Would becoming an architect limit freelance or contract opportunities?

Would becoming an architect role limit freelance or contract opportunities?

From my experience, if you are a more hands-on, it is easier to find freelance and contract opportunities. The term architect is also a bit blurred. As a lead developer/senior developer one can still be involved in many of the key design decisions. This can give many the best of both worlds without having to get too involved with the politics, too many meetings and documents that many dislike

.

It sounds like your post is implying an architect can't be hands on. Many of the bests architects are hands on too. I am the architect on my team and I still code regularly. Granted it isn't every day. But I code at least three days a week. And the days I don't code, I am mentoring someone or doing design or the like. Or pair programming - but that is coding. Just on someone else's task. All technical skills.

I think it is important for an architect. It helps with respect and avoids "ivory tower" architect syndrome.

I am not implying that at all. From my observation, in larger organizations, it is harder to stay hands on. Smaller to medium size organizations are more conducive to stay hands-on. It also depends on what type of architect you are.

arulk pillai wrote:I am not implying that at all. From my observation, in larger organizations, it is harder to stay hands on. Smaller to medium size organizations are more conducive to stay hands-on. It also depends on what type of architect you are.

I work in a large organization (over 100 developers.) There are about 10 developers on my team.

You raise an interesting point though. Why does it become hard to stay hands on? What do you do that competes with that?

Hi Jeanne,
Here in India being an Architect takes away your hands-on opportunities. This is true at least for Service based companies. Not sure about Product ones as never got a chance to work there.
I too have observed while I was in US till last year I used do both lead developer along with solution design but in this part of world it is different.
Its good to know that you still can do hands-on alongwith leading 10 member team.

What do you do that competes with that?

At least here in India you end up doing lot of People Mgmt and that certainly leaves a very little time if you want to do hands-on.

Regards,.
Amit

amit punekar wrote:Hi Jeanne,
Here in India being an Architect takes away your hands-on opportunities. This is true at least for Service based companies. Not sure about Product ones as never got a chance to work there.
I too have observed while I was in US till last year I used do both lead developer along with solution design but in this part of world it is different.
Its good to know that you still can do hands-on alongwith leading 10 member team.

What do you do that competes with that?

At least here in India you end up doing lot of People Mgmt and that certainly leaves a very little time if you want to do hands-on.

Regards,.
Amit

I have seen this to be very common in Indian IT firms as more and more technical guys with years of experience move towards management kind of a profile and once they do it for a copuple of years, most of them never like to look back at the technical roles.

Also, as a freelancer or a contractor, there are more development jobs than architect jobs. If you choose your contracts carefully, you don't need the title as an architect. You could take up a contract as a lead developer, and soon convince your peers and superiors to assume more responsibility as an architect.

amit punekar wrote:At least here in India you end up doing lot of People Mgmt and that certainly leaves a very little time if you want to do hands-on.

I agree it is virtually impossible to be a people manager and have time to code. Where I work, I mentor but don't manage people.

I agree with the above that if you want to code (vs manage) and it isn't an option to be a hands-on architect, that there is nothing wrong with staying a developer.

Where I work, I mentor but don't manage people.

Exactly. That is what we do not get a chance to do. We are asked to be mentor as well as produce the design and manage delivery.

Glad that I became part of this discussion. I think one needs to make clear while accepting the appointment that one would mentor but not manage people and their tasks..Thats horrible for a person like me who wants to be handson and progress in the technical stream.

Regards,
Amit

Managing people's tasks is an interesting phrase. I could argue that I both do and don't do that. I am involved when people are working on a task for me in monitoring/providing guidance. But I have someone I can go to if things aren't going well. Whereas the supervisor is responsible for the person overall.