5 ms·
There are also "code adjacent" jobs. Aside from a few weeks training on an unrelated Masters I'm IT-unqualified, but got a job with an IT company making softwa
by goldcd 4y ago
There are also "code adjacent" jobs.
Aside from a few weeks training on an unrelated Masters I'm IT-unqualified, but got a job with an IT company making software for an industry. I started out coding, but knew I was never going to be great at it - although it can be really satisfying to make something 'elegant' that's yours.
Then moved into a more customer-facing role, trying to capture what they wanted the software to do. Learnt elegance was maybe of less importance, than solving real world problems.
Then moved into Product Management, which was maybe the first time I felt a 'good fit'. Gave me the opportunity to come up with 'big vague ideas/themes', and defer the implementation to the architects and devs who were actually good at the job.
You try to break it down into consumable chunks - but it's on you to make it all come together.
Final thought is just that even outside of dev, I now realize there's a massive spectrum of people within it. Some want you to absolutely nail-down the down criteria and will deliver against it. Others want to understand why, and if you can explain it relatively succinctly, will come back with suggestions on how stuff can be improved.
I guess my point is that excellent coders are required - but the "rockstar coder trope" overlooks the vast majority of people working in IT.
e.g. If you've say spent a decade serving food in or running a restaurant, you've got a way better understanding of what the requirements of a POS system are, than the people creating it.
If you want to move to IT, you need to learn the vocab and grammar, but you don't have to be fluent - bring in your experience. IT can only solve an understood problem, and being able to articulate that is a prerequisite to a solution.
- leesec 4y agoDefinitely. There needs to be QA's and Designers and PM's and all sorts of roles within tech. Even having a little technical experience in some of these roles will be a big advantage.
- abledon 4y agodo you think Product Management works harder than devs from what you see?
- goldcd 4y agoI can only speak for myself, but I think the answer is "No.. sortof.. it depends.. maybe?" Writing an epic and a dozen US is definitely a lot quicker for one person to do, than it is for a team to implement it. So from that side, PM does a lot less work. Plus there's dev work like platform architecture, upgrading, platform, change management, automated test-cases etc, that I don't even have to think about. There's a massive multiplier there. Maybe 1 day a week writing requirements can keep a team busy and another day for answering questions, sprint ceremonies etc (story review, signing off demos) - but I'd say less than half my time is dealing with the actual productive work. Dev team just functions on 2-week sprints and the commitments they've given - so hard for it to go too-sideways, and they're safely insulated. Majority of my time goes on the "meta-work" - trying to manage what goes into those sprints. Customer requirements/placation - they don't (and shouldn't) have to give a toss about our internal sprints - so somebody has to ensure they'll be happy/not-going-to-sue in 18 months. Also the budget side is a complete Pain-in-the-arse. Your Agile trainer imagines there's some single pot of money to splash about however you choose to spend most efficiently. Reality is you're fighting for little top-down piles on internal accounts and then trying to fit the work you've done to them.