical work at a very cool place, so don't tell me ageism is so pervasive that you can't do what you like.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Just read your own post as if it were written by somebody else. You can tell by the tone that you want to take the management job. A techie who is expressing reluctance about "having to keep up" is not going to be a happy techie.
If you aren't going to be happy doing it, you won't be successful.
Take the management job. It's plainly what you want.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
It makes life worth dying. You are already way too old. We now come for you.
... I can't imagine doing management. I just like doing tech stuff and it doesn't help if I have speech and hearing impediments. :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
You're still young, dude!
When I was in my 30's I had the same decision, and found it to be a choice between doing something I did well (technical) and something I did kind of poorly (management). Easy decision. I have spent the next 20 years keeping up with various technologies. I have done well, but recently discovered the secret (for me) of effective management. I have discovered that, even though I can outperform ten normal individuals, I can manage a team of ten that does about three times what I could do by myself. That's pretty cool. I'm ready to let go of having to keep up with every new technology, and teach my team how I did it so well for so long.
So, my advice is to do what you think you are best at. If that is the technical path, don't worry -- if you really are good at it, you'll certainly have management chances in the future.
On the other hand: the management "ladder" rises faster.
COBOL
If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
If you were management material, you would have thought this out for yourself.
Your indecisiveness has shown through. You do not plan ahead.
As someone who has had a history in examining the behavior of individuals, I have to wonder why you would post a question like that on a site geared towards tech savvy individuals. Why not post the question on a less biased web page, such as Yahoo! answers? Why not ask whether or not you should study for tomorrow's final on CollegeHumor.com?
This makes me think that you are, perhaps, leaning towards the tech position. Also, your tone makes you sound as though you are not very thrilled about the management position. This is certainly not a bad thing. It sounds as though you are simply happier keeping up to date with the newest trends or happenings in the tech world.
Best of luck to you!
Deryl
I've been out of college for one year and have a great engineering job that I can stay in for as long as I want. When I was in school, there was what I assumed to be the start of talk about getting jobs that offered promotions without requiring movement into management. As far as I know, those jobs don't really exist. If you like management, then in my opinion, the choice is simple: go into it.
The tough question is for people who are 40 and can't decide whether to move into management so they can get a pay raise and better support their families or to stay in engineering / tech / IT / programming and do what they enjoy while sacrificing the extra cash. Most of the time, management gets paid better in long run, so that's something to consider. Also, most non-management would prefer to be working under someone who has experience in what they are doing instead of someone who took a few classes to get a degree that would offer more pay. Just keep your tech years in mind when you're managing.
Mid level management is always the first to go, then the first to get rebuilt once the upper management cruft remembers how much *real* work they have to do every time they do it.
I've been on the tech side for 23+ years, starting at 17... I'm still considered to be among the top of my peer groups within my company. So it can definitely be done, if you want to do it.
As others have said... do what's going to make *YOU* happy.
I'm 37, and like many that have posted before me, I am facing a similar choice. Here are some of my observations on working in both government and commercial sectors.
1) Pursue your own happiness first. If money makes you happy, then figure out what will make the most money. If sitting with headphones on coding modules by yourself makes you happy, then do that. If racking and stacking equipment makes you happy, do that. Most likely, it's a combination of things. Find out what it is, and pursue that. There *is* nothing more rewarding in a job than simple happiness.
2) To most employers, it comes down to a question of "value". Is there ageism is the technical field? Absolutely. It's difficult to constantly reinvent yourself. But I haven't observed that that's the *primary* reason for it. Long-time employees are used to annual increases, if only to offset inflation and provide a little bonus money. When you've worked in a field long enough, that salary will begin creeping up. At some point, the company is going to want more *value* for the money they are spending on you. You either need to be damn, damn good at your job, or find an alternate way to bring value to the company. Usually, this is by going beyond being a technical force in the workplace, and becoming a force multiplier. And this means leading people. Not necessarily managing, but at least being in a position of authority and responsibility for something greater than yourself. Technical employees who avoid this responsibility more often than not plateau. Which very well may make them happy.
3) I've spent way too much time in organizations that attempt to distinguish between "management" and "technical". And as much as the pure technical genius is admired by his wanna-be-peers, the truth is they are largely irrelevant. If you live in a technical organization, there is no such thing as "a business decision" or "a technical decision" - there are only decisions, and those decisions have ramifications in both spheres. The best techies and the best managers are the ones that can straddle that line, and understand the consequences of decisions so that they can choose the best way forward. For the ones that I've admired the most and have tried to model myself after, I find that the only way to distinguish the two is that one rates employees while the other doesn't. Otherwise, you've got Rainman working for you. He may have incredible knowledge in his head, but if everything is going to cost $100, none of that is likely to bring any value to the company.
4) Be sure you can do it, and translate your skills appropriately. Too often techies hold on way too long, and then try to take on a management position that is roughly equivalent in pay or status as was their technical billet. If you've always been a senior lone wolf, it may be a stretch to believe you can take on management of a 500 person organization. Start with a team lead position, managing 5-10 people. Much like learning any new skill or sport, practice the fundamentals and develop a solid foundation that you can then scale out.
5) Set realistic expectations. The number one mistake I see people make in the transition is the decry that it sucks working for management, so they become one so that they don't have to put up with that crap anymore. Unfortunately, unless you are the owner of a privately-held company, you *will* work for someone, no matter what position you are in. You cannot avoid the idiocy above you. As a manager, you may get some authority to make decisions, but that will be offset by being held more accountable than before. You will have bad managers. You'll have the occasional good manager, too. Remember, life is *never* fair. People just don't complain when it's unfair in their favor.
6) Be yourself. Other than the roles and responsibilities of your position, there is no model for the perfect manager. Some are laissez faire. Some are micromanagers. Some manage the people. Some manage the organizational functions. Ther
Well, you seem to mirror my career although you are older by 5 years.
I was a techie in my early years of my 14 years of IT career. Cut my teeth on JDK 1.0.2 and was the one of the first to introduce Java to Citibank via a working prototype that used RMI/JRMP: won an award for the same.
Over the years as i got promoted beyond my capabilities, i realized two things: I was a leader, not a manager. I created and built teams that were fiercely loyal and extremely professional. But like me, they too hated the Administrivia of Management and refused to enter "Management".
I also recognized a truth: The MBAs in suits look down upon techies. The Techies look down upon MBAs as paper pushers. You need someone who has the confidence of techies BUT also has an MBA under his belt to talk sense to the management.
Someone who can talk to Clients directly on their business needs, understand their business problems on Compliance, Dealer Management, Funds Treasury investment across borders, EoD transaction nettings, etc and then turn around talk to the techies about EJB Entity Beans, Message Driven Beans, WebSphere 5.1.3 to WebSphere 6.0 AS migration to achieve the same.
I realized that such people are far and very few. Most take to Management after the required years as a techie and lose touch with technology. Some stay with technology and refuse to understand the business reasons and concerns that put food on their plates.
You need to be the one who bridges both and has the confidence of both.
I can walk up to any Bank and talk sense to their suits: Corporate Actions payouts, T+2 settlements, Securities Loans, etc. Why? I have a PG in Banking under my belt. But i can also come back to my teams and talk to them about evaluating their architecture via SAAM rather than ATAM, mathematically evaluating a design for fitness for purpose, not preferring AJAX for security reasons, architecture patterns, etc. Why? Because i daily go through the grind and understand their difficulties. FYI Its not easy to migrate from WAS 5.1.3 to WAS 6.0 on OS/390 when you have session beans invoking MDBs and you are using SQLJ.
In short, you need to be a master of both.
You need to wear two faces: one face which understands that the cold fork is for Salads and one who understands IE 7.0 DOM model.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Really, the question is a simple one. Are you willing to continue to spend your life putting up with poor management decisions, or are you willing to become the one making the bad decisions.
Let me put this another way, and I'll have to post A/C to protect my own hide. I'm a techie. Have been for 25 years. During that time, I've done some PM work and some low-level management work. What I mostly do is very high-level, very high-pressure coding work. I've got letters from a company thanking me, personally, for saving them $100M. I have reviews calling me "Key to Mission Success". I've got a lot of stuff like that.
What I don't have, is control over my own life.
Consider my last project. From day one I told management that the schedule was woefully underestimated. They had scheduled four months of coding time for what should have been a 8-10 month project. Guess which one of us was right?
Now, guess which one of us got to write the following two emails five minutes apart?
#1: "We are behind schedule. As of now, all coders are expected to work extra hours, and weekends to make up time to get back on schedule. All vacation time is canceled."
#2: "I'm taking the afternoon off to go golfing. Also I will be out all next week on vacation."
In short, when coders screw up, coders pay the price. When management screws up... coders pay the price.
Go to management. Coding is no longer worth the gray hairs. I'm crafting my resume as we speak, looking for a position in management.
Don't worry about your gray matter. I just turned 50. I'm lucky enough that my current gig is really enjoyable, and as a result I am programming better now than I ever have. As others have said, follow your passion. I've drifted back and forth between tech and management several times in my 30 year career, and its clear to me that I am happier, and therefore more productive, when I am purely tech. But to each his own, you might be happiest in management. And finally, don't think your decision now is permanent. You can probably change roles two or three times in your 40s -- I did.
It seems to be the consensus among some that although discrimination on the basis of age is illegal, it happens.
I personally enjoy learning the new technologies, getting into the details, solving the problems, and fixing things. In my mind, programming is more like playing music than sports, and although some older musicians may lack energy and tenacity, there are plenty of examples of older artists (the Rolling Stones come to mind) who continue to be productive despite "the odds."
I can see myself as a mentor or teacher but not a manager, and would like to prove to those who practice agism with respect to technical types that they hurt only themselves.
The only way to do that, of course, is to - quietly if possible, because I feel humility is essential to continued growth in such a rapidly-changing industry - do my best to do work that is as good if not better than those who are less experienced. And when I meet someone younger who really knows their stuff, then most definitely it's important to have the humility to learn from them!
See my blog at tomwhartung.com for my resu
The problem is that 20-somethings are cheaper, and more likely to put in ridiculous unpaid overtime (both because they can handle it, and because they're cheaper). If you're in a front-line sort of job where you're competing with fresh BS grads, then you're going to face it.
Or rather, desperate, because the system pushes you continuously to get work. If you don't get work, they say, the economy collapses, and no one wants that, hm? So, they say, get crackin'!
Management is hard. Doing it well is satisfying. Read _First Break all The Rules_ and you will see what it can become. Besides, change is good and keeps you young.
Most here will probably say to stick with tech. Probably with various degrees of vehemence. Most of them would probably do just that given the choice. That'd certainly clear the field of competition were you to go into management, and you'd be more likely to progress further faster.
And should you do so, you'll probably be competing for your job against other management types, quite likely with less hands on tech experience than yourself. You'd probably be able to compete against those successfully.
Of course the success in both cases depends upon competing in a context where your qualifications are taken into account. If you were trying for a job where the top dogs think management needs an MBA and expensive ties and little else, you wouldn't do well there. But with your qualifications you could judge which outfits were run by such weenies and steer clear of them.
I don't know if it's changed, but it used to be that the floor life of an engineer was about 15 years. By then they were obsoleted by progress. They then either went to management or to pasture (or fast food, etc.). Consider if that kind of situation exists in your field, and if so whether you're near enough to the cut off to make it worth switching now.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
... on the specific circumstances of what field you're really in. I'm only 25, but this is something that I've given a lot of thought to. There seem to be certain fields wherein you reach a fairly young age which is still "too old," and these mostly seem to be of the commercial sector where you're not a "professional" in the true sense, or you're not "the boss." For instance, I would assume that someone would be considered at some point "too old" to be a paralegal (at least, I think this would be the case for men), or something similar.
Scientists, Teachers, Lawyers, Doctors -- these are all people for whom age and experience lend credibility and increase their value. "Blue Collar"-type jobs and "Para Professionals" -- they seem to have a shelf life. Computer Science, or CompSci-related activities in the hard sciences, I don't think that anyone is going to look down on you when you're that 50-year-old graybeard with the Sun tshirt under your suspenders (you're part of folklore at that point). A 50-year-old PHP scripter, well, you're going to be surrounded by a bunch of obnoxious kids who like that shitty 'Swordfish' movie. Best to learn FORTRAN and go work at CEBAF or something.
I'm 40 and have predominantly been doing tech since I was in my teens. And, you know, I'm finding experience actually helps in tech. Possibly more than youthful energy.
And management. There are many types of management that often get grouped under that one word; Project Management, program management, product management, technical lead, and people management.
Question is, what do you want to do?
Most 'tech' folks seem to want to go into management to take on a 'technical lead' role, where getting labeled a manager gives one more ability to provide technical leadership.
And hey, they get saddled with things like project management or even people management. And as their focus is on technical leadership, they don't necessarily spend much time on people management skills. That's why there's a general wisdom among some that tech people make awful managers...
People management is hard. Probably harder than tech. 'Cause, you know, a person is a bazillion times more complex that some silly computer program. Don't believe me? Design a person and build it.
As far as what to do? Follow your bliss.
Ageism in tech is very real,
In my experience, ageism in any professional career is very real. Management is no more immune in its quest for "fresh blood" at times.
Get on the management track while you can
I think that is quite bad advice, and I think that the perception that you have to go into a management role, with a fancy title, as you get older to be respected or seen as successful is maybe the single biggest reason so many disposable "PHB" type managers are out there. Not everyone has an aptitude for management and I'd say perhaps slightly more than half of managers are not suited to the task--hence the stereotype.
The best way to counter ageism is to pursue a career path that you truly enjoy and that you are inclined to do well--if you do that you become MORE highly regarded with age, as older and WISER, rather than being regarded as old and stale. That said, I cannot give this person the right advice--only they can decide for themselves. If you are conflicted you probably don't know yourself as well as you could.
As part of a package when I was laid off I got a good severance plus my former employer paid for the use of an employment agency with workshops and "career coaches" and things. They have you take these aptitude tests that seem pretty silly and time consuming at first, but they spit out reports that can be pretty insightful. I know myself pretty well so I found it was more validation of the test for the most part, however even then the results report contained very good adjectives and a "personality summary" that are perfect for resumes (the Birkman test is well established and still popular though there are others). In the article poster's case it may show an aptitude slightly more toward technical than managerial, or it might show he is a "persuasive" personality that could be suited to technical sales (or some other option not considered). I urge people at a career crossroads to look into the services of these kinds.
I know people in their 60s that are in design/engineering/technical professions that still make a comfortable living and are highly respected and sought after. There is no law that you can only program in COBOL or FORTRAN77 once you enter middle age--experience transcends the technology of the day. Furthermore there is no need for a technical career to stop progressing at hard technical skills. You don't need to stay in tech support, or be a code jockey cranking out lines of Java, or assembling PCBs. You can go into electronic design (make your own processors, etc), or be a software or systems "architect" who selects/designs technologies/platforms/protocols/interfaces/etc and writes the specs that programmers and testers work against. You can still be a highly paid "technical consultant" as well--I don't do much in the way of project management but I often find myself as the "technical lead" responsible for the architecture of systems, consulting on the technical aspects of the work more than on managing the work as it is being done. In those technical career areas, "old and wise" is respected, so don't discount ANY career option because you think you are "too old". That is too often an excuse to accept being in a career path that makes you miserable.
I'm sorry, but this is plainly obvious. Now there are a lot of useful comments in this thread about IT ageism and all that, but the wording of the submission is plain as day to anyone who cares to read between the lines: For continuing in IT you mention no particular positives, and harp on the negative aspect of having to stay up to date and 're-invent yourself'. Whereas w.r.t. management you only say that you seriously enjoy doing it and are seriously considering spending the rest of your working life on it.
Ermmmm....
Granted, you then go on to imply that management is for senile old men, but this only serves to clarify to your audience why you're having this issue: you have deep-seated preconceptions as to what type of people actually go into management, and while you respect the work itself and would like to shine in that respect, you can't get past your own mental blocks of seeing them all as Dilbert-styled PHBs.
Well, by the power vested in me by Slashdot, I officially set you free. Go forth and manage, AND stay up to date on tech, and be the good manager that will render Dilbert obsolete. Use all the grey matter you have - and frankly you will need to - to properly challenge your talented techie workers while using them to the best of their abilities and making the latter obvious to those above you.
I wish you all the best in your management career. Remember, while it's not the same as tech work, don't be afraid to treat it the same when it comes to research - there are innumerable useful books written to help ease you into management coming from any techie standpoint.
Stuff.
The problem is that 20-somethings are cheaper, and more likely to put in ridiculous unpaid overtime (both because they can handle it, and because they're cheaper). If you're in a front-line sort of job where you're competing with fresh BS grads, then you're going to face it.
Not true at any company with competent hiring managers, which would also be any company that makes good products and is actually capable of long-term survival.
I chose the technical path when I was your age 11 years ago. No regrets - but I am a veins-in-the-teeth competitive programmer. If you want to get into management, it is much better if you get to create your team. You interview everyone, they understand that you hired them, they work for you, and they will do what it takes to make the project a success. If you take up management of an existing team, then you're just another PHB, and the team might be damaged goods. Probably not worth the risk. Since you are in a toss-up situation, only select management if you get to choose the team. Sometimes this is negotiable.
I have had lots of coworkers over 50 who are software or hardware engineers. And they are all great engineers. Some of them work full time, some run their own consultant companies.
If you enjoy management, then the choice is pretty easy. Short term the pay is the same, but generally the limit for a tech guy is principle engineer, which is a director level position at pretty much any company. Beyond that you can only move "up" to CTO, where you usually don't get any salary and have to make due with stock options and selling your share of the company. In management you can move into a VP role, although it helps a great deal if you get an MBA. Without an MBA you probably can't easily rise past a director anyways. You're age is pretty "average" for people starting for an MBA, so it's not entirely out of the question if you have some long-term career plans.
It is especially important to consider your long term path when you have another 15-25 years of career left to complete.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
So the question is irrelevant - that is, if you are going to be a good manager. Of course, if you are a good techie then similarly, you've already made the decision. Either way, you're just looking for confirmation of one choice and will ignore any arguments for what you don't want to do.
So I'd recommend you retire and go fishing.
But you've already made your mind up anyway, go ahead and do it.
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
Seriously, depending on where you work and what you want to do, you don't have to keep on top of every new fad. I'm a few years younger than you, but have largely considered most of the recent trends to be fads, or niche things. I'm a happily employed electrical engineer who does C, Forth, and 68k ASM programming and embedded work, and I've crafted my position to be as much business analysis as technical. I'm lucky enough to work for a department where I could basically morph my job duties to fit my talents. I considered management for a while for many of the same reasons that other posts suggest - that it has a further career track, and that I wouldn't be outpaced by the younger people coming in. In the end, I realized that there will always (or at least for the foreseeable future) be a place for programmers who have a greater understanding of the business their code supports, and have the skills to maintain and upgrade legacy systems. C isn't going anywhere for a few decades at least - it's still by far the most portable thing on the planet. I also realized that while I'm good at motivating and organizing good people, I suck horribly at dealing with the problem ones and therefore, I'm not management material.
Don't give up the technical side just because you're afraid of learning new fad X, Y, or Z. If you're a technical type where software is not the end product but supporting a larger business, the ability to understand and solve business problems in a consistent, efficient, and rational manner is much more important that whatever the hell trend Infoweek is pushing this week. Give up the technical side because you honestly think you'd make a better contribution as a manager. In the end, doing what you enjoy and providing real value to the company will likely make you happy.
Apart from "what makes you tick" there's the expectations side.
/.), or you will not fit in and burn out (most likely), or you're so completely bland that you are appreciated for not interfering (not likely, /.)
Not to put you down but realistically I'd say that at 39 you'll most likely wind up being a dispensable middle manager. As technical savvy person you most likely will be a pain in the arse for your peers and one management level higher. Either you're the talent that took the wrong road 20 years ago and will become CTO/CEO (not very likely, you're reading
Face it, 39 is late for starting anything new. Would you accept a middle manager which at 39 decides that being a middleware expert "really is his calling", as your peer?
Even though most of us here think we would be better managers than the idiots that are currently managing us, we most likely won't. However basic and primordial we think management skills are, these remain skills which you have to acquire.
If management is really what you want and you want to avoid the trap of "caring too much about the details of the product", you might consider moving to another field altogether. Think how easy it would be to push, say, fashion designers around. ("I can't sell this a s beige, Serge, call it Sahara Yellow.)
FYI: At 45 I'm an absolute techy. Only now I start to really sense the way certain managers want my services and will stick knives in my back as soon as these are obtained. These are "management basics" and I'd be the laughing stock if I were to swap places.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
If you feel you can't keep up with the day to day in tech anymore ( a common concern ), then by all means jump to being the PHB.
If you can't keep up with the latest tech then should you really be managing those who are? How are you going to be able to judge those who are up with the latest tech when they come up with ideas? To be a GOOD manager you need to be be able to keep up with those you manage.
Tech will eventually be sent overseas like most other work in the US.
The desired end game is to send any and all work that can be done
for much less overseas, or pass 68 different types of visas to bring
ppl here to do the work for less.
In some cases the Visas and offshoring has not been enough so
that is where leaving the border wide open for 10's of millions of migrant
workers to come to the US illegally and work for low pay comes in.
This giant vacuum of cheap foreign labor send the money out of the country
mostly to never return.
Ppl say they buy US goods, but I counter with what goods are made here anymore ?
GM has already moved its eventual primary production plants to India, China, and Russia.
They talk of two separate companies, and you can see where this is going.
The dead man walking left here in the US, and the new and cleanly escaped
International company that can escape US law because it surgically removed itself.
So join the paperwork pirates and loot what is left and you can fly off into the sunset
with the financial pirates instead of staying in tech fighting over the scraps of what was the US.
Just my 2 cents.
My opinion is derived from the fact that the $134 Billion in US bonds were not fake.
The men were released along with the bonds.
And marketwatch says US embassies were told to stock up on 1 years of local
foreign currency due to possibly lengthy banking shutdown in the US.
I think a US bond panic would start the final act on the 247 banks on the red list.
http://bankimplode.com/list/troubledbanks.htm
Prepare accordingly !
Good Luck to you all !
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
I am 44, with a similar background. I have the luck to be in a company where I can have both aspects, management AND tech. I will never be a top manager and I don't write code anymore, but there are plenty interesting things in the middle : writing specifications, architecture, quality assurance, consulting, etc.
Maybe it is again a typical American bias : either you are management OR you are technical. It reminds me of George Bush's "either you are with us or against us". Why do Americans always see things so much as black or white, whereas the reality is often between light and dark grey ?
P.
Posting anonymously for confidentiality reasons
continuously reinvent yourself?
The IT industry doesn't change as quickly as people like to think. Those who sell re-training, frameworks, programming languages and bullshit have an vested interest in convincing you of this.
World wide web:
1991 - (hypertext linked pages)
1995 - (hypertext linked pages, with scripting)
1996 - (hypertext linked pages, with scripting and styles)
1999 - (hypertext linked pages, with scripting and limited network access(xmlhttprequest))
2009 - (hypertext linked pages, with enough scripting available to create applications similar to previously created native applications)
Hardware gets faster, Operating systems add features, but software development and the user experience is pretty much the same.
...and that is all I have to say about that.
http://jessta.id.au
Why not just stay 39 from now on? You won't be the first person to spend several decades at 39.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
...if you aren't comfortable with "being evil" then don't go there.
#1 More pay, most techies have a "salary cap" for their position and can only reach a certain level, managers go all the way to the top aka CEO. Also when the company starts having losses the first ones they downsize are techies.
There is such a thing as "enough pay". I don't care how rich I am, if I hate what I do to get that money I'd be unhappy. There are lots of ways to make six figures in a highly technical career. That is enough for most people--if you don't think so then you might want to re-evaluate your priorities.
Also, in the case of my former emplyer the techies were NOT the first to be laid off--the first were "middle management"--the ones that seemed to me "district X manager" or some such title, where "x" changed every other year (or even more often). Hourly labour was next when a manufacturing facility was shut down and work was consolidated in another facility. Techs were about the third round of layoffs. Thing is, if the need to cut costs is deep enough NOBODY is immune to layoffs, unless you are VERY high up the chain, and at 39, most people are at a point where they are "mid-level" in a corporate structure--and at that level it is managers that are MOST vulnerable.
#3 As you age it becomes harder and harder to understand new technical trends.
Not everyone gets dementia when they get older--most people retain more than enough of their cognitive abilities well past retirement age. It seems everyone who complains about ageism in an argument to go into management is most guilty of it themselves. You don't become mentally feeble at forty. Old dogs CAN learn new tricks, and besides, someone has to fix the messes left behind by young techies who are still over-confident in themselves and make poorly thought-out decisions.
Furthermore, making the argument that you should leave tech for management when you get older because you aren't mentally sharp enought to keep up with tech implies that management is for the feeble-minded. Please don't make such an implication--being an effective manager requires one to be mentally sharp, and besides, there are already way too many ineffective, feeble-minded managers out there.
#4 Managers have better benefits and the "golden parachute" clause in that if they fire you or lay you off, you get a nice severance package.
This is not the case unless your title includes the words "president", "chief" or "officer". Severance is generally based on salary and years of employment. If you are a mid-level techie or a mid-level manager you are likely to get similar severance pay as you're likely to have the same length of employment and not-too-different salaries. More technically oriented layoff victims are also more likely to be brought back on a consulting basis.
#5 Any company that is willing to promote a techie to a management position is a valuable company to work for,
Only if they are able to recognise if that person has a knack to manage a team of people. A technical person without an aptitude for management skills is probably worse than a manager who is good at managing but lacks technical skills--primarily because a good manager knows how to delegate such tasks effectively.
Don't do either. Just knock off an armored car and retire. It's totally out of style and hasn't been done since "Heat" with De Niro and Pacino. They will never see it coming.
Have a squat over at the hobo house.
The biggest geek that I ever worked with was 60 years old. He had kind of a hybrid position. He was a "manager", but he still did a lot of coding and system administration. I can count on one hand the number of people I've met who have amazed me with their intellects. This guy was one of them.
As you well know, it's up to you but it also depends on you. Are your older relatives still mentally sharp? If so, you may want to remain in tech. If your grandparents call you ever child & grandchild of the same gender's name before they get to yours, then go management.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Dude, I'm 37 and still very happily programming away. I know I need to always have one eye on my resume. I've probably peaked in terms of income unless I move up the food chain -- more money would be nice but isn't necessary (I earn more than both my very happy parents ever did, added together). I have a friend my age, we started out programming, he went management, I stayed a techie. He laments his brain has wasted away and wishes he was still programming. To balance it out he earns 3 times what I do, and while he could demote himself but doesn't. Also, you've been working for what, 20 years, give or take. Maybe it's time for a change.
Choose the management option and keep yourself active in tech domains (opposite option is not doable). If the management opportunity you are offered is in R&D, this is easy. Beware: in hardtimes (crises, etc.), the ones that survive best are experts in their domains (either good managers or good technicians).
I completely changed track and got a masters in CS last year at the age of 46 and managed to get a great job doing technical work at a very cool place
You imply you changed fields. If that is the case, then how did your pay compare to that of people with 5 or more years experience in CS related work? I yours was significantly less, then I think that you saw what I will call the "reboot effect". By going back to school, you demonstrated you were truly willing to change fields and not just switching out of need, thus, the hiring manager had less concern that you would be seeking to return to your previous field of work.
Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
I'm 56 and have been a techie since my first programming job in 1974 (a Univac "mainframe" with 32k BYTES of main memory, using RPG II), to today (designing REST APIs, programming in Java, Ruby, and Python (plus I need to pick up a couple more scripting languages in the next year). I've loved it all along.
For me, I've never been interested in the management track. Fortunately, I am currently working for a company (Sun) that believes in the value of individual contributors, and has parallel career tracks for technical and management folks -- well at least until the Oracle purchase goes through, then we'll see what happens :-). However, I have started from the assumption (from the very beginning) that anything I thought I knew about technology would be non-useful (from a career enhancing perspective) in 3-5 years, and laughed at in 5-7 years. So, I've committed myself to a lifelong self education regime to make sure I'm always current on the latest and greatest technologies. It can indeed be tough keeping up with the young bucks from an energy perspective, but there's a lot of value that comes from experience and being smart, so you can be more productive without having to work quite so hard :-).
For you, I will agree with what others have said, and suggest you go with your passion. BUT, I would suggest you *not* assume that a choice today has to be a now-and-forever type commitment. (Save that kind of commitment for marriage -- coming up on 35 years myself :-). I know lots of folks who have switched back and forth over the years of their careers, and enjoyed the fruits of both tracks. As long as you stay current with trends on both sides of the fence, you'll always have that option -- plus, techies that know something about management, and managers who know enough tech to not get snowballed, are going to be better at their job of the moment, and thus more likely to get rewarded.
It's tricky to be a first time manager. You have to learn how to review, hire, and dismiss employees. You have to avoid micro-managing and delegate responsibilities to your team. You have to improve your communication skills so that you can work effectively with your managers, your peers, and your [new] subordinates. It will be useful to find a manager you respect and get some mentoring. All of these activities take away from "techie" time, so it's a real challenge to be a good manager and retain your technical skills. My suggestion is that you begin to look at technology from a strategic perspective, focusing on those issues that are most important for the long-term success of the product(s) and the company. That approach should help senior management to recognize that you are successfully moving into a management role.
Good luck!
I am in a management role and about to make it to 39 years age mark. my company is asking managers to turn technical and I am in a dilemma as to what and how much techie can I be. I have learn so much that it looks like I have to start from square one. This is scary. But I think i just need to know enough so that I am technical enough to understand my project, team's troubles and help them resolve those. There are many managers who have become laid back and ignore technical part completely. So i am trying to learn a few things that are relevant to my organization and project. The best transition you can make is towards being Architect or solution designer or consultant whichever role is offered and required in your organization . it requires technical, managerial and leadership skills. It is niche, always in demand and balance of both. Not many can achieve it. I wanted to be one but forced management position took me onto management side from where point of return is very difficult. Moreover, in difficult times especially, you need to be saleable. So go for the niche and move to a higher level technical role. may be you will become CTO of your company some day !!!
The main difference at different phases of my career has been the way I relate to other people in order to get what I want and to try to get the best out of them. Working with manufacturing staff and sales people needs a different approach from working with engineers and PhDs. This is one of the things that keeps the job interesting.
Over the years I've moved from designing early embedded systems where it was hard to see where the hardware ended and the code started, to using mainly Java and SQL to build data models. If thirty years in the business post-education tells me anything, it's that you can't go far wrong if you use the latest and best tools with the most tried and tested languages and patterns. But that shouldn't limit creativity.
So: final advice. Do management while you can, and you have a real chance of a portfolio career where you always have employable skills.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
I'm nearly 59 and I still do freelance technical work (admittedly sometimes in niche programming languages, a good place for us) and keep up with a lot of technology innnovation. The secret (if there is one) is that I'm a lifelong anorak and I enjoy all this, actually the last 10-15 years have been the most interesting.
A lot of the time, it still doesn't really feel like work, but I hated work politics which is why I stayed freelance, most of my life.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
You have to learn the rest of your life. And as long as you do so your brain will be able to learn and to process information. It will get a little slower with time. However, this could be related to the greater amount of available information, which is automatically used. Older people create less mistakes. You will never be too stupid for the tech job. And if you are good in management and you like management more than tech then switch. You need to learn other things in management. And there will be no smooth way back to a tech job, but if you really like management. Go for it. You have to learn so much new things, which is very stimulating. And stimulating is good.
To go back in a tech job later, would require that you learn new terminology which will be available at that time. If you have an understanding of general concepts, then this is no problem, because the most stuff is just relabeling. Think of modules. Today they are called components, which is a generalization of the module concept, nothing more. The real change is in the product world. Think about routers or tools ten years back and today. What has changed? If this change doesn't frighten you. Go for management.
Also if you can stay in touch with technology evolution, then this should not be a problem. And a change back would result in a additional stimulating phase of reentering the tech domain.
I did something similar. I studied CS for 3 years part-time and then worked for 7 years full time, then I reentered university and studied full time. At first the switches were difficult, but after a short period it was always easy to manage it and even stay ahead of the crowd. It is a myth that people get dumb when they get older.
...is a lie. When I studied comp sci, my 60-years-old profs were writing whole operating systems. There are a lot of older programmers who do awesome work, Steve Gibson comes to mind. The reason why there are few old programmers is that the profession has been growing so quickly that we younger ones outnumber the older ones purely on growth. Also, a lot of competent programmers get promoted into management.
So, if you like coding, keep doing it. There's no reason why you would have to go into management if you don't want to.
Real world on line 3...
Studies actually show that you can buy happiness - as long as you don't spend your money for yourself. Giving money to others increases happiness. Here's a link.
Just a few days away from my 40th birthday, and this is something I've thought about a lot on the past - perhaps because when one is a techie and female the expectation that you will want to move into management seems to start a lot earlier. Well that's how it seemed to me anyway. After walking away from the offer of a management job that came with an MBA in IT Managment attached in my late 20's I have never looked back. The decision to stay techie has served me very well so far through several country moves and many job changes. As an experience techie I've never had trouble finding a job, including in coutries where I barely speak the local language. BUT I do wonder about being a little old lady techie one day.... As for the learning new things, yes I guess it gets harder, but easier in a way too when you have so much experience to draw on.
Agreed that slashdotters tend to be a technical community and are highly critical of bad management - which suggests that slashdot posters are desperate for good management. I suppose some slashdotters work in organisations where they'd prefer no management, but you could argue that even open source projects need some sorts of decision making to protect them from a war between the biggest egos.
So maybe a starting point would be to ask slashdotters how they feel good open source projects are successfully managed? This might be a relevant starting point.
... and become one of those rare breed of technically competent managers.
(I'm guessing) You've been in the game long enough doing the tech side to have seen "it all", and have an idea of what sort of problems occur and how to make things "right" (or acceptable to the client/business).
Leave the grunt work to the new, younger guys to get experience with and step back a bit.
Still keep up with technical advancements, but you don't need to go into the nitty gritty details.
Anyway, my 2c.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
I recently got another year (much) closer to my half century - the idea of moving into management makes me shudder, I intend to code until I retire (and beyond probably).
I guess it depends on how you view management. My experience is that they can't avoid the office politics and tend to be the target of much of it too. You say you enjoy management but have you tried all facets of it? Have you had to make the unpopular decisions that all managers have to at some time and do you think you can live with doing that for the rest of your working life.
To be a good manager in the modern IT industry requires you to keep on learning, just as I have to as a coder so don't fool yourself into thinking it will be any easier - it could be harder.
At the end of the day there is no real reason why you should not continue to code until retirement, except those reasons you create yourself; besides, there could be other better opportunities waiting round the corner.
Do what makes you happy and you feel comfortable with - if you're feeling uncomfortable and threatened by the up and coming younger developers then perhaps it's time to move on but it doesn't have to be that way.
Go permanent? In your dreams and my worst nightmares.
My father had the same experience. Long ago he was given the choice between staying a programmer and climbing that chain of job titles or becoming management. In a previous job he discovered the further he moved away from writing code the more unhappy he was. It is for this reason he quit that job and took a new one at lower pay.
Now the OP on the other hand has an obvious preference for becoming management. It is as plain as day in how he worded his question. I think what he's really asking for is forgiveness for going to the dark side or at least some understanding.
So yes you can become management but it at that point you have become a sell out, not that there's anything wrong with that.
In the end do what makes you happy.
IMAGE VERIFICATION IS EVIL!
A middle way would be to not choose between the two, and instead combine them. That is what being a project leader in tech projects is all about: You come with a heavy tech background and thus have the know-how, and now your beard is gray enough to be credible in the role of leader. My advice would be that. From now on, spend your energy on reading information systems literature, along with business intelligence and similar. Meanwhile, offer to take charge of the tech projects in your organization and delegate most of the actual techie stuff to the people you're now bossing around. I'd say an experienced tech project leader is more employable than a pure code monkey or a pure bureaucrat. And if worst comes to worst and your hands start shaking with abstinence from programming, there's nothing stopping you from getting your hands dirty in some programming work inside the projects either.
90% of everything is crap. Including engineers and managers.
Squirrel!
It says something about being promoted from what you are actually competent in, to management, which you know nothing about.
Management has so many PHBs, because everybody thinks this is the way to go up in their career. While in reality, management is just as much a skill and just a job as any other, as engineering, graphical design, or being a race driver.
And usually, being good at engineering, makes you a bad manager.
Just as being good at management, makes you a bad engineer. You wouldn't want a good manager to actually design the big picture of your software's structure, would you?
The problem is, that nowadays most people somehow value management more. They are always "above" other jobs. And they earn more.
But they are just a job. Like engineering.
So the top engineer in a company must earn just as much as the top designer or as the top manager, right?
Of course, the manager usually manages, who gets how much money, too. Which should be the job of accounting.
So if he is a greedy bastard, he decides that he gets the most. And has tons of excuses for it, like he being "responsible" (while in reality, it will be your job on the line), etc.
Usually these greedy types are also those, who have a genius engineer/designer/whatever sitting next to them, but who for the life of themselves won't use that expertise in their decision-making process. (Then why do they work with them in the first place?)
So do whatever you like most. If you are good at it, it will be good.
But if you know nothing about it, you have to start way at the bottom and learn to become good at that skill first.
Depends on how much you like to do that new thing, if you want to work trough being a total newbie again.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
If you go into management and don't keep on top of the tech anyway, then I never want to work for you. The last thing we need is another pointy-haired-boss who isn't keeping ahead on the latest developments. Good managers are the ones who have a good understanding of everything that goes on below them and this just isn't possible if you don't stay up to date.
So I took the leap to salary. This was a financial mistake because they based my salary on my prior year's hourly pay, which was a year in which I did everything possible to get zero overtime. So naturally that meant my salary number was abnormally low, and at the same time, I was instantly working 15-hour days as a routine. No more 8 hours and gone. No more OT. But it settled down and I am now back being technically the supervisor for my department but the reality is that my boss (old manager who took over when most of the others quit) really runs the show and looks to me to sort of shepherd my team. It works OK.
A month ago, the sole IT guy announced he was quitting and strongly suggested that I go for his position. Ok fine, whatever. We have long been a linux shop with Windows doing minimal stuff. We got bought recently and the new owners are solidly Windows everything. It has its uses but I find Windows just plain boring. I find being forced to use it frustrating. It's a dead OS. It's always the same. No excitement. The idea of ripping out working linux stuff just so we can run IIS and SQL is just stupid. But the last linux expert was the guy leaving so clearly that's what would happen.
Anyway, I never got a formal job offer. Never got a job description and never got a feel for what the IT guy had been doing. They kept asking me if I wanted the job and I had to say I don't know what quitting guy DOES all day, how can I say I want his job? I don't know what it pays. I don't know what the promotional path is. I did know I didn't like the boss I would have, or his boss. One of them had recently demanded written reports on anything and everything that happens and I didn't want to be stuck doing damn reports all day. Screw that. I am a fixer, not a report writer.
They gave me a proficiency test, which I flunked. I saw the exam sitting around and refused to cheat and look at it. Morals: I haz them. They tried to say flunking was OK you passed anyway. At that point, I knew I was dealing with people who didn't take this stuff seriously and flat out told them I did not want the job. I did not want to trade the job I knew well for essentially a pile of unknowns that would require constant training and classes and research to get up to speed and keep up with all the new stuff.
They said fine, no hard feelings, you gotta do what you gotta do, but the reality is that a lot of the senior IT people had it all planned out for me to take this IT job and by saying no I ruined some carefully laid plans and pissed off several people I should not have pissed off. The end result is that there are now moves taking place to eliminate the office I work in, not out of direct spite but just because they see little reason now to keep it. I expect my safe and secure management job to vaporize in the next four to six months, tops. Maybe less than that. The IT job would have been much more secure and would have looked good on the resume.
The moral is, consider not only what these offers mean to you but also how taking the job -or not- fits into the office politics and plans. There may be times when you have to make choices to advance your career in directions you may not want go, because the consequences of doing what YOU want may be just too high. I should have known this. But I am naive.
I don't do brain surgery but I wouldn't suggest that just anyone could do it. As others have said it is because we can SEE that what managers do is often just follow the latest trends, buzzwords, etc.
If management makes you happy, I say "Go for it"
I consider it a big plus when my manager has a technical background. At least they understand tech-talk and they know why a simple change can have a major impact.
A senior technical person and a junior manager or project manager in the tech team basically have to deal with the same political, financial and people management issues anyway. If there's a problem with the schedule, or the skill set of one of the junior team members, both the tech lead and the manager have to come up with a plan and deal with it. The difference is in the perspective they need to bring to the table. The tech lead should be focused more (but not exclusively) on the "best possible" resolution to an issue, whether that is more training for the team or adjusting the schedule to ensure a quality product. The manager/PM will be more concerned with the costs and deadlines and getting the most out of the team possible within those constraints. The two need to have enough common ground to understand the constraints and requirements from both perspectives and recognize which ones take precedence in a given situation. So would you rather risk dealing with a lousy tech lead as a manager, or dealing with a lousy manager as a tech lead?
The promotion ladder is longer in management, but it's harder to get a job back if you get cut, because management skills tend to be more common. So apart from which job is more enjoyable, you might want to think about weighing your future promotion chances vs. the risk of job cuts. Also, if you're thinking long-term of starting your own company, a management (or accounting) skill set is more useful for keeping your partners honest.
We are the 198 proof..
What a sad person you are. If you think yourself you're too old with 39 then, please, go into management. They have a lot of techies there who went as easy as you into that downward-spiral of low self-evaluation and hence stopped trying what they once knew they were born for when they watched Scotty on Star Trek.
Don't be one of those assholes that constipates the circle of life. Take the damn management position.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
In five years you can become still a manager. Therefore, turning down the manager position is not final.
In five years you cannot return to being a coder. This choice is really taking a different path.
In terms of relevance, tech guys are always employable.
Bottom line: whatever makes you happy.
(actual bottom line below):
--------------------
Most people don't work at a place like this. (I do, thankfully)
If the OP really dislikes having to keep up with new developments, management should suit him down to the ground, and since he says he likes it anyway, the choice is clear.
Very well said. As others have said, if I had mod points today I'd have used one of them here.
I had similiar misconceptions about management (and about big companies vs. small companies, etc.). Now I find myself in management, managing teams and projects that span the globe from Tokyo to London to New York and various and sundry places in between, and I discover that a) not only do I like it, but b) I'm surprisingly good at it and c) your tech skills don't atrophy, they grow. Even if you're not hacking shell scripts, java code, or kernel compiles in detail, you're managing people who are, evaluating competing technical solutions to meet business needs, estimating deadlines, composing proposals, developing, managing, and adhering to budgets, researching new technical solutions and staying abreast of the field in a much wider context.
Less specialization, but by no means less technical application or knowledge. If anything, as a manager, you need to stay even more abreast of new developments, and certainly a wider range of technologies, than when you're a specialized techie, whether its a developer, sysadmin, or architect ...and you'll need your technical knowledge to differentiate between buzzword bullshit / marketdroid nonsense vs. real technical innovation--something that's easy to do if you're knowledgable about(and keep up with) the field, but something that you will find challenging (and requires research) for areas of IT you may have previously ignored while working in your specialty. The need to learn and be familiar with new technologies doesn't stop, it accelerates and encompasses more, and becomes arguably more important in doing your job.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
&%%#$ management and for the same pay(&%%#$ management)^2.
As a tech, you only have to depend on yourself and only have to save your ass for your own failings. As a manager, you have to depend on others who will inevitably ^#%$@ up.
IAAM (I Am A Manager)
As a 60 year old software developer, I'd advise you to go into mgmt if you think you'd like it just as much as staying the techie. But be aware that mgmt these days is mostly about having a high tolerance for sitting in meetings, learning to sound confident even when you don't know what everyone is talking about, and being able to spin a failure as either a misunderstood success or someone else's fault. If that's your cup of tea, go for it. It certainly has more potential financial upside than staying techie. Plus it can be nice being in a place where you can actually participate in decision making.
I think your real issue here is not weather you will choose to be a TECH still or Management. It's the typical TRY at which would make you feel Young still. You cant Go back.. and you can not feel like you failed because you are not what you were. You have to be what you ARE. YOU ARE a TECH.. and You are experienced enough to be Management. You'll still have to stay current.. as if you would ever stop trying.. your a Tech Geek.. It's in your DNA now. AND ITS NOT your over the hill... so give into being the "OLD MAN IN MANAGEMENT". Your relevant, current, Skilled.. seasoned.. Management would put all that to use. AGE happy.. take the managers job.. you worked for the ability to know what you know.. and now.. you can use that to help others GET what you got.
Go for it! The world needs more good managers.
But it won't be easy.You will need to invest plenty of time in learning new skills now, and later in reinventing yourself as times change. We have a big problem at present with managers who have not got to grips with the challenges of managing a more diverse workforce -- or have even failed to realise that the old model is not appropriate.
You will have both the advantages and disadvantages of gaining more generic skills that can be used in wider fields. At present your edge will be in tech management, but as you move up and away from tech roles your potential field is larger and also you might choose to switch to say managing a company related to another hobby of yours. Obviously you will be vulnerable to downturns, as are we all, but you will have a wider range of opportunities.
But please don't underestimate the degree of skill and art involved in good management.
I have found that in industry, age is a benefit in technical management roles or technical roles such as system architechs or designers - the areas where the focus is understanding the problem and solution rather than the detailed aspects of the implementation.
From what you say about Web.x, it sounds like you are more on the implementation side. In this case, these roles tend to sit with younger staff as they have been devalued with the mindset that coders are relatively easily replaceable.
You will likely be more valued as a technically competant manager, and if you think its something you will enjoy, I would go for it. You can always change your mind later.
Alternatively, you could look into contracting. It can be very lucrative and experience is sought after.
"Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want"
Prostituion or drugs dealing. At least they're fundamentally honest and provide a service people want.
Personally, I see no reason why you can't continue in tech for another 20 - 30 years.
Your history gives you a huge advantage - not many companies are going to throw out all their old kit, so your experience will stand you in good stead.
There is also the issue of Tech Managers who haven't realised that they're not techs any more - at more than one site, I've had to deal with managers who are still doing half the configurations themselves because a) they still want to play and b) there isn't anyone to tell them to get on with managing - all very well, until the mess they leave is either given to you to clean up or worse, blamed on you.
Someone earlier mentioned that there's nothing above 'senior' for techs - I disagree. Once you're a senior engineer, you can become a team leader, group leader, test leader...lots of fun stuff!
I think my boss is pretty awesome. He's ~55 now. He originated as a mathematician/coder. But for the last 15 years he's been pretty much a fulltime administrator. He says he hates it, particularly the 250+ emails per day, but I know he loves it.
The last year though, he's been doing some opengl coding on the sly (having only ever coded in fortran, but taught himself java and c++ pretty quickly) and is presenting a paper on his new algorithm for flow visualisation next week.
He makes a truly excellent boss cause he keeps a lot of the shit away from coders like myself and colleagues so we can focus on what needs to be done but when he does ask you to do something it is because there is no other way. I can do that.
Coders that make the decision to continue coding or go admin at age 40-50 will be excellent, gifted and respected no matter which way they go. It's the ones that do it much earlier that I'm a little wary of. They seem to have a superiority complex.
.
It's all about impact and influence.
I have been in IS management for 20 years, having done most tech roles prior, mostly development.
Management is where you get to participate in how your organisation is really going to get where it wants to be. Although staff at all levels get to participate at certain times, as a manager you will get to really start to steer things.
Towards the end of a recent role as Head of IT, I was itching to get my hands dirty again and took an opportunity to get back on a project, while looking for a replacement for myself. Seemed great until they arrived and suddenly my access to top level decision makers started to dry up - great fun developing again but when things needed to steer better then I was out of the loop,
So it isn't really about the the soft option of management - and most of the tech's I know are as hide bound as hell and deeply resistant to change - it is about whether it is important to you that you want more of a say in the direction and strategy that your organisation is taking.
I mostly work for large non-profits, at the £100m turnover or above, at it is fantastic to be at the top table moving these well meaning but sometime ponderous groups towards more dynamic and interconnected futures. Can't really do that from the shop floor ...
Retrain to be a plumber or electrician, or anything but software. All the software jobs are going to India or China soon...
Are you married? If so ask your wife.
With the changing demographics companies are being forced to look at older workers for positions. I am 45 y/o sysadmin and a year ago I recently changed jobs moving to a very youthful workforce company, my experience was appreciated. That being said it seems like you want to go into management, just have a backout plan.
The best way to make this choice has nothing to do with money. Do what you really enjoy. If that's leading people, then management. If its solving problems and building solutions, then it's tech. Don't get caught up in the money because your new career will be short if you don't like it.
-- $G
I'm 51 years old and I've been a hard core technician for 30 years. I'm still at the top of my game but I do have to learn new technologies on a regular basis. It keeps me interested in the job. I've worked for many managers over my career and frankly I find that their attitude can be on the revolting side. Since I'm the boss, I'm smarter than you are,...It you want to join the dark side fine, but remember your roots.
Do you:
A. Want the pebble?
B. Need the pebble?
C. Love the pebble?
If you don't love the pebble, then quit trying to grab it. Do what you love...the alternative is doing what somebody else loves for them...
griff
if you think 39 is too old to be a techie, you're one of the idiots perpetuating that nasty stereotype. past that, if you think you can't keep up with the learning gruel associated (ignoring age), then go to management, but the techie job will probably pay more later on.
before you need the walking stick
Note that it's not the workers who should accommodate the manager so he can do his work, it should be the other way around. The manager should manage, so the workers can work.
It goes both ways. None of us is perfect, so we need to accommodate each other so the work can get done. If I've been on a team longer than the manager, it makes sense that I'll have to do some training - same thing as a new employee.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
Do what turns you on. Either can be right or wrong depending on how you feel when you get up in the morning - dread means make change, enthusiasm/bounce means keep at it whichever it is. KISS.
Run!
Mission statements are, and always have been, bullshit. There's only one true mission statement for any for-profit business - "We're in it for the money. We give our customers what they want, they give us money."
When Shakespeare said "First, we gather up all the lawyers", MBAs didn't exist.
"But we need a mission statement for our brochure-ware web site!" Wankers. I blame it on the Internet.
1) To get a decent job in IT, you need a lot of experience. And that experience needs to be with enterprise-level technologies: cisco, java/j2ee, oracle, sap, etc. You will never get anywhere patching up desktops. However, nobody will give you experience until you already have experience. There are thousands of technologies out there, and every decent job requires experience in different dozen technologies. There is no way to be prepared for any particular job. Education is nice have, but experience is essential. And don't let anybody kid you: experience working as volunteer is worthless, some job ads even state that specifically.
2) The IT career field has been going downhill for US workers, for years, and will continue to do so. Jobs are being aggressively offshored, and Americans are being replaced with guest workers. Even if your job can not be offshored, you will be competing in a glutted workplace.
3) US companies despise US IT workers, and strongly prefer offshore workers. Guest workers cost less, and can not job hop as easily. Manufacturing jobs were offshored in the 1980s, IT jobs are being offshored now.
4) You are young enough to - fairly easily - make a clean break, and to get into a career field that actually has a future.
5) IT is extremely ageist. That may not mean anything to you now, but it will mean something before you know it.
6) IT is extremely unstable. People get laid off for no fault of their own all the time. IT is always hit first, and hardest, when there is an economic downturn. Even if you have a job, you have to constantly worry about getting your next job. Prepare for a life of constant uncertainty, constant turmoil, constantly looking for your next job, and constantly living below your means. Seriously: who needs it?
7) There is, at least, a 50% chance that your education will be wasted. In IT there is no standardization when it comes to degrees and/or certs. You are supposed to get the degree, or cert, and then hope-and-pray the employer will value it. Compare this to health care where: specific credential == specific job.
8) Experience in IT is typically not transferable, and can easily work against you. When you get experience in one thing, you paint yourself into a corner. If you have worked with Solaris, then nobody will consider you for AIX, because Solaris is what you really want to do. Your years in IT do not matter, only your recent, verifiable, enterprise-level, experience in exactly the technologies used by a particular employer matter.
9) If you have not used a particular technology in over a year, then your experience with that technology is worthless. Your experience may count against you, but it will not help you.
10) When you are 21 you may not have to worry about a mortgage, health care, and all that. But, when you get older: you can easily be financially ruined due to no fault of your own. You may be smart, well trained, experienced, honest, and hard working; and through no fault of your own you can ruined to the point that you will never recover. All so the managers will get a bigger bonus. Don't kid yourself, it happens in IT all the time. That sort of thing does not typically in more respectable career fields, such as health care.
11) As you get more experience in IT, it will become increasingly difficult to transfer into anything else. Employers will not take you seriously. Employers will figure that you will go back to IT after a short time.
12) IT workers are looked down upon by practically everybody else. Mangers are seen as creative geniuses - they are the gods that make things happen. Peon techies are looked down upon mere commodities. IT is viewed as a cost center. IT workers are the dogs that get kicked around.
I wouldn't assume that middle management is going to offer better security, especially in an economy that it not doing well.
As a senior developer, assuming you are good, you will always be in demand, but as a junior manager you have little to offer. If you get laid off as an inexperienced manager, especially in the type of economy we're in (and look to be in for a while), then watch out.
If your contingency plan in the event of being laid off as a manager is to go back to being a developer, then why should anyone hire you over someone who hasn't flip-flopped and failed? It certainly won't help that you've demonstrated you don't really want to be a developer!
Tech or management beyond age 39? No. Time for Carrousel, old man.
I don't get the ageism in IT. In the past when people joined a company at 20 and stayed until retirement then sure better to get the extra 20 years by hiring younger. But now you're lucky if people stay more than 3 or 4 years...... So in that case even if you hired someone at 50, you still have the potential for 15 years....in reality you'll be lucky if they stay 2.
As far as brain goes, they are constantly changing the studies on them. But anyway my psychology textbook in 2002 said intelligence went up until 45 or something, stayed the same (the line had a tiny increase) until 65, then starts a modest decline (a tiny decrease) until 80 or so and then the decline becomes more rapid. Also there are researchers and scientists who are very productive in their 70's. Also one of the brightest college professors in my masters program is in his 50's. I can't keep up with him. There are others (both younger and older) who are absolute idiots.
Also you get the 60 and 50 year old whose brain is total mush due to dementia, lazyiness, etc... and then you get the 90 year old who is pretty sharp (although physically slow).
I am 42 and starting a new linux admin position this month - leaving a place I have been with for over ten years. I really enjoy the work and love the coding that goes with it. I would not be happy managing although it has been offered. so, fwiw I took the tech road.
> With the other, I'm being offered a chance to get into management, something I also
> enjoy doing and am seriously considering for the rest of my working life.
And besides, you will never have to think or learn again (after you learn to play golf, of course).
> The issue here is the age of my grey matter. Will I still be employable in tech at this
> age and beyond? Or should I relinquish the struggle to keep up with progress and take
> the comfy 'old man' management route so that I can stay employable even in my twilight
> years?
Give it up. Your're already an old man. Your grey matter is totally ossified. Have you ever heard of anyone over 39 accomplishing anything?
The fact that you even ask this question tells us the answer. You clearly see learning as a chore, and probably always have. Go into management. You are CEO material.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
For starters, I'm 37 and still doing tech. On my current project, I am the youngest guy on the team by about 10 years. Furthermore, my Father-in-law was 71 when he retired as a system admin. He was remarkably current on all Solaris and Linux system. He is still an excellent python developer today. With that said, I don't see it as a problem to continue in tech.
One caveat though: my current employer is located in the suburbs. I used to work in downtown Boston where everyone was well under 40, if not 35. Once I got out of the city, I noticed that everyone was older, or saddled with kids (as was my reason for moving out of the city). Basically, I find that agism is more prevalent in your urban/hipster areas than out in the 'burbs. The fact that I'm working with bright guys in their late 40's, gives me great faith that I can be a techie for much longer.
My advise: Try something new, you already know the old thing! That and only that will make you grow.
I have been an engineering manager for the last 3 years or so (38). When I was promoted, I was never given the option of declining, which in hind site was probably a good idea on their part. I felt the same as most other /.'ers in the fact that Management is a slow rotation down the flushed toilet of corporate IT.
I decided that I didn't want the job to be that way. I continue to study and stay on top of cutting edge tech, ensuring that I won't get left in the dust, even while embarking on the long learning curve related to capital project planning, operating expense budgeting, roi, dealing with HR, etc... I do my best to spend approximately half of my time focusing on both of my core objectives, balancing tech with management.
In the end I found that I was able to work with my engineering staff to keep our company on the right track. We work together as a team to ensure that we keep leading edge technology rolling into our data center. What's cool is that since my team and I are on the same page, even though they spend more time implementing than I do, we are able to get really cool stuff rolled out without hitting the brick wall known as "management" - since I'm the "management". I am able to take our ideas and lobby for them with the VP's and Directors, get budgets passed for cool stuff that we want to do, and ensure that we get those things implemented. I'm also smart enough to roll with the deepest technical discussions and am more than capable of calling "shenanigans" if necessary. By understanding and spending equal time working in both environments I believe that I have had the opportunity to work with more technology than I could have otherwise.
The most important thing to keep in mind is that, even as a manager, you are working with a team of people. I have told my staff that I consider them my peers, and that together we work to help the company stay afloat and make more money. I do not consider myself any different than they are, and am more than happy to work on problems/issues that arise right along side any of them. The cool thing though, is that I can keep heat off of them, empower them to implement changes, and ensure that their backs are always covered. In turn, I get a team of people who circle the wagons and ensure that we put our best efforts forward all the time and truly respect each other. I also spend the time letting them know that I appreciate their work and acknowledge a good job when I see one.
Management is not giving one thing up for another, it's the ability to affect change, both positive or negative, in your environment. You can choose which way you want to take it, which is what makes a good or bad manager. I would have declined the promotion if I was asked, however in hindsight, I think I learned a lot from it.
Hope this helps you make up your mind. BTW - between 30 and 40 is when most techs get the bump. You are right on schedule.
It's nothing, just you're carbodyluminocap acting up... just a couple of hours to fix.
The best managers are those that remain technically savvy.
Switching to a management route doesn't mean you have to stop using your brain... even though a lot of managers seem to do just that... dare to be different.
As an individual contributor, your impact is merely your own contribution. As a strong technical leader, you amplify the contribution of every member of your team, which is a much greater impact.
Like several posts I'd recommend that you do what gives you satisfaction, more time with your family, and that doesn't leave you thinking about work at the end of the day and on weekends.
I just turned 42 and have stayed on the developer track. I have my hands in ASP.Net, SQL Server, PHP, MySQL, ActionScript and other technologies. I've been one of the fortunate ones to have stayed employed during years of off shoring, downsizing and other events. Yet at 42, I am wishing that I had taken the management track when given the chance a few years back. I'd like to impact the work process and stop some of the stupidity and craziness that I have seen.
I am a little tired of trying to keep up with all of the changes that a developer has to these days. If I were trying to keep fluent in just one technology perhaps things would be different, but I have always kept one foot in Microsoft technologies and one foot in Open Source technologies.
I wish you well.
I made the move into management 7 years ago, and went through similar 'do I want to move out of tech' thought processes. I'm at a Fortune 50 company, hence the reason I'm posting AC - some things below I wouldn't want coming back to me via HR.
1. Realize that people management is vastly different from engineering / tech development. An engineering team typically loathes a first line manager who still believes they are lead engineer. You've got to be able to let go, and allow your team to make mistakes. This is very, very difficult to do - and is one of the major reasons peers of mine who entered management later left. They never got comfortable with stepping away from actually DOING the engineering work. Rule 1: You're NOT an engineer anymore. The easiest way to adhere to rule 1 is to NOT manage something you've actually implemented yourself. Some situations (companies) won't allow you to have that much lateral movement, but if you can make such a move I strongly recommend it.
2.a. People management also means you're going to have to deal with all sorts of information you never imagined you'd have to. You will find out about people's medical challenges, you'll have to umpire petty disagreements, etc. - people will suddenly come to you expecting you to be able to answer questions you WON'T have an answer to. You're going to have to give reviews - can you tell someone they aren't as good as everyone else, constructively? Can you objectively 'rate' or 'calibrate' your team versus other teams that aren't necessarily doing the same thing yours is doing? Can you lay someone off? DON'T believe you won't be asked to do that - if you're in a corporate environment, it is almost inevitable in today's macroeconomic environment. This was the toughest thing for me to get a handle on when I first became a manager. Dealing with people's 'lives' - the decisions you make, and actions you take DO affect people's lives and their families' lives. It took me three+ years to get comfortable with this, to the point where it didn't keep me awake at night during review time. Rule 2: Always keep people informed of their performance, and then LET them be responsible for what happens in the end. You cannot be responsible for their choices.
2.b. You will also encounter politics and unpleasant legal issues in this role. Realize there are things you cannot change, and don't try to boil the ocean. Do what is right, always, and if someone above you changes it, realize it was NOT your decision. You will have access to information your team will not (like knowing a layoff is coming), but you won't be allowed to tell them (duh). You'll question whether the corporation really values their employees, or only the stockholders / Wall Street. The answer is a mix of both, but ultimately Wall Street wins in the corporate world. If you don't like this, consider starting your own firm - I'm not saying that in any sarcastic or condescending manner. I've considered it many times myself, but I cannot afford to do so due to my personal health situation.
3. I hope you've gotten some opportunity for mentoring from a manager, preferably someone at least in a second line or director level position. If not, seek one out. The company I'm with allowed me to have mentoring from several directors while I was an individual contributor (IC), which was a fantastic blessing. These mentors gave me priceless guidance and advice, and set up many 'situation simulations' from their past experience to have me think through. Rule 3: Look at management above you, and seek mentors to learn from. You can always learn more about managing.
In general, staying on top of tech is a technical manager's job. Hopefully, by now in your career you've developed competency/expertise. You should expect to leverage that expertise as a manager, primarily as a BS detector and a guidance tool. Eventually,
That is a skill.
You either have it or you don't.
Techies dismiss managers at their own peril, good managers will shield their technical reports from all the bullshit that is being thrown at the team (you know, recrimination, unreasonable requests, tiring and boring statistics and reports, that kind of thing) and will allocate resources fairly to get the job done.
This requires mostly to reach deals with people with varying priorities. Techies slaving away on their keyboards could try this and see if they cut it. Many of them can't hold a conversation without retreating in the body language equivalent of "please don't beat me", so it may be implausible for them to actually be an effective manager.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Any professional person is perfectly capable of doing a job he doesn't like.
This fluffy attitude about doing what you love is pure bullshit, sometimes you do what you have to do, and at the end of the day you may have hated every single minute of it, but still be satisfied for a job well done.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
No? I thought so.
Words are cheap of course.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I'm 46, and still in tech. I enjoy leading small teams, but I have no desire for the 'suit and tie' world of real management. I'd rather lead a team; while rolling up my sleeves and getting down and dirty with them. I have no stomach for being 'the boss', aka a glorified paper pusher. IT is my second career, I fell into it after being an electronics tech for 10 years after the military; it was a natural progression from ET to PC and peripheral Hardware Geek, to Novell/Windows Geek and now I'm in the Web Dev field. Yes, it's all Microsoft, but I tinker at home with other technologies and use them for non-profits and churches I work with. I agree with all who said do what makes you happy, I disagree that I learn slower than a recent graduate--I'll wager I can keep pace with any 20 year old. It's all in how you apply yourself---my age grants me an experience level that lets me think outside of the proverbial box.
Former SW engineer. Promoted throught ranks up to VP. Left for a startup opportunity. Hired as VP Technology at startup. Laid off. Hired as VP of Development at large established company. Laid off. Replaced with lower level manager. Lost desire to work in hi-tech. Left the field for 3 years. Thought about what made me truly happy and it was when I was developing software, not watching others do it while I filled out spreadsheets, managed budgets, and sat in meetings that produced nothing more than more meetings. [Dilbert is spot on!] Went back to school and picked up some new skills and was hired as a developer. Age means nothing. Experience, attitude, and skill sets mean everything. If you bring these to the party, you'll be employable.
They may be cheaper, but when they shit their pants because they are told your company is losing $10 million an hour due to a technical issue, then you realize that not all techies are created equal.
After a few years working technically, even if you remain a techie, you have gained an understanding about what is important for a company, how the technical aspects of what you do affect business, and which things are dumb or not to attempt.
You have earned your stripes, and you will be a good asset to anybody that can see beyond the salary differences.
Good companies needing solid experience will not be ageist, funnily enough many companies realize the error of their ways after a dalliance with only 20 somethings and come back for old timers to ensure their operations keep running.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I've been a programmer since college in the 1980s. I don't use DEC BASIC or Turbo Pascal anymore, but C/C++ is alive and well, and I've picked up Perl and Python along the way. I keep staring at that Java textbook, too.
I got my first genuine Silicon Valley job in 2007; it was quite interesting. (God, I love the Bay area!) My manager and I were the same generation and general level of experience; we had a lot to talk about. All the other programmers were a bunch of kids, frankly. 20-somethings and 30-low-somethings. Good kids, relatively sharp, but I learned that being young and sharp isn't the same as being experienced and still sharp. If you're willing to keep learning new stuff as it comes along, and new techniques, that huge fund of experience with problem solving and bug-hunting gives you a major advantage. Besides, you can tell the new kid from India war stories about working on the engine controllers for the Marine Corp's coolest toy.
(I've also noticed that after you've unsnarled someone else's undocumented, buggy code for the Nth time in 20 years, you develop a strange fondness for well-written documentation, even if you have to write it yourself, and modular, well-structured code, even if you have to re-write it yourself, and coding standards, even if you have to invent them yourself. All that stuff I disdained when my professors back in college demanded it has come back to haunt me; damn, they were right--this stuff is a good idea! On the other hand, there are times when 'goto' is actually useful.)
I personally have little aptitude for management and avoid it like the plague, but that's me. YMMV; just pointing out you can still program well beyond your age. You can, in fact, become the respected senior guru.
---dragoness
At 42, I've gone through a lot of the same thoughts. For me, I couldn't do it. I'm the kind of person who has to program. If I don't get to do it for a while at work, I end up finding some excuse to do it in my own time at home.
However, if I wasn't the kind of person who has to program, then I'd make the switch. Scheduling people, tasks, and resources is just as challenging a puzzle as most programming tasks. I really like helping people (which should be a manager's primary job), and the advancement possibilities for managers are nearly limitless.
GO MANAGEMENT! Cause The guy slinging the code, like me at age 38, needs good guys like you who care enough to think about it. We also need you at that level to make decisions based in reality which comes from experience. Those decisions affect the rest of us. I've got one such manager 2 levels above me and let me tell you... I'd do anything he asked me to do without question even if it meant going against my reasoning... I know I can trust him.
First I commend the many find responses offered to this important question. My only comment that has not already been articulated would be that I disagree with the thought that there is no limit to management and that it is possible for a middle-manager to rise to the c-suite. This no longer occurs which is actually a problem. The upper management ranks now consider themselves aristocrats and pay themselves accordingly and dispense with employees of all kinds in the lower ranks accordingly. It also appears that there is a trend towards more experienced technologists. I am 42 year old coder and architect and I am often ping'ed with job requests even in this economic environment. I've done some management and speak often with management given my position and there opinions of management job prospects vis-a-vis tech seem to square with my opinion above. If you want to move to upper management you are best starting your own company if you are not a Harvard MBA. That's my two cents in any event. I suggest trying management since it appears from your post you desire this. However, be prepared to abruptly change course again if you decide this is not your karma because project/middle management is extremely difficult and not highly valued by upper management. In any event I wish you the best of luck. I truly do.
If you are in doubt , you are not a LEADER , so forget the manager trail and be happy with techie , your subordinate team will EAT you , because every day , everyone will try to find a weakeness in you and will exploit it,just to say "hey , I am better than my boss" .
Only the ones with no doubts, no heart , no feelings can be that.
You may be served to clarify your desired outcome. I consulted from 1987 - 2005. In 2003 I started a Super Food import business, out of self defense as getting high quality food in the US is a serious challenge. My contract pay kept falling, so I went to work for IBM (after contracting their for 10 years) to keep my salary level and because I was told, "If you're a team player and you get on the Management track, we'll give you a big raise on your one year anniversary." On my one year anniversary, a Monday, I got my raise. It was less than the previous Saturday sales in my other business. I quit on the spot. If your outcome is to have little or no effect on your income, than choose any job. If your outcome is to have complete control over increasing your income as you desire, learn how to market using Social Media and enjoy Living Well Doing What You Love. And be sure to set your "Magic Number", which is the amount of cash you require, under management, which will handle all your material requirements for the rest of your life. Once you meet your "Magic Number", retire which means "doing what you like, when you like, with no material considerations." Great question!
I did this on a temp basis last year - stepped out of a tech position and into an executive/management position for six months. It was more difficult than I expected. My tech skill level = expert. My management skill level = rookie. Unfortunately, I assumed I was an expert manager, so I dove in and acted like one. If I had understood the truth, I would have given myself more time to learn the ropes. My superiors took my swagger at face value, and expected me to be an expert manager from day 1, and solve extremely difficult personnel problems. I was out of my depth, and I did a poor job. MORAL: Management is a different skill set. Give yourself time to learn it. should I relinquish the struggle to keep up with progress and take the comfy 'old man' management route If you are expecting that management is all about playing solitaire and filling out the occasional budget report, I would suggest that you need to get a clearer understanding of what the job will entail. A manager who doesn't at least try to stay current with progress will be on a 6 year glide path to obsolescence. Once you have no idea what the tech people are talking about, and can't even understand their explanations, you will be a PHB who can't run the department efficiently. You'll be ripe for replacement by some bright 39 year old looking to move out of a tech job. You wouldn't take a tech job where you'd be forced to work with shitty equipment. In management, you'd be working with people, but the same rules apply. You should consider the people you'll be working with and for. Know their expectations. More importantly, you need to have a clear understanding of the people who will be working FOR YOU. In management, you should consider each person to be a different piece of kludgy, buggy, undocumented software. Each piece might work well under one set of circumstances, but make them interact and rely on each other under a different set of circumstances and there are no guarantees. Oh, and you don't have access to the source code for them either, so figuring out what makes them tick has to be done empirically, through observational reverse-engineering.
The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain
You don't mention what field you work in. There is no such thing as a generic techie or manager. Consider (strongly consider) continuing education, whichever way you jump. Instead of generic software engineering courses, take some graduate system engineering courses. The one strength a senior programmer has is understanding the entire system design (including human engineering). Which is to say that by adding a title like "system architect" to a management job you don't have to give up the thrill of working with the technologies (whatever those technologies are).
SysML makes UML make sense.
... so go for it, unless it would mean that you'd do both tech & management like many entrepreneurs.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
First line and middle managers are often fired during downsizing. They don't really contribute that much to the organization. The "doers" (pgmrs, designers, etc.) are harder to do without, while still conducting business. When you get fired from the lower ranks of mgmt, the chances of getting another job are SLIM. These are positions routinely promoted from within a company, not hired from the outside. Once you lose those techie skills, getting them back is extremely difficult.
Your boss does less work than you but gets paid more than you.... doesn't sound too stupid to me.
Super Awesome Broadband
You can do what my manager does. Although not the norm in my entire company he became a resource manager in highly technical group. He as a resource manager has his responsibilities in that arena, but he continues to code and prototype small aspects of the product anyway. This gives him plenty of technical perspective to drive major technical decisions in the product. This probably makes him more busy, but I think his perspective helps him understand what is really going on. ALSO makes it harder to get away with stuff.
This may be an imperfect analogy, but just like 1E AD&D, you'd be like a strong, high-level Magic-User (with a high Strength score) who'd be shifting to Fighter. If need be, you could always go and cast those spells that would save the day. If I were party-leader, I'd pick you over a regular Fighter.
Depending on your company, you may be able to do both.
At my company, I went from lead developer to manager over 5 people, but I was a "working manager", meaning I still did my programming job while managing the group.
It actually worked out great.
I was able to be heavily involved in far more projects than just my own
I could offer actual programming advice while still doing my management job
I could give my employees some pet projects with new technology so they had some fun and I still got to learn the new tech
I gained far more knowledge about how the company functions through all the management meetings
Then in the end, the company (like most others) had to do cutbacks, and my entire group was laid off.
Since I kept my skills up I got to keep my job, and I'm back to a developer now.
Not ideal, but at least I'm still employed.
So my advice is: Go the management route if they let you keep your keyboard. :)
Are you good at management?
Do you like it?
Remember, It requires a completely different set of skills.
I have never understood why companies insist that a proper career path progresses from engineering to management.
Many people become engineers because they have a talent and a passion for it.
Along the way, I have met many managers who were forced into management, believing it was the only sensible decision.
They always told me they missed engineering a lot.
Me...I have been engineer all my life.
It's not just what I do, it's who I am.
I would avoid management at all costs.
I would probably suck at it...
...you maintain relevant. You are in the computer industry - your age plays no role in your ability to code as long as you can see, and type. Your relevance remains based on your tech knowledge. If you enjoy programming more then management then do that - you have to make sure your skills are relevant to the time - constantly learning new languages. If you prefer management go that route...you will still need to maintain skills relevant to the time but not as much. Obviously the more technical knowledge you have the more valuable you are (and respected by your subordinates).
Do what makes you happy (or if you are money hungry go the route which will make you more money).
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
Look for something completely different. Tech managers now have to force techies to do what the business units want rather than plan and provide technology solutions. The business makes the calls, which are typically crazy, ignorant requests that make little technical sense. The result is techs become the zombie implementers of a "git 'er done" 1/4ly profit management philosophy.
Makers of enterprise level applications are now faced with a staff comprised mostly of sales people, marketers and managers. Support, development and engineering are really no longer needed and all development and support is contracted on a "as needed" basis. So going the manager route will no doubt put you in the situation of deploying applications and solutions with few resources, no training and no time. The discipline of software development has been tossed out the door long ago.
I suggest get into teaching, open a bait shop, garden or greenhouse supply store, solar panel installing, sales or management.
The best answer is to let it go and let someone else beat the dead horse. Apply your tech skills in a way that builds something lasting for the community. The rest will end up in the dust heap anyway.
I went into management for four years and found it boring, stressful, confusing, and finally the byzantine politics of upper management did me in. I ended up asking to be put back on the Unix team and I am so much happier now - and so much more competent and useful. Remember that while you are obviously intending to be a tech-savvy manager, you may end up being a talented techie who sucks as a manager.
--tcpiplab
Whether in tech or in management, you'll still need to keep your skills current. However, you already know the tech-skills game. It's fairly easy to go out and get some books or courses, or to get your hands on a new SDK and work on those skills. In management, however, your skill set will be completely different. I'm not just talking about keeping up with the method du jour made popular in current business literature, but talking about skills dealing with people. To me, one of the most interesting things on the management side is that, unlike technology, where skills learned for old technologies are still applicable to those old technologies years after the fact, the skills you develop managing people require that you always be willing to approach problems in new ways.
Whereas old technology does not change, people do change over time. So, while you may have been successful dealing with Employee A using Method A at one time, changes in Emlpoyee A's life and career may mean you now need to deal with him or her using Method X. It can be a rewarding mental exercise, but if that is only thing that motivates you (the challenge of figuring out the best way to deal with people), you might want to stick with technology. If you can make the transition to deriving your success and satisfaction from achieving organziational goals and building up your people, then give manaegment a try. You can always keep abreast of the tech changes during your off hours, just in case you ever find the need to cross back over that bridge, though the return trip might be more difficult. Some employers might see your management time as something that places you out of the current flow of things in tech, and others might believe you wouldn't be happy in a tech job anymore, so your goal will be to sell them on the idea that your management experience made you a better tech. It will, if you let it.
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
39? Maybe, depends how resilient you can stay. 43? No. Absolutely not. You'll go down in flames and kill your chance to get into management. Nobody wants you when you're old and gray.
Be beautiful. All you need for that is high school.
Be beautiful and black. All you need for that is an ignorant old man with a quick temper and a ready belt.
It amazes me how many jobs there are that make sense in urban environments. Developed means not having to apologize for selling what is essentially a protection racket — insurance.
``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
...tech stuff always made me happier. I went through a 20 year Aero Engineering career, and it seemed like every time I moved up, ie - more management, I was less happy. The dirty little secret (AFAIC) with management is that you end up dealing more with people problems than with tech problems. Tech problems are much better defined than people problems. And I was always much happier with well-defined problems I could DO something about, rather than having to deal with the idiosyncrasies of human nature, which very few managers ever get a handle on.
If you like being a tech and you want to be a tech and you haven't had any real problems being a tech, then keep being a tech. You're 39, not 90 and can in all likelihood continue to do whatever you set your mind to for another 20 years or so. If you like management and want to be in management take that job, if you really want to be a pastry chef go do that. Life's too damned short to do something other than what you want to do just because you're afraid it might be hard.
There's a lot of other factors involved of course, there's different kinds of tech jobs some of which are less volatile than the web side of things, there's management jobs which are more technical and management jobs which are less technical. There's the question of whether you're any good at being a manager, or whether you're any good at being a tech, but none of them really matter.
A lot of people will tell you to think of the future, think of where you can get if you do this or do that. They're probably also going to tell you to take the management path because that's the path to big bucks, and that could be the right choice for you, it could also not be. Do what you love if it's at all possible, and if it's not try to find something that's as close as you can get because going to work every day in a job you hate isn't worth it.
As a Manager, your time will be more flexible and you should be able to juggle the responsibilities of management and still have time to keep up to date on the latest tech as well.
I'm 49 now. The company (Dilbert Humungous Corp) MUCH prefers the younger techies. Much more energy, many more ideas (albeit usually moronic). Go for management. Do it. Don't look back. The choice is truly obvious when you get my age. Ageism is a reality, and it hits hardest at about 45.
Good question. Kids take heed. Plan ahead.
Don't forget that being a 'tech' and management are two totally different skill sets and you should embrace the opportunity to learn and expand on your current abilities. You will find or have probably already found that good management know how to manage and motivate. Some of the best management I have seen know nothing about the technology or environment, they only need to know the business and how to best utilize their best resources, the people surrounding them. There is an old adage that states "Management is where careers go to die", don't believe it, it's not true, you may in fact find that it is a very good place to start your next career.
If you like tech analysis and have people skills, these two are good options where an older person is respected for tech knowledge.
I'm 42, and slowly moving toward management roles. I still do sysadmin, but not anywhere near as much. The Tech Sales bit can be either pre-sales, where you largely prove concepts, do demos, write up project plans and such. It can also be just flat out sales. (not for me)
Management of both these groups in a technical setting is challenging and fun. You will have a quota though. That's not so fun right now.
If I were you, and enjoyed management, I would jump at the chance to add it to the resume. Given where tech spending is at right now, and given the ongoing outsourcing, I don't think management is a bad idea.
Then you do tech hobbies to stay cool and relevant!
Blogging because I can...
I was in the exact same boat as you. I had been a "tech" for fifteen years and had worked in just about every field in IT. This was actually a boon when I took a job as an IT Manager because I could talk tech with my subordinates and understand their issues while communicating these to the non-tech/management staff.
For me it's been a satisfying transition. My only warning is that non-techs often have a very "retail" view of IT. Since technology is so commoditized, the perception is that managing a company's technology infrastructure is "easy" since there are so many off-the-shelf "plug-and-play" retail solutions. The biggest challenge I've run into is getting the difference between this perception and reality to register in their brains.
As someone in tech at slightly older age (41) if you ever get the option to go management that is the way to go but like it has been said in other posts. Stay up with the tech and learn as much as you can. The more valuable you are with your employer/company the more likely it is that they will retain you and get rid of the "fat" in management that can't keep up. Plus in the event you have to switch jobs you can go back without having to relearn it. I can only hope somewhere down the line and soon I get that opportunity.
Go into management. If you still enjoy the tech side, you can always keep up with it. On the other hand, at some point the younger guys learn faster and will be cheaper to employ for those jobs. At some point in the future it can and probably will affect your employment!
On the contrary. Wake up and smell the shit.
;).
As I said, flowers aren't as common as shit. And if what you think are flowers look, smell, feel and behave like shit, they're not flowers.
You want to go on believing they're all the same - shit, flowers etc, that's up to you.
If what I said makes you feel uncomfortable because maybe you smell a hint of shit about you, take heart, because flowers can smell a bit of shit when there's so much shit around them.
BUT if it's really hard to tell the difference between you and shit, then in practice you are shit. That's the truth whether you like it or not.
Flowers can spring from shit given the right seeds, and flowers can be turned into shit.
Yes everything decays in the end, but even though I'm shit, it's often nice to be doing my crap under a bunch of flowers
if you just worry about being hired later, review your own hiring practice. what do you look for when hiring? does age matter in hiring a developer? how about management position? there lies your answer.
Shut the fuck up.
If I had this opportunity, I would go for management but still keep my tech skills sharp by honing them at home.
Fluid ability (Gf) does tend to level off and start to decline at that age. However, you may need those abilities in either of the jobs you described. Crystallized ability (Gc) does not follow the same pattern so you will have to decide which situation calls for which abilities if you want to use the age as a major factor in your decision.
I do too, thankfully.
On our dev team the youngest programmer is 36. No one has worked here less than 9 years, and some of us have been programming for 20+ years. That's one of the shiny things about working here: the programmers are seasoned, settled professionals. There are no "death marches" or heroic coding sessions: new systems are designed competently, testing and release are well-regulated and the egos are under control. We don't have to use 'cutting edge' because it's neat and that's what the college kids are using, but we're not coding Payroll in COBOL '59 either (Windows/.Net shop, using all of 3.5's goodies).
The economy is really lousy here (Detroit area), but we're keeping the lights on, and still turning out product that people are buying.
Get off my lawn.
I've been a tech for 25 years and just had my 50th b-day. I've even had my own business. The bottom line is truly happiness and I'm happiest as a tech. Where I now work we have 9 techs and 4 are over 50 and only 2 are under 40. We keep 2000 pc's and servers running with ease. Almost every tech I know who's gone on to be a manager has hated it due to the higher stress levels and the politics, so there is a lot to be said about being a grunt and just doing the job and making users happy.
Face it, if you are asking this question you already have one foot in the grave. Have some dignity and get it over with.
What sort of person volunteers to be a anonymous middle manager at the very big company? I think we all know the answer.
I'm well over 50, I'm still leading projects and actively coding... as a contractor. I get the ageism, and I'm fine w/that. I don't need to work for those people. But I do get tired of the stereotype. There is no rule mandating we turn into lazy semi-retired fossils on our 40th birthday.
Some of you people need to get over yourselves. It is 2009 and coding is relatively easy. The tools are good (hell, when I started you could not trust the compilers) the computers are nice, the networks actually work, API's are complete, etc. Quit acting like you are inventing computer science, because you aren't and it has already been done.
Oh, and get the hell off my lawn.
if you're experienced and successful in your previous technical roles, take the management role to properly advise and train the newcomers who need the mentoring. a manager of technical folks who is the text-book manager won't be nearly as good as a technical person with good management abilities.
You appear to work in a nice company. Ask your company if you can be in management for few months with an option to go back into tech in case you don't like it. I am 44 and been exactly in same situation. Tried management, didn't like, went back to tech. Management is not so easy as it sounds. You will be dealing with most complex variables...namely humans. Peace BT
As long as you aren't just recently going into tech. Said it before and I'll say it gain: no need to flood an already vastly oversaturated career path with more people "changing careers" or "chasing money".
And yes. Please continue at least keeping a general touch with tech trends so you aren't a clueless manager.
If you really do enjoy management (what are you, a masochist?), then do what you enjoy. But good tech managers also keep abreast of the technology, so don't expect management to be any easier on your brain cells.
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." -
I'm 52 and still in tech. Yeah, it gets a bit tiring keeping up with all the new technologies, but I'm still running with the young dogs. In fact, I think I may have an edge on some of them just because of the work ethic of my generation.
Although I'm still in tech, my advise to you is do what makes you happy - that's what really counts.
It's like reading my own post, as I too am 39 and have been coding in this technology branch for 12+ years, and also am at that same crossroad of moving more into management or staying where I'm at. I can completely relate to your indecision about this, as I've been the Sr. software engineer at several companies over the last 6 years or so, and as a developer it's about peak of where it's reasonable to go. I have also worked in a couple positions as the manager, in addition to being a developer, and even held the title of CTO of a small start company (for whatever titles are worth).
While you definitely still need to keep up on technology for both positions (at least you should), you definitely don't need to dig in near as deep in a managerial position, so there is what I believe to be a much less demanding need to learn and still stay competitive. For me personally, it's the constant need to learn new techniques and languages that keeps things interesting and enable to push the envelope of what's possible, but there are days I just don't want to have that demand on me. I don't know how things are in your position as a developer, but further back than I can remember, if I didn't know about it or had a question, well then I'll be referencing google searches until I figure it out - because there is nobody to ask, but plenty of other programmers asking you questions. Most management positions also pay better, although I couldn't say why, since it doesn't seem to be as skilled of a job. Managers also requires far more meetings, writing documents and creating graphs, as well as a lot of politics, personal interaction, and even the ability to be a bit of a salesman.
In the end, I dislike meetings (especially pointless ones) and office politics, I just like creating things - the harder or more impossible the better. The flip side to just creating things is you don't get near as much deciding power as in management, which is why I was lucky enough to get to run both at the same time. I will say this, the management experience definitely doesn't hurt on a resume and opens a lot of other possible doors having that under my belt, and you never know what possible opportunities will come in the future. Ultimately for me, I choose to stay coding over managing, since I enjoy creating applications far more than being the effective communicator and publicist. 8-) You should do what you love, or at least like the best - while factoring in pay cuts or increases as compensation for compromises. I've been debating just starting my own company, which is definitely more of headache by a mile, but also a much bigger payoff - so maybe that's an option you can consider. It wouldn't hurt to try a manager position, as you can always go back if it doesn't suit you, and then you have established experience - should you want to return.
When the workday is over, if your saying to yourself "Why does god hate me more than everyone else", then it's time to do something different. 8-)
-Davey
Even if the two jobs pay the same in the beginning, note that the IT job is for a high level technical position, while the manager job is for a entry level manager.
Even if your position stays the same, you are going to rise faster in pay if you take the manager path (if you are any good).
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
I'm 54, and although I still write code for a living my personal experience has been that keeping up with the latest and greatest in recent years has become decreasingly fun and increasingly a pain in the ass. I still love writing code and am still good at it, but I'm tired of learning how to do it a different way every 5 years. Learning my first few programming languages and dev environments was fun and exciting. Now it's just like awww jeez, not this again?
I can't address the advantages and disadvantages of being purely a manager, but in the Project Lead roles I've been in I have always done less work and felt less stress than as a developer. Bottom line, managers don't have bug lists. If I were more organized and had a higher tolerance for people droning in meetings, I'd go for a management job in a second. As a manager you can always assign yourself some of the design or coding duties in a project if you really really want to. And you can certainly continue to do dev on your own time just for the love of it. Contribute to opensource projects, that sort of thing. Conversely, being a programmer and doing management as a hobby isn't really an option.
If you're amenable to the actual work of management, and you seem to be, I would wholeheartedly say go for it.
If you think IT management absolves you of the requirements to understand the technologies you are managing.
That said, I've had several bosses in IT management who've often said, 'That's stuff is too technical for me.' -- when I've tried to explain them various issues and potential solutions.
Not understanding the technologies means you'll be asking your subordinates to fight-it-out when there's a dispute over which path to follow. They will come to despise you for that; and ultimately exploit that weakness in you to get the things they want (and eventually -- that includes your job).
Unfortunately, not going into management means your probably going to find yourself at the mercy of the very person I just described.
Rob Enderle's excellent new book: Everything I needed to know about Computer Science I learned in Marketing School
I agree with the "whatever you makes you happy dude" bunch, but you should be awares of pitfalls on both sides. Techies in the US are now competing against Chinese, Russian, Brazilian and Indian programmers who get paid half of what you would. So, as you grow older and into the six figure pay scale, your employment as a programmer is harder to justify in some companies. On the other hand, management isn't for everyone but the same companies that outsource programming also are the ones that want their higher paid, older employees in management in some cases, whether or not the person has any aptitude for dealing with people instead of machines. So there is a lot more potential for your to rise to your level of incompetence. I think a good medium road is something like the Project Management or IT Architect professions. They allow you to maintain a foot in the techie world but to get into the higher paid realm as well.
There have been some terriffic points made on this thread but there is one thing that hasn't been discussed. Companies change -- often quickly and dramatically. It can happen as a result of change of ownership, change in upper management, competitive pressure, changes to the market, changes in the underlying technology, or changes to the economy. You read about it every day: ABC CORP has always provided lifetime employment to its employees... and suddenly lays off half its staff (the most highly paid) and outsources many functions. If the tech vs management decision is based on some assumption of job security, that is a very dangerous assumption. How portable will those N years of tech management be to a new job? If you succeed brilliantly at it, will you be able to convince other prospective employers?
kdawson, 3 years ago I recently faced the same decision you now have. I chose management and, for the first 2 years, I really enjoyed it due to the high quality of people working for me who, with my guidance, were able to accomplish quite a lot. The last year, however, I have found a lot of poor decisions from above have adversely impacted my group to the point I had to let go of 4 people. Not pleasant. If they had been substandard or the company had been in real financial trouble, it would have been one thing, but not in this case. I felt like a worm. I also suffer, occasionally, from self-worth questions of whether I am actually doing anything useful (I don't do real work), I just coordinate and set up meetings --- "MetaMan!!!" I have been tempted to leave, but then I would leave the people working for me without a home and I couldn't do that. So my job is now to help ensure they keep their jobs by making sure they focus on the "right" projects. Its a big game. I guess I am saying that there will be ups and downs either way you go, but if you are patient, there is a wider scope of opportunities available to you once you move into management. Plus, the view from my office is nice :)
Cheers and good luck with your decision!
Hello Mark
Most of your experiences reflect mine, but I fail to perceive any drop in "work ethics" between the nerds of the 80's and those of the 00's. I attribute my edge to plain experience.
As an automotive tech I say keep doing what you are doing. I am not familiar with the computing world but I know in my business managers are targets. I have know many techs that got into management to "advance" their careers only to be blamed for technician's deficiencies. Usually when something goes wrong it is the managers fault for not overseeing properly. I breifly thought of enter the same world but found that my experience is more "valuable" as a tech. The newbies don't have the knowledge to keep up with this "old"(46) man!
My experience in IS/IT includes desktop support, Novell Administration, VB coding, Unix Administration, DB administration, system analysis, information security, enterprise architecture, and project management. After many years, I moved into the management ranks and eventually became a CIO of a major hospital. Long story short: life as IS management is more about applying BROAD technical knowledge to define strategy, start projects, manage budgets, assign and motivate staff. You are removed from the technical coding and administration, sometimes by several levels. Your rewards come from managing staff, resources, and time to solve complex organizational goals in ambiguous business environments. In contrast, life as an IS technician still involves having hands on the keyboard and creating technical solutions that are defined by programming, OS, or other types of rules. You apply DEEP knowledge to problem-soling. Rewards are more concrete; you can get direct evidence of a well-tuned server or database. In the end, you really need to determine what you like best and how it fits your life goals. But do not be afraid to try management and see if it something you like. A year or two of focusing more on management may give you a new appreciation of the technical side of IS. Good luck with your decision.
I am 52 this year... I have gotten paid to program computers since I was 16...
After years of creating new embedded products for clueless managers, I moved into engineering management.
Initially I did this so I could remove the artificial barriers put there by incompetent managers and allow projects to get completed.
Later, I stayed there because the top end pay was greater.
In all (but one) job i kept my hand in "the game" and continued to write software for new devices as well as manage.
I HATED being a manager, a "good manager" means that most importantly you create an environment where your engineers can work productively.
This can involve many different aspects, but basically you take all the heat, all the crap, and act like a "feces umbrella" for your people.
In between that you get the joy of dealing with idiots and accountants (is this redundant?) above you; making budgets; setting in pointless meetings; settling disputes between your people, sometime of a personal nature {shudder}; setting goals for a project; and performing countless interviews to expand or replace your department.
As an Software Engineer, I had endless work, with long hours, where no one ever said "thanks" or "good job". Just a continuing steam of projects that made the companies I worked for extremely profitable.
The only comments where "we need it faster", or " we need it cheaper", sometimes both!
And where a $5 raise was handed out like it was gold coins.
The top end pay for a Sr. Software Engineer is the entry level pay for a lawyer! Enuf said!
Overall my passion is creating new products, but being an Engineer and being a Manager isn't about any of that! It is about all the interpersonal crap that goes on.
So applying my 36 years of experience, I suggest that you ditch both careers and go into the lucrative field of "illegal drug distribution"!!!
I am over 50 and after 10 years in management returned to the tech arena. I see a change in many companies in that they start to appreciate deep technical experience again.
Younger guys might run faster - but older guys know the shortcuts.
I feel very accepted by my younger peers and we complement each other well.
Most important - follow your passion
From a young age I loved electronics and ended up in my chosen career of electronics manufacturing by 30. It then evolved into management, and now I'm a CEO of a company nothing to do with electronics. Sadly the now the electronics industry (in Australia) is only a shadow of what it once was and if I stayed in hindsight I don't think my career would have gone so far. More importantly electronics is now something I do for fun, and is far more enjoyable as a hobby then a career.
You haven't said if you prefer one or the other, so I'll tell you my experiences as I approach 63!
The things you found exciting about development tend to diminish with the years, as does your drive and interest in keeping up with them. Frankly, you will not be able to keep up with programmers in their 20's and 30's.
I took the techie route because I loved code and did not like management. I tried it a couple of times, but it just never had the draw that code did. I still like coding, but I no longer love it, and I sure cannot keep up with 20 and 30 year olds. Also, the development model had become something I hardly recognize: formality is gone, requirements gathering is unrecognizable, and I find myself uncomfortable with the new model we are using -- "agile" programming. The only thing agile about it is MY ability to jump through hoops at every-increasing speeds while management micro-controls the process through metrics gathering: Metrics that are reported, but never used for anything to improve processes. I guess metrics are the "next big thing" nowadays, and I feel sorry for the poor bastards who have to gather and distribute them.
Managers used to know the strengths and weaknesses of their team members; now, we are interchangeable bodies. IOW, you will find that what you see as normal now, and what you become comfortable with, will change -- just when you want things to stay the same (comfortable as in personal security).
If I had liked management, I would have gone that route and stayed with it. However, I loved code, formality, etc. and still think it is the proper way to develop code. Most code hangs around for years, and some of the Cobol and Fortran I wrote for mainframes may well still be running today -- after almost 40 years! The DEC code is gone, but the PC and UNIX code is still running after more than 15 years.
In the end, it is a personal choice based on YOUR interests. I think each is rewarding in its own way, and I know managers that are really happy they made the transition; others went back to coding. Best wishes for whatever decision you make.
Techie priorities
Slashdot = Sarcasm
A successful ENTREPRENEUR is worth 10 MBAs and 10 PHDs.
Slashdot = Sarcasm
Dave Astels, a presenter at Software Craftsmanship North America (http://scna.softwarecraftsmanship.org/speakers#dave_astels) writes: "If you love to code, there is no reason whatsoever that you can't or shouldn't make a career of it. Resist the pressure to move 'up' into management. Pursue your passion." This is really a matter of figuring out what you, in your heart, really want to do.
Slashdot = Sarcasm
Another reason to do an "S" incorporation is that there will be tax increases coming, probably on the income tax side in the next few years. We do have to pay the Chinese interest at some point.
If you don't incorporate, you are considered "rich" and will likely be hit hard. If you incorporate you can get even bigger tax breaks as you will pay yourself just enough to "not be rich" and still have money to invest into your business, which is what profits are meant for.
I also don't see that the government will close that so called "loophole" (as some from the extreme left call it). If you thought the outrage on the Wall Street bailouts was something, the outrage on additional targeted taxation on S corporations (small businesses) and letting the other corporations get away with no additional taxation will be deafening. Trying to kill small businesses by taxation during this economy is a sure way to make unemployment figures skyrocket and a sure way to have a one-term Presidency.
Now I never wanted to go into management, I like hands on techie, but the question did come up for me too. Now at 57, and female, I do find I struggle to keep up with my younger counter parts, but this is what I enjoy. I wouldn't worry about the grey matter as long as you keep your mind exercised that shouldn't be a problem. But if management is what you think you'd like go for it.
It's all in what you love. I wouldn't worry too much about not keeping up. It's all trade offs anyway. What you may (feel) you lack in new skills, you have in spades in business knowledge and longevity. On the other hand, if you think you'll like management go for it. But don't do it out of fear that you cannot keep up.
Age really doesn't seem to be the issue. It sounds to me that you are really just tired of keeping up with tech. If you go into management in any industry heavily based on technology, you are going to have to keep up anyway, or worse rely on a subordinate to keep you informed. I'm a VP in VFX and motion graphics and as a producer have to know about all developments in the technology we use, otherwise how will I effectively hire and manage my staff, budget my projects or know if there might be a better approach to achieving what my client wants?
Been there, done that...here are my personal discoveries:
1) Don't become a manager unless you are willing to fire somebody. This is something that a lot of people really don't want to have to deal with, but it's the harsh reality of being a boss that you may need to can somebody. And don't assume that the person you need to can actually deserves it - it may be just for budgetary reasons.
2) The higher you go up the management chain, the more you must multi-task. When you are a technical developer you can focus your energy *deeply* on a limited number of things. When you are a manager you must keep track of dozens or hundreds of entire projects. Your attention span gets chopped into lots of tiny pieces, and you are not able to think deeply about very technical issues the way you did before.
3) You must learn to delegate or be crushed. When you first start to delegate you may feel very lazy somehow. But if you don't learn to do this you will be crushed (see #2 above).
Well? Answer me. If you do tech projects until you're 65, your mind will remain sharp. If you want your mind to dull, stop using your analytical skills. This is a well-understood fact of aging. So... the fact that you're 39 here seems like you're reaching for an excuse to move into a less demanding job. The fact will be that if you do go management, it will be because you wanted to, not because people 40+ are unsuited for a technical track. Life's better when you're honest with yourself, man.
my wife's b-i-l made the jump from mainframe wrangler (JCL, MVS, CICS) to management years ago. while he's happy overseeing a $10e6 budget, he still misses coding.
there's a similar trajectory in the building trades: a young guy starts out as a carpenter, then starts his own contracting business, working with a few others. if he doesn't go corporate (he's the exec, finding the jobs, then hiring foremen to run multiple crews, etc) he ends up >50yrs old still swinging a hammer, aching in every bone, 1 accident away from bankruptcy:-(
i just got laid off after 25yrs of successfully avoiding the peter principle;-) i always was assigned to interesting projects, but @ 60 i don't have the nrg of a kid to make 24/7 release deathmarches:-P
so now i'm ready 2 retire:-)
The management track has social and personal value in transparent environments. The management activity in large environments is power-gathering and not collaboration. If you want to manage, stay highly honed and start your own operation.