George LewisProgram/Project Manager| DXC Technology CompanyHeredia, Costa Rica
Aug 20, 2018 10:20 AM
Replying to Vivek Bhatia
...
It's all dependent on your desired bill rate/salary, and how much industry expertise you have.
If you're not technical,you better have deep knowledge about a given industry.
IE, health care is highly regulated, tons of nuances. And the technical side has to address that. If you don't know the business well, and you're not technical, you're going to be little more than a secretary making secretarial rates.
Here's my example bill rates for 1) health care, 2)northern california, 3)contractor, not consulting. These are hourly, zero benefits, zero job protection. Either 1099 or corp-to-corp. This is out the door, agencies keep between 20%-50% (Scammier ones take more, but tons of scammy ones). If you have connections, you can either ink the contract yourself or go in via buddies who typically only ask for $10/hour to cover administrative expenses.
If you are neither technical nor business, companies might pay might $50/hour. If you can even get a job. They'll probably just promote a non-PM from within who's proven to be good at organizational skills.
If you're only technical companies pay $75-$120/hour based on your seniority level. But you're not uniquely valuable to the sector, so you'll have a ceiling.
If you're only business companies pay $90-$135/hour as there are fewer of you. Can't take a retail or finance PM and put them in healthcare at a senior level, given the lack of industry expertise.
If you're technical *and* know healthcare companies pay $125-$190/hour. Highest end reserved for those who know multiple fronts in health care (physicians, hospitals, insurance).
Consultants, aka those who come in to guide them to a better place vs contractors who purely execute, are $155-$240/hour at 40 hour weeks. Shorter term contracts or 40 hour weeks go to the higher end.
Vivek - interesting data, lead me read it carefully to understand it better! Saving Changes...
George LewisProgram/Project Manager| DXC Technology CompanyHeredia, Costa Rica
Aug 20, 2018 9:32 AM
Replying to Tom Maffei
...
When I took the course for the PMP exam the instructor was pretty adamant that a PM should have "years of experience as an engineer" and people in the PM world should be well versed in the technical nature of the projects. I fully get why he thought this way and it makes sense. But I fully agree there are exceptions. Also, just so everyone is aware, not ever engineer could be a PM.
Tom - so what's your point exactly? must a PM be fully, partial, or non technical? Saving Changes...
Tom MaffeiConsulting Manager: Technology and Delivery| RedaptCumming, Ga, United States
Aug 20, 2018 10:58 AM
Replying to George Lewis
...
Are we saying that for us to manage a project, we have to understand the technical aspects of it fully?
This is an exciting topic because I thought that a PM did not have to understand the full technical aspect and be a "master" in project management processes and procedures. And not the other way around.
Fully? No.
But the teacher I had in the PMP class gave the perception that the PM should have done the technical type work in the past. One reason is so he or she could call out a line of BS from the engineers. Another was the PM role is a "promotion" for engineers that want to move on to something with more responsibility and requiring managerial skills. Again this was his opinion. But I understand why he feels this way.
...
1 reply by Adrian Carlogea
Aug 20, 2018 4:47 PM
Adrian Carlogea
...
I strongly agree with that teacher. No matter what people may say leading a group of people at work means providing technical direction to them. If you are non-technical then you can't do this and you can't be a real leader.
In IT many companies hire PMs straight from the University. Freshly graduates with no work experience in anything can be accepted in project management internships and in 1 or 2 years they can become PMs. Well PMs in title because in practice they would hold junior paper pusher roles. They would keep the projects documents up-to-date, schedule meetings, take meeting notes, track, report, etc but never lead.
It has become quite common in IT to have many project team members more senior and at a higher pay than the PM. These non-technical PMs are generally regarded as individual contributors and not real managers. And it is not a matter of weak matrix or functional organization is a matter of lack of skills and experience to lead people.
Saving Changes...
Anish AbrahamPrivacy Program Manager| University of WashingtonAuburn, Wa, United States
Like my colleagues mentioned, it depends on the role. In my case, my employer expect me to be an expert in my domain, as will as various IT technologies. Saving Changes...
A PM can range from technical to completely non-technical. I've seen a few job postings for PMs that specifically mention that the candidates need to be non-technical.
It's hard for me to believe that those jobs specifically ask for the candidate to be non-technical. Yes many jobs say that technical background is not required but I think it is foolish to reject a candidate just because he is also technical.
I mean if a candidate has very good project management skills and is a perfect match for the job would you reject him just because he also has some additional skills that are not required? In my opinion you have to be stupid to do such a thing. Yes don't take into account the technical skills but don't penalize the candidate if he has those skills. Just ignore them. Saving Changes...
But the teacher I had in the PMP class gave the perception that the PM should have done the technical type work in the past. One reason is so he or she could call out a line of BS from the engineers. Another was the PM role is a "promotion" for engineers that want to move on to something with more responsibility and requiring managerial skills. Again this was his opinion. But I understand why he feels this way.
I strongly agree with that teacher. No matter what people may say leading a group of people at work means providing technical direction to them. If you are non-technical then you can't do this and you can't be a real leader.
In IT many companies hire PMs straight from the University. Freshly graduates with no work experience in anything can be accepted in project management internships and in 1 or 2 years they can become PMs. Well PMs in title because in practice they would hold junior paper pusher roles. They would keep the projects documents up-to-date, schedule meetings, take meeting notes, track, report, etc but never lead.
It has become quite common in IT to have many project team members more senior and at a higher pay than the PM. These non-technical PMs are generally regarded as individual contributors and not real managers. And it is not a matter of weak matrix or functional organization is a matter of lack of skills and experience to lead people. Saving Changes...
George LewisProgram/Project Manager| DXC Technology CompanyHeredia, Costa Rica
Any more comments? Saving Changes...
Vivek BhatiaPrincipal| The Bhatia GroupOakland, Ca, United States
The reason I think a PM overseeing a large project with a technical component *must* be somewhat technical is that otherwise it's easy to snow him, or worse, the IT people to follow directions but not realize that the business would be willing to get 80% of the solution in 20% of the time.
I have many examples, but one stands out: I was brought in to help a multi-billion dollar company get their eCommerce back on track, it was woefully inadequate. I was the overall project driver, had a dedicated IT PM working fulltime for me, and a biz "architect"/lead. I reported into the business side, not IT. But, i've been both a DBA and a hardcore programmer, only went into mgmt at age 27.
I was regularly in rooms with 2 SVPs of business, CIO, and others. I was a director level PM, a mere peon in comparison. Everyone was generally terrified of them given their level. The 2 biz SVPs oversaw $4B of revenue just in their groups.
Once the SVPs both asked if they could do X. The IT architect and CIO were about to respond when I jumped in and said "Stop don't respond. (SVPs): The only thing worse than IT saying they can't do X is them saying they can. The request as phrased is doable but I don't think that's what you really want. All you really need is Y to accomplish goals, right? I'll bet they can do that in a third of the time."
I then let the techies respond. And sure enough I was dead on correct, both paths doable, one far faster. The CIO pulled me and SVPs aside later to thank me as historically they'd have done X, but getting Y instead saved money, time to market.
I've had that happen on nearly every single project, including the last one I ran. Being conversant in both biz & IT adds value in a way that A)spotlights your skills, and B)gets you phenomenal recommendations and/or more money. Saving Changes...
Vivek BhatiaPrincipal| The Bhatia GroupOakland, Ca, United States
btw, it also helps facilitate tough biz/IT meetings. You can all but bark out orders to the traditionally pigheaded IT guys, and they know they can't snow you. On my last gig I had to personally get involved in several areas despite having 3 IT PMs work for me, as I was far more technical. I could say things like "seriously dude, all we need is for you to create a bash script and set up a cron job or whatever program you're using. Stop making this harder than it is. Give me the root password and I can do it."
Said that with the traditionally straight laced CIO in the room once, he chuckled and told the IT people that they need to either get it done within the next few hours or give me the passwords so I could do it. Guess which one they picked. Saving Changes...
