Quote:
Originally Posted by bochng0001
Thank you for all the replies in this thread so far. It has been tremendously helpful for someone like me (haven't worked long enough to understand the ins and outs of career advancement).
But I think I've worked long enough to see that if I get stuck in a technical role, I'm not really going to get anywhere from a salary/influence standpoint. So I'm interested in reading and hearing the journeys of people who have made the transition into management from a technical position, and what they did to get there.
|
Interesting post. I myself am almost in the same situation as the TS. ~30 years, drawing about the same, interested but don't know what it's like in management.
Just my thoughts. I see management as scalability. One person can only do so much in 9 hours / day. But if you managed 5 people, then you're in charge of the output of 5 * 9 hours / day. Perhaps an idea needs 45 man hours / day to execute, hence a manager who can lead 5 people.
However, in my field of quant fiance, scalability comes in different forms - you can utilize 5 computers to perform a big task, you can increase your investment sizes by allocating more capital. Put differently, more computers and / or more capital achieves the scalability in this domain.
My question to TS: as you are in a technical role, are there opportunities of scalability that doesn't require you to manage people? For example, could you assign more machines to a production line? But I get what you mean. At times, I just wish to interact with people to achieve a goal. Rather than synchronized computers.