I have a physics PhD from 30 years ago. I think it's just too hard to generalize. PhDs are still relatively few and far between, come from different discipline

I have a physics PhD from 30 years ago. I think it's just too hard to generalize. PhDs are still relatively few and far between, come from different disciplines, have different interests, strengths, weaknesses. We're not exactly children when we start a PhD program, so our trajectory is influenced by what we've already done. We come from 100 countries. An odd thing about physics is that we don't have a lot of our own tools or techniques. We're opportunists and we borrow ideas from everywhere. My thesis involved nascent laser technology, mechanics, electronics, theory, programming, data analysis, and a bit of chemistry. Historically, physicists were often the pioneering users of those things before they became branches of engineering. Today, my work still tends to be multidisciplinary. I do a lot of programming, but I've never wanted a software development job per se. I'm willing to work on problems that are ill-defined, that don't fall into anybody's field, and that might not be solvable. Almost all of my work is heavily quantitative. I interact regularly with management, customers, academics, etc. The people at my workplace who are doing that kind of stuff are, by and large, PhDs. They are not necessarily the highest paid employees -- the coders probably have us beat. What I don't know (if I were to anticipate reasonable skepticism) is whether this is a special feature of PhDs, or if we move into this role by necessity due to the lack of marketable hard skills. I don't know if any of my skills, taken in isolation, would be enough to get me a job.