IT Project Manager or Project Manager II, Information Technology
Albert AharonianProject Manager - Information Systems| LibertyGeorgetown, Ontario, Canada
Recently our organization has decided to rework the existing titles for various departments and has suggested changing my title from IT Project Manager to Project Manager II, Information Technology. How would you perceive this change? Positive or negative? I see so many interpretations of Project Manager I/II/III on the web that I'm not sure this is something I should accept or challenge. Thoughts? Saving Changes...
Job titles are really only relevant at your current employer. Numbered grade levels in a job classification are pretty common. Sure, PM II will mean different things at different employers, but so do titles like PM, Senior PM, Technical PM, IT PM, etc.
When it comes to changing employers, many resume experts will tell you not to bother with job titles because they don't add anything for that reason. The responsibilities and achievements are where you want to focus. Saving Changes...
Albert AharonianProject Manager - Information Systems| LibertyGeorgetown, Ontario, Canada
Thanks for the reply. As a former hiring manager, I completely agree. Your point about what it means to the organization is important because it could have impact on career path at the organization. Otherwise, yes accomplishments will always be more meaningful on a resume.
...
1 reply by Keith Novak
Mar 28, 2022 3:37 PM
Keith Novak
...
Yes, understood regarding to the internal career path. I was not thinking about that as much.
When I was at a large firm where they changed the classification system in a way that sounds very similar to yours. There was a lot of discussion regarding how one skill group mapped to the new skill groups since it was not a 1:1 change, since some might have been combined, or divided into separate classifications.
The two biggest areas of concern were ensuring that people were assigned to the appropriate skill and level based on their qualifications, and the pay ranges for the skill levels. It worked out better for some than others. If you were assigned to the lower pay-scale end of a skill level, you were more likely to get a larger raise to put you more on par with your peers. If you were at the top such as a 2 that could be a 3, then you were likely to get smaller raises unless you could get a promotion.
How well people fared in that depending a lot on their immediate manager and how well they represented you in negotiations with the other managers. Another issue might be if the IT PM group was typically higher paid then other PMs, and everyone gets lumped together.
Saving Changes...
Stephanie SyMarketing| Software TestedWi, United States
How have you improved project management processes at your current firm? Saving Changes...
I'd see it as a positive as "IT Project Manager" puts "IT" first and foremost which might create perceptions that you are just a techie, and without a qualifier on the senior of the PM in that title, a hiring manager could assume you are an entry level practitioner.
By calling the role PM II, IT, they are effectively putting the "PM" first, and implying that you are at least one step above an entry-level role.
However, this is merely a case of "a rose by any other name".
Focus on highlighting your accomplishments and strengths in your CV and that will carry more weight than the specific job title you held.
Thanks for the reply. As a former hiring manager, I completely agree. Your point about what it means to the organization is important because it could have impact on career path at the organization. Otherwise, yes accomplishments will always be more meaningful on a resume.
Yes, understood regarding to the internal career path. I was not thinking about that as much.
When I was at a large firm where they changed the classification system in a way that sounds very similar to yours. There was a lot of discussion regarding how one skill group mapped to the new skill groups since it was not a 1:1 change, since some might have been combined, or divided into separate classifications.
The two biggest areas of concern were ensuring that people were assigned to the appropriate skill and level based on their qualifications, and the pay ranges for the skill levels. It worked out better for some than others. If you were assigned to the lower pay-scale end of a skill level, you were more likely to get a larger raise to put you more on par with your peers. If you were at the top such as a 2 that could be a 3, then you were likely to get smaller raises unless you could get a promotion.
How well people fared in that depending a lot on their immediate manager and how well they represented you in negotiations with the other managers. Another issue might be if the IT PM group was typically higher paid then other PMs, and everyone gets lumped together. Saving Changes...
It depends on the organizational ranking system.
Anyway, Kiron made a valid point. Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
I find that just creates more levels in the management pyramid or hierarchy. More levels means more administration, more costs, less efficiency. It also limits people (operate within your range), stifles motivation and can set up class systems. Having Project Manager as one range, albeit wider, provides greater management flexibility with less fear of over- or under-assigning. It does not mean you pay everyone the same - you still should pay on merit rather than title.
As to IT, if that's the nature of the business then it need not be said. If the company delivers more than one type of project does that mean every PM has to have a discipline attached to the title?
As far as I'm concerned project management should not be attached to a field or discipline. A PM's subject mater expertise is project management - not IT PM, Transportation PM, Civil PM, Infrastructure PM, etc., just plain Project Manager. Saving Changes...
I agree with Keith, the title is only important to the current employer. I've seen companies change titles for no other reason than to give the position more status. A title change that doesn't change responsibilities is superficial and some have changed to make it easier for the organization to understand your position. Whatever the reason your experience to a resume will speak for itself.
I've been called many things throughout my career but my accomplishments define me more than the titles held. Saving Changes...
Stéphane ParentSelf Employed / Semi-retired| Leader MakerPrince Edward Island, Canada
A title is what you make of it. Putting PM II on LinkedIn without any associated accomplishments is meaningless. Saving Changes...
Some view these types of graduated promotions as line manager roles, where specific forms of expertise are expected from the project manager over other processes. Saving Changes...
