[Career Choice] IT in house vs Consulting Firm. Which one?

• 

  MrHyde on 15/09/2021 - 05:30

  +3

  Depends on what you would prefer job wise.

  I'm in consulting and I love the variety. Each project is different, each customer is different. You get more exposure to different things and it is more challenging with possible longer hours.

  In-house is more stable and you get to build much more long term relationship with stakeholders. You get more exposure to all aspects of the firm, especially in solution architect role - but you may be limited by the technology stack that is at that firm with little chance of exposure to other stacks.

• 

  garetz on 15/09/2021 - 05:31

  +4

  If there is only a few % difference then go for work life balance, your family will benefit.

• 

  try2bhelpful on 15/09/2021 - 06:03

  +4

  Me, I started in IT in house, went Consulting for a while, then went back in house. It depends on what you are interested in and what you are looking for. If you want variety then go consulting if you like working in a stable team then go in house. The other thing to keep in mind is “hidden” perks like long service leave and redundancy payout. I turned some of my long service leave into “leave at 1/2 pay” which gave me a really good break and a secure job when I got back. Just as I was getting to retirement age I managed to beg a redundancy which added another $100,000 plus to my retirement “fund”.

  Whatever you do isn’t set in stone. If you have a good reputation, and can demonstrate delivery, you can review your choices for the next job. I would work on getting good at the financial bits. Maybe find a mentor who is good at it and get some guidance.

  I would also talk to your partner about the option that suits them best. If you don’t set aside some time to be with your family you might find yourself with a lot of time without them. On the other hand they might be happy to not see you so often.

  Best of luck.

• 

  Indomietable on 15/09/2021 - 07:57

  +2

  As for the actual work itself, if you enjoy the technical side of IT and actually provide solutions, you should choose a consulting firm.
  In-house architect deals a lot more with the politics, resource planning, and documentation.

  The majority of in house architects that I dealt with have really bad technical skills and poor basic understanding of how things work. But most of them are people person with good people skill.

  • 

    try2bhelpful on 15/09/2021 - 07:58

    YMMV. Not my experience.

    • 

      Indomietable on 15/09/2021 - 08:11

      +1

      Sorry if I offend good in-house architect! I think it's just the nature of the job - if you are confined in one place you become expert on your own domain. When tackling something new most orgs want to take the safe route and consult with external consultant. Rinse and repeat multiple times and you get the culture, but sure YMMV.

      • 

        try2bhelpful on 15/09/2021 - 08:30

        I won’t get into the politics. Let’s just say the tide runs both ways. I’ve seen some really bad consultants as well. The fact that companies look to external consultants can show that senior management are susceptible to power point presentations.

        I think we can’t generalise about anything.

        • 

          Indomietable on 15/09/2021 - 09:22

          @try2bhelpful: There are bad consultants but generally they don't last long.
          Its good that you've dealt with senior management thats not susceptible to PowerPoint presentations, but generally they are!
          Any in-house architect that dont have to deal with politics/resource planning should count themself very lucky because generally this is not something that you can get away.

          I think we can’t generalise about anything.

          We do & We have to. It's how we learn and it's imprinted in our DNA to survive. Just because you don't experience it doesn't make it false.

          • 

            try2bhelpful on 15/09/2021 - 13:47

            @Indomietable: You started with what your experiences are, I countered with what my experiences are. You can’t say “generally” bad consultants don’t last long, but I’ve, certainly, seen ones that do. I said we shouldn’t generalise because neither of us has worked in, every, work environment and you claim a “learning experience” and we need to do this to survive. I’m not saying that your experiences are false I’m just saying that they may not be typical. If you forgive me you seem to be exhibiting the sort of behaviour seen from some Consultants. Any experience that the user experiences is invalid because the consultant “knows best”. Often consultants appeal to senior management because they run down the in house personnel and make it things look good on power point. They then cut and run once they have their money and leave it up to the in house people to try to make things work. If you look at major organisations you will see this pattern again and again.

            • 

              Icecold5000 on 16/09/2021 - 21:13

              @try2bhelpful: I worked for an outsourced service provider (not in IT) and generally the inhouse team wasn’t particularly fond of us because we were brought in to do their job that they were unable to. If they were capable of doing it why weren’t they? This was BAU stuff and other more specialised transactions they would appoint us to execute which made sense.

              • 

                try2bhelpful on 16/09/2021 - 21:55

                @Icecold5000: I don’t doubt these things happen; all I said is it can’t be generalised. I’m sure you will get plenty of tales happening in both directions. At least, with the internal people, they have some, long term, skin in the game. I’ve worked in IT, for a long time, and seen the world from both sides. My personal view is companies should keep their, overall, architecture and project managers and outsource design and delivery for specialised functions. It is important companies understand when they are being lied to and understand how to manage the costs and delivery schedule. It is when they abrogate responsibilities that you get the major blow out cockups. We used to have a saying “pitch things at the level of small children and senior management”.

                I go back to my, original, answer YMMV.

        • 

          spunkyfondue on 15/09/2021 - 11:46

          @try2bhelpful: Take my upvote for 'susceptible to power point presentations'

• 

  Quantumcat on 15/09/2021 - 08:01

  +1

  Would the consulting one mean you have to spend your time on client sites? If so don't do that. You'll miss out on building relationships with your co-workers

• 

  slow on 15/09/2021 - 08:05

  +4

  Having done both and had to make a similar decision several years ago (move from years of consulting to in-house), some of the changes I found when moving to in-house

  • much more regular hours, far less weekend and after hours work
  • less variety in the work, although I guess this would depend on the role
  • long term involvement in projects. In consulting, you tend to finish a project for a client and then pretty much wash your hands of it. In-house you are there seeing it and dealing with the consequences until you leave the company.
  • have to deal with far more work politics, also involving non IT people.
  • no pressure to bill hours and sell product / make money for the consulting company, sometimes as the expense of delivering the best result for the client. This was a biggie for me. You have more time to spend on detail and doing things well.
  • End up getting involved in things that aren't directly related to your job.

  Overall I found what I learnt in consulting I could never have learnt in-house but at this stage of my life am happy in my current in house role and wouldn't go back to consulting. Some of my colleague who have only worked in-house have very narrow fields of knowledge and experience

• 

  MoonlapseVertigo on 15/09/2021 - 08:15

  I'm in consulting. Wouldn't change it for the world. I manage my own projects, have resources, and make the decisions. My freedom and flexibility are unparalleled. If I was doing my job in-house, I would be reporting to someone who would micro-manage, constant performance reviews, meetings about meetings, clocking in at a certain time each day

  Consulting is freedom in comparison.

  Oh, and in consulting, you only really work for 9 months of the year at best. Actually more like 6 months. So you're semi-retired for half the year.

  GOOD LUCK

  • 

    dogboy on 15/09/2021 - 10:29

    +1

    I think there are many different flavours of consulting. If you are working for a consulting company then you work all year, none of this semi-retirement stuff.

    I have spent many years doing both consulting and working as a permie and I would take the in house IT role over the consulting job for the following reasons:
    - Consultants always get the crap jobs that firms don't want to do
    - Consultants usually only get called into fix problem projects and then you are out again when it is fixed and onto the next disaster project - can be very draining
    - Because companies are paying top dollar to your consultancy firm for you to be there they expect the world when you are probably getting paid less than the permanent staff you are working with at the company and getting all the worst jobs
    - Average burnout time for consultants where I worked was 2 years. Most only lasted 1 year
    - Working as a consultant can be a good way to advance your career as you get exposed to many different systems and processes + opportunity make good contacts
    - In house IT jobs are a lot more stable in terms of hours and workload
    - Can usually wear what you want for in house IT jobs where as a consultant, you will need to dress up for the part
    - Consulting sometimes felt like the worst of both worlds - you are required to work like a contractor but paid like a permie

    • 

      Indomietable on 15/09/2021 - 11:24

      Not sure what type IT role you referring to but its rare to bring an external architect to do a break-fix unless it requires a quite major redesign. ie, you call plumber when your toilet blocked not the architect.

      • 

        dogboy on 15/09/2021 - 12:53

        Not architect .. IT management consulting mainly.

• 

  flyboysyd on 15/09/2021 - 11:06

  +1

  What about option 3 - go independent contracting ?
  I find it best of both worlds really, client / project variety, nice pay and if you don't like it, just don't like it after 6-12 months find another gig.

• 

  rollin on 15/09/2021 - 12:02

  +1

  I'd go with option 1. Very similar pay, great title/position for the CV, and more importantly it could be a better work/life balance. Thats key when you have a family.