4 ms·

Consider consulting. I like the variety of roles, and changing clients periodically keeps things fresh and exposes me to a lot of technology. I prefer working f

Consider consulting. I like the variety of roles, and changing clients periodically keeps things fresh and exposes me to a lot of technology. I prefer working for a company so I don't have to find my own clients, and get benefits and a steady paycheck. If you can manage your own network, you can potentially earn more, but it's a lot of work finding a steady stream of clients on your own.

anonytrary 6y ago
People are finally starting to realize that benefits are orthogonal to the mission of the company and should be replaced with increased base salaries instead. If the company spends $X on processing your $Y benefit for a year, your salary would increase by $X + $Y, and you would just (optionally) sign up into whatever programs are available to you, without much of a UX change.
- soroboros 6y ago
  I'm no expert, but I have a hard time believing the economics are this simple. Take health insurance: I'd imagine employers are buying plans offering per-employee costs lower than if each employee were paying for their own insurance. Economies of scale, bargaining power (at least when it comes to larger firms), etc. Perhaps at some firms the processing costs really do outweigh the savings, but I would expect this to be the exception rather than the rule. I could be wrong -- maybe someone with experience could shed some light here.
  - dboreham 6y ago
    Not saying you're wrong but the costs to maintain health insurance for employees are significant. You at least need to have a person on staff who understands health insurance in order to negotiate with carriers. The subject is about as complex as a C compiler.
  - muzani 6y ago
    None of the companies I've worked for offered a decent insurance plan. One had it, but it was more for the other 300 minimum wage workers and practically covered nothing other than car accidents. There were companies that offered full, proper health insurance, but I had my own so the value was close to nil, and the salaries were 25% lower than the smaller companies offered. Benefits tend to be mostly flat across employees to make use of economics of scale. I'd love something like a company car, and would happily take a salary cut because they're liabilities and it's a win-win where taxes are involved. But if a company won't offer a car to everyone, it's not going to happen. I got free parking as a benefit once but only used it a quarter of the month because it was cheaper to Uber to work. I know they were paying for the parking every month and I'd rather take the cash, but I wouldn't turn down an extra $30 of savings even though it cost them about $100.
    - anonytrary 6y ago
      This is another great point. When the employer controls benefits, they choose an average/bulk/bundled solution which may not cater to the needs of all employees. It is improbable to be completely inclusive. Better to give every employee a static dollar amount and let them choose exactly what works for them from a competitive marketplace. In my opinion, we should do whatever maximizes product-market fit.
  - anonytrary 6y ago
    I'm not sure if the option is worth the increased cost either, but at a glance it seems convoluted. Why is the employer even involved? Is there a reason private companies could not utilize the economy of scale and provide solutions? Why did this become a threesome? Insurance should be between me and my insurer.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
el_benhameen 6y ago
I hope this isn't too direct, but do you find that the pay is acceptable/comparable to non-consulting roles?
- nlh 6y ago
  Not OP, but for me, consulting has vastly outpaced pay for non-consulting roles. I’m not planning to go back to W2 again.
- caymanjim 6y ago
  I typically work as a salaried W2 consultant with full benefits, paid vacation, etc. I give up a lot of my hourly rate for this, but my W2 salary as a consultant is comparable to the W2 salaries I get offered for normal employment, as are all the benefits. I don't get stock options or client bonuses, but often get some form of profit sharing on the consulting side. I've been burned by enough failed startups or already-established companies whose stock stalls that I don't miss playing the equity lottery; I just want a good paycheck and I'll invest it how I please. My two highest salaries were working for a consulting company, although I've turned down much larger offers for non-consulting roles because I didn't want to be tied to the same job for years.
tarsinge 6y ago
As a generalist I also found consulting to be a good fit for me. Also good if you easily get bored because you are usually not tied to a product and get to work with different teams and clients every few months.
stevenhubertron 6y ago
Everything I have heard about consulting is the hours and the travel are brutal if you have a family. Gone 6-9 months of every 12 would be a long time to be away from my children. Is that your experience?
- disgruntledphd2 6y ago
  You don't want to work for a consulting company (i.e Accenture, KPMG etc), you want to be a consultant. For the first type of role, you're essentially hired help to solve non-technical problems in broken well-capitalised businesses, whereas in the second you're hired individually for your own skills. The second type are normally much more flexible with respect to remote and lack of travelling.
- caymanjim 6y ago
  Depends on what kind of consulting company you work for. The ones I work for historically only engage with long-term local clients. I normal embed with client teams, full-time, at the client office. With covid, everything is remote, probably forever, so that will change, but I'm still effectively embedding with client teams. It's like being a normal full-timer, but I get to change jobs ever 6-24 months.
biolurker1 6y ago
how do you brand and market yourself as a consultant? that is probably a different skillset and a project on its own

anonytrary 6y ago

People are finally starting to realize that benefits are orthogonal to the mission of the company and should be replaced with increased base salaries instead. If the company spends $X on processing your $Y benefit for a year, your salary would increase by $X + $Y, and you would just (optionally) sign up into whatever programs are available to you, without much of a UX change.

soroboros 6y ago
I'm no expert, but I have a hard time believing the economics are this simple. Take health insurance: I'd imagine employers are buying plans offering per-employee costs lower than if each employee were paying for their own insurance. Economies of scale, bargaining power (at least when it comes to larger firms), etc. Perhaps at some firms the processing costs really do outweigh the savings, but I would expect this to be the exception rather than the rule. I could be wrong -- maybe someone with experience could shed some light here.
- dboreham 6y ago
  Not saying you're wrong but the costs to maintain health insurance for employees are significant. You at least need to have a person on staff who understands health insurance in order to negotiate with carriers. The subject is about as complex as a C compiler.
- muzani 6y ago
  None of the companies I've worked for offered a decent insurance plan. One had it, but it was more for the other 300 minimum wage workers and practically covered nothing other than car accidents. There were companies that offered full, proper health insurance, but I had my own so the value was close to nil, and the salaries were 25% lower than the smaller companies offered. Benefits tend to be mostly flat across employees to make use of economics of scale. I'd love something like a company car, and would happily take a salary cut because they're liabilities and it's a win-win where taxes are involved. But if a company won't offer a car to everyone, it's not going to happen. I got free parking as a benefit once but only used it a quarter of the month because it was cheaper to Uber to work. I know they were paying for the parking every month and I'd rather take the cash, but I wouldn't turn down an extra $30 of savings even though it cost them about $100.
  - anonytrary 6y ago
    This is another great point. When the employer controls benefits, they choose an average/bulk/bundled solution which may not cater to the needs of all employees. It is improbable to be completely inclusive. Better to give every employee a static dollar amount and let them choose exactly what works for them from a competitive marketplace. In my opinion, we should do whatever maximizes product-market fit.
- anonytrary 6y ago
  I'm not sure if the option is worth the increased cost either, but at a glance it seems convoluted. Why is the employer even involved? Is there a reason private companies could not utilize the economy of scale and provide solutions? Why did this become a threesome? Insurance should be between me and my insurer.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

el_benhameen 6y ago

I hope this isn't too direct, but do you find that the pay is acceptable/comparable to non-consulting roles?

nlh 6y ago
Not OP, but for me, consulting has vastly outpaced pay for non-consulting roles. I’m not planning to go back to W2 again.
caymanjim 6y ago
I typically work as a salaried W2 consultant with full benefits, paid vacation, etc. I give up a lot of my hourly rate for this, but my W2 salary as a consultant is comparable to the W2 salaries I get offered for normal employment, as are all the benefits. I don't get stock options or client bonuses, but often get some form of profit sharing on the consulting side. I've been burned by enough failed startups or already-established companies whose stock stalls that I don't miss playing the equity lottery; I just want a good paycheck and I'll invest it how I please. My two highest salaries were working for a consulting company, although I've turned down much larger offers for non-consulting roles because I didn't want to be tied to the same job for years.

tarsinge 6y ago

As a generalist I also found consulting to be a good fit for me. Also good if you easily get bored because you are usually not tied to a product and get to work with different teams and clients every few months.

stevenhubertron 6y ago

Everything I have heard about consulting is the hours and the travel are brutal if you have a family. Gone 6-9 months of every 12 would be a long time to be away from my children. Is that your experience?

disgruntledphd2 6y ago
You don't want to work for a consulting company (i.e Accenture, KPMG etc), you want to be a consultant. For the first type of role, you're essentially hired help to solve non-technical problems in broken well-capitalised businesses, whereas in the second you're hired individually for your own skills. The second type are normally much more flexible with respect to remote and lack of travelling.
caymanjim 6y ago
Depends on what kind of consulting company you work for. The ones I work for historically only engage with long-term local clients. I normal embed with client teams, full-time, at the client office. With covid, everything is remote, probably forever, so that will change, but I'm still effectively embedding with client teams. It's like being a normal full-timer, but I get to change jobs ever 6-24 months.

biolurker1 6y ago

how do you brand and market yourself as a consultant? that is probably a different skillset and a project on its own