Software Development a Dead-End Career?

The Corinthian · 09-04-2014 10:12am

moycullen14 wrote: »

And they'll end up f**king it up. Nothing surer. I have no doubt that some companies act like this but they are not and never will be successful.

Some of them are actually very successful.

I'm not condoning such approaches, only pointing out that they happen. Sometimes because the 'company' is inefficient or unduly influenced by politics (particularly true of large blue-chips or the public sector), and often because modern capitalism is regrettably driven by short-termism nowadays.

But sometimes it also makes commercial sense. If you don't have the capital to get to market 'properly', are you just going to not bother? Or are you going to do so anyway and factor in the long term cost of having to deal with your having cut corners to get there? Or it's all very well to hire only the best and most senior resources and produce the best software out there, but how does that help you when you're being outbid on every contract or no one buys your product because it's priced out of the market?

We don't live in a perfect World where we only need to choose between one and zero.

If you have the misfortune to work somewhere where IT strategy is predicated solely on cost then my advice would be leave, now. Someday they will discover someone cheaper than you and then you'll be turfed out. (Outsourcing, anyone?)

I suppose that companies where they don't do that sort of thing will never think of replacing you? Bless you and your innocence.

Calina · 09-04-2014 10:34am

I'm with pgmcpq in that a significant amount of my life has been devoted to assembler and the IBM mainframe.

I'm coming to the conclusion that software dev is a problematic career as well, for various reasons. There's a big push to get more people programming - I tend to see this as a predictable reaction to higher wages in a skillset which people feel shut out of. So there is a push on salaries - downwards - there is a push on importing people - there has been discussions in both the US and Ireland regarding talent import for example. We allegedly have 4000 odd IT vacancies available but from having looked at them, the overwhelming issue I have is not too many of them are interesting.

As a skillset, it's not that well valued by the people doing the paying, from what I can see. I'm back in college on a MSc at the moment. I am considering not going back into development or programing for various reasons.

However, one of the points that I would raise - regarding it being a young man's game - is that the elements that make it a young man's game have very little to do with software engineering, and a lot more to do with the culture around it. I used many years ago, to fund college studies, work as a typist in a lawfirm in the UK and some of their more driven lawyers used to work 20 hour days, operate on the balance of presenteeism to a completely unhealthy extent. So a few of those features that make SW dev a young man's game are not unique to it and could justifiably be removed. They are non-intrinsic.

GreeBo · 09-04-2014 10:42am

ChRoMe wrote: »

Two words come to mind when reading that:

Technical debt.

Technical Debt usually comes out of the next guys budget, not the current guys.
Current guy will be long gone (probably promoted on the back of it) before someone with a budget asks why its so expensive and takes so long to make even the simplest of changes to a system.

This is only true in badly run companies, however its difficult to find a large multi-national that doesnt, inevitably get run in this manner.

moycullen14 · 09-04-2014 11:05am

Calina wrote: »

I'm with pgmcpq in that a significant amount of my life has been devoted to assembler and the IBM mainframe.

I'm coming to the conclusion that software dev is a problematic career as well, for various reasons. There's a big push to get more people programming - I tend to see this as a predictable reaction to higher wages in a skillset which people feel shut out of. So there is a push on salaries - downwards - there is a push on importing people - there has been discussions in both the US and Ireland regarding talent import for example. We allegedly have 4000 odd IT vacancies available but from having looked at them, the overwhelming issue I have is not too many of them are interesting.

As a skillset, it's not that well valued by the people doing the paying, from what I can see. I'm back in college on a MSc at the moment. I am considering not going back into development or programing for various reasons.

However, one of the points that I would raise - regarding it being a young man's game - is that the elements that make it a young man's game have very little to do with software engineering, and a lot more to do with the culture around it. I used many years ago, to fund college studies, work as a typist in a lawfirm in the UK and some of their more driven lawyers used to work 20 hour days, operate on the balance of presenteeism to a completely unhealthy extent. So a few of those features that make SW dev a young man's game are not unique to it and could justifiably be removed. They are non-intrinsic.

Well the 40,000 vacancies in IT are pure hogwash. How many of them are customer/client management roles with strong language requirements? How much core product development are LinkedIn, Google, DropBox et al actually doing in Ireland?

I've been hearing the mantra of 'IT skills shortage' for years now. What there is is a shortage of people willing and able to work for low money. It's like cheap beer - there's always a shortage of that!

One thing for sure is that the downward pressure on salaries is real and will continue. If you are unfortunate enough to work for a company where IT is non core, it's even worse: You're regarded as an 'expense' to be reduced by accounting and HR droids.

As stated above, if you haven't got a specific technical or domain skill, you will struggle as a developer in the long run. That's not solely down to age either.

beauf · 09-04-2014 11:13am

Calina wrote: »

...- is that the elements that make it a young man's game have very little to do with software engineering, and a lot more to do with the culture around it. I used many years ago, to fund college studies, work as a typist in a lawfirm in the UK and some of their more driven lawyers used to work 20 hour days, operate on the balance of presenteeism to a completely unhealthy extent. So a few of those features that make SW dev a young man's game are not unique to it and could justifiably be removed. They are non-intrinsic.

+1

I didn't always work in IT and the other industries I worked in always had a similar pattern to this.

Stark · 09-04-2014 11:16am

ChRoMe wrote: »

No, you are conflating a client/employer where software is a cost centre rather than revenue generator. Clients/employers who understand the implications will not go the route you use. You also seem to be assuming that development is the whole cost, those margins will be completely destroyed by support costs if its done incorrectly. The project doesn't end once its shipped.

Where I work, the development department is explicitly labelled as a "cost centre". It's stupid, especially for a company who likes to brand themselves as a "technology company" but it's the way it is.

On the upside I've never been asked to work one of these 80 hour week thingies.

Calina · 09-04-2014 11:22am

4,000 rather than 40,000 and as someone with multiple foreign languages, that skillset has always been the subject of people just not wanting to pay for it in this country. You'll see the same with data analytics, the next big thing in this knowledge economy of ours. I watch those vacancies at the moment.

Ultimately, the point is in the technology sector, an awful lot of the jobs are not technology jobs.

ChRoMe · 11-04-2014 7:41am

moycullen14 wrote: »

Well the 40,000 vacancies in IT are pure hogwash. How many of them are customer/client management roles with strong language requirements? How much core product development are LinkedIn, Google, DropBox et al actually doing in Ireland?

I've been hearing the mantra of 'IT skills shortage' for years now. What there is is a shortage of people willing and able to work for low money. It's like cheap beer - there's always a shortage of that!

One thing for sure is that the downward pressure on salaries is real and will continue. If you are unfortunate enough to work for a company where IT is non core, it's even worse: You're regarded as an 'expense' to be reduced by accounting and HR droids.

As stated above, if you haven't got a specific technical or domain skill, you will struggle as a developer in the long run. That's not solely down to age either.

There definitely is a IT skills shortage in regards to pure technical roles. I'm not messing when I saw that when I returned to Ireland in January, the phone rang 15 minutes after sending out my first CV. I'd apply for one job and the recruiter would sent back a selection of five or more, all dev jobs.

IRLConor · 12-04-2014 12:24am

ChRoMe wrote: »

There definitely is a IT skills shortage in regards to pure technical roles. I'm not messing when I saw that when I returned to Ireland in January, the phone rang 15 minutes after sending out my first CV. I'd apply for one job and the recruiter would sent back a selection of five or more, all dev jobs.

Yup, though it's very uneven. I've lost count of the number of recruiters who've contacted me saying stuff like "Hi, I wonder if you'd be interested in a role with <boring non-tech company> working with <crappy technology>? The company is based in <the arse end of nowhere> and the salary ranges from <one third of my salary> to <half my salary>. If you're not interested, perhaps you could pass this on to your friends?"

I suspect a lot of the vacancies are based on unrealistically low budgets too. It's very easy to say you want to hire 10 developers if you're thinking you'll get them for €25k each. If those 10 developers cost an average of €50k then suddenly it'll be "oh... right... well... we didn't really need to do that project..." and the 10 vacancies evaporates pretty quickly.

To go back a little closer to the topic, I'm in my early thirties, roughly a decade of full time experience and I'm still writing software (and doing about 40 hours a week at that!). I'm lucky because it's a regularly scheduled thing for my boss to sit down and talk to everyone on his team about their career and what they want to do. I've been very clear that I don't want to move into management and they're cool with that. I know it's somewhat unusual for a company to be actively involved in career development, but there are companies out there who make an effort to retain their staff.

I've worked for companies in the past where there were developers who started their careers around the time I was born and at least one of them is still working as a developer. Certainly, I've met a bunch of developers who've been 40+ and still happily working away as a senior, non-managing developer. It's rare, but it's definitely not impossible.

Trojan · 12-04-2014 8:41am

IRLConor wrote: »

I'm lucky because it's a regularly scheduled thing for my boss to sit down and talk to everyone on his team about their career and what they want to do. I've been very clear that I don't want to move into management and they're cool with that. I know it's somewhat unusual for a company to be actively involved in career development, but there are companies out there who make an effort to retain their staff.

They probably get the same productivity out of you that others will get short term out of someone working 50-70 hour weeks, because your hours will be far more productive as you're working on what you like, and to a plan that you trust. But they will get that longer term.

I think that kind of thinking is the difference between software companies that do ok and companies that do incredibly well.

IRLConor · 12-04-2014 12:13pm

Trojan wrote: »

I think that kind of thinking is the difference between software companies that do ok and companies that do incredibly well.

I would like to think that, but there are plenty of very successful companies who treat their employees badly. I doubt that it's that much of a competitive advantage.

The Corinthian · 12-04-2014 12:48pm

IRLConor wrote: »

I would like to think that, but there are plenty of very successful companies who treat their employees badly. I doubt that it's that much of a competitive advantage.

It depends on a number of factors, especially the availibity of staff with the necessary skill sets, but unfortunately you're correct in many cases.

I remember considering this, in a company I worked for years ago and who underpaid their staff in general, how this must be a counter productive policy for them, as it would mean that their better staff would find better jobs quickly, leaving them with the staff who were less capable. Thing is, the staff was fairly easily replaced, regardless of how good they were, for various reasons (top of which that this was a firm that many actively wanted to work for). So they were thus able to quantify the cost of staff turnover and assess this against the cost of well paid happy staff who would be more reluctant to leave (remember, turnover is never zero, even in great workplaces).

Bottom line is that it made financial sense to pay the staff less - they were simply victims of mathematics, at the end of the day.

As developers we have a tendency to prefer the 'ideal' business, where staff are treated well and quality is always high. In the Real World, it's more about optimizing based upon revenue and cost, rather than doing the 'right' thing.

It's one of the reasons I've seen many start-ups fail; the founders are often developers, who still think like developers, rather than businesspeople.

Sparks · 12-04-2014 4:16pm

IRLConor wrote: »

I'm lucky because it's a regularly scheduled thing for my boss to sit down and talk to everyone on his team about their career and what they want to do.

That's not why you were lucky - you were lucky because they actually meant it when they said the talk was for your benefit. There are companies where they happily do this... and where you really have to watch what you say because it's anything but a process to help you, it's to identify which members of staff are next for the chop.

IRLConor · 12-04-2014 4:39pm

Sparks wrote: »

That's not why you were lucky - you were lucky because they actually meant it when they said the talk was for your benefit.

Oh, it's not for my benefit.

It's because hiring is expensive so retention is worth spending money on. My boss(es) might personally give a **** about what I want but the process is there because it's good sense for the company.

cregganna · 12-04-2014 4:59pm

Been a developer for 37 years, contracting for 30 years. Never thought of it as a career as I enjoy it so much. Certainly not dead end as there's always new stuff to get in to. Interviews are a pain nowadays.

Sparks · 12-04-2014 5:03pm

IRLConor wrote: »

Oh, it's not for my benefit.

It's because hiring is expensive so retention is worth spending money on. My boss(es) might personally give a **** about what I want but the process is there because it's good sense for the company.

That's still a better scenario than most folk get to worry about

I mean, a company exhibiting good sense in a way that doesn't involve firing everyone who's been there for a few years after getting them to train up the brand-new graduates hired to replace them, some folks would see that as the holy grail

srsly78 · 12-04-2014 5:05pm

Here is me working on a saturday (remotely). As a contractor... that just got offered equity. Don't even know what to think -.-

deconduo · 12-04-2014 5:14pm

Sparks wrote: »

That's still a better scenario than most folk get to worry about
I mean, a company exhibiting good sense in a way that doesn't involve firing everyone who's been there for a few years after getting them to train up the brand-new graduates hired to replace them, some folks would see that as the holy grail

Sounds pretty similar to where I am now. Myself and 3 others from a conversion course got placement as interns in January. Just a little over 2 months later, we've all been offered permanent contracts. They could have easily saved the money, and waited until the end of the 6 month internship before offering us a position.

We also have regular meetings about career paths and progression, and the management are genuinely interested in helping us do well. I'm really enjoying working there, and it does feel like I've fallen on my feet.

moycullen14 · 14-04-2014 11:38am

cregganna wrote: »

Been a developer for 37 years, contracting for 30 years. Never thought of it as a career as I enjoy it so much. Certainly not dead end as there's always new stuff to get in to. Interviews are a pain nowadays.

Why do you think interviews are getting worse? In what way?

moycullen14 · 14-04-2014 11:42am

The Corinthian wrote: »

Some of them are actually very successful.

I'm not condoning such approaches, only pointing out that they happen. Sometimes because the 'company' is inefficient or unduly influenced by politics (particularly true of large blue-chips or the public sector), and often because modern capitalism is regrettably driven by short-termism nowadays.

But sometimes it also makes commercial sense. If you don't have the capital to get to market 'properly', are you just going to not bother? Or are you going to do so anyway and factor in the long term cost of having to deal with your having cut corners to get there? Or it's all very well to hire only the best and most senior resources and produce the best software out there, but how does that help you when you're being outbid on every contract or no one buys your product because it's priced out of the market?

We don't live in a perfect World where we only need to choose between one and zero.

I suppose that companies where they don't do that sort of thing will never think of replacing you? Bless you and your innocence.

Far from innocent, thanks. As a contractor, my relationship with a client is very simple: money for time & experience. I neither want or expect anything more from them. Also, I am always prepared for a contract to end at the drop of a hat.

MagicMarker · 26-04-2014 9:42pm

Boskowski wrote: »

Changing into IT in your 30ies is going to be difficult because what IT employers value above all is experience. And that invalidates completely what Bloomberg says because you just don't have that experience in your 20ies. 20ies is fine for gathering experience and working 60 hours plus for Accenture or Google or whatever but thats only one side of the coin.

I'm in my 40ies now and I'd say I'm as employable as I ever was due to my 20 years of experience in all sorts of fields.

IT is never just about the latest web this and that which only came out 6 months ago and will disappear in 6 months down the road. Loads of systems and their technologies have much more longevity than you would imagine. Not in my current job but in the one before that the most valuable (and paid) folks were the Cobol veterans, some of them were in their 60ies. I have a good chunk of embedded and real-time experience in C/C++ and assembly and I get unsolicited job offers all the time. In my current company we have a hard time getting half decent SQL developers and you would imagine that should be a core skill. Its all about a wide range of skills and niche skills and older technology skills I find particularly good to have.

You will definitely struggle changing into IT development in your 30ies, cos you can't compete with the 20 somethings doing 60 hours java/web/mobile and you can't compete with the guys your age or older 'cos they have 10, 20 years experience.

Well, speaking as a 30 year old who will be returning to education this year in a bid to move in to Development, this post is more than a little disheartening!

I could always be a gigolo I guess....

midlouth · 26-04-2014 10:19pm

deconduo wrote: »

Sounds pretty similar to where I am now. Myself and 3 others from a conversion course got placement as interns in January. Just a little over 2 months later, we've all been offered permanent contracts. They could have easily saved the money, and waited until the end of the 6 month internship before offering us a position.

We also have regular meetings about career paths and progression, and the management are genuinely interested in helping us do well. I'm really enjoying working there, and it does feel like I've fallen on my feet.

Lucky you....finished a conversion course in January but struggling to get a call for an interview never mind a job offer. Really just hoping patience gets me through until I find something, along with attending some workshops to keep me busy.

Tar.Aldarion · 26-04-2014 10:21pm

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I saw one spelling mistake in one of our directories and i'm still annoyed about it :pac:
As for OPs question of being too old, i know somebody in their 30s that started..and somebody in their 40s. Both happily working away in it now.
I'm not sure what the salary cap for s/w developers is but i guess you have to focus on adding non-common value to your skill set at that stage.

MagicMarker. Dont worry about it if it is what you want to do, none of this age crap, sure you might be starting off as a grad but you are 30 ffs! Good luck

The people above did a masters with me btw and wouldnt have known too much before, just worked their ass off and asked for help a lot.

zig · 26-04-2014 10:43pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well, speaking as a 30 year old who will be returning to education this year in a bid to move in to Development, this post is more than a little disheartening!

I could always be a gigolo I guess....

I started at 29 (developer not gigolo) and didnt have any issues. Dont be disheartened!

thewheel2.0 · 27-04-2014 1:03am

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well, speaking as a 30 year old who will be returning to education this year in a bid to move in to Development, this post is more than a little disheartening!

I could always be a gigolo I guess....

I know mature students in your situation that both have a job before graduation and haven't had a call at all. The difference is the students that worked their asses off then graduated with a first class honors got the call, however, the guys that made excuses because they are mature students didn't.

If you put everything you have into your degree, showing a genuine interest and have the personality for the interview, you will get a job. Especially if you are willing to relocate to the job. If you use the fact that you are a mature student as a crutch instead of motivation, expect to fail. Talent is talent.

Good luck with it

bogwalrus · 27-04-2014 1:24am

Great to see this thread. I am 29 and applied to do a degree in SD to hopefully have some solid employment for the future.

I would be one of those who would like to project manage with the technical background. I have project managed a few art projects and recently managed a development team to build me an app and I really enjoy that position.

I hope to work hard and get this degree so that I could eventually manage a team of developers for some company.

Of course it won't happen straight away but SD really seems to be the best career choice for the future.

beauf · 27-04-2014 1:52am

thewheel2.0 wrote: »

I know mature students in your situation that both have a job before graduation and haven't had a call at all. The difference is the students that worked their asses off then graduated with a first class honors got the call, however, the guys that made excuses because they are mature students didn't.

If you put everything you have into your degree, showing a genuine interest and have the personality for the interview, you will get a job. Especially if you are willing to relocate to the job. If you use the fact that you are a mature student as a crutch instead of motivation, expect to fail. Talent is talent.

Good luck with it

You're kinda talking about something entirely different. The highest qualified person doesn't always get the job. It might seem like that in college but RL doesn't work out like that. But you're right in that its obviously a major advantage to be the best qualified person in the room. But IMO I don't think this thread is about that.

A career change when you are 30 or 40 is a different thing entirely from when you are 22 and leaving college. When I was contracting, you might be competing with 400 people for a role based on the main skillsets. But if they are looking for a specific skill, or experience in business, IT, maturity etc, you're probably competing with 10 or so.

If you're writing software and you have a guy with no experience, vs a guy who's worked in that industry (but not in IT), they will have a wealth of industry and business knowledge that is of considerable value.

Thats not to ignore that some places just want the 22yr old coder with the best grades. Thats just life.

Software Development a Dead-End Career?

Comments