Short term low rate now versus high paid better long term later

[ShandyDrinker]

If the job is right for me and interesting enough I would take it, but would go FTC rather than Ltd Co as to avoid having the administrative burden for no real financial benefit.

£350 now is worth a lot more than £500 in a number of months.

WRT IR35, the winners will be the consultancies with perm staff, as they will become comparatively cheaper compared to contractors demanding far higher rates.

An interesting comment by m0n1k3r on another thread.

I have also been a subscriber to this approach in the past but now am not so sure. While it's fine to take a lower rate to keep the money coming in, the big problem I have with this approach is that you are then expected to remain on the lower rate for a long period of time so as not to have a bad side effect on your CV.

It would appear that, particularly for city based roles, you are expected to have long term contracts on your CV and anything that looks short term can be damaging to that.

I have worked with a number of people who target only city based contracts and are prepared to wait a number of months between contracts for the right role to come along so as not to pollute their CV with what could be considered damaging short term contracts.

While in many ways I have viewed the above to be against the interests of the limited company to keep invoicing, I am coming around to thinking that the people using that approach may actually be right as it would seem that clients and agencies alike prefer to see longer term contracts on the CV, even if there are gaps.

Any views on this, one way or the other?

[northernladuk]

The contract is only as long as the notice period (or not). I'd be looking at other factors. On the high paid gig, what's the work? Major modernisation of a global bank. You can bet that's not gonna be a three monther.

What's the tech, environment, how good will it look in the CV.

There are many more considerations to make rather than rate v initial duration.

On the Cv point. Write it properly, get good format, get the words in etc. If you have been doing the same thing for decades it won't matter. If you are a two years PM, one year BA, a year SDM types you could be screwed but I'd argue you are anyway so won't make much difference

[ShandyDrinker]

The contract is only as long as the notice period (or not). I'd be looking at other factors. On the high paid gig, what's the work? Major modernisation of a global bank. You can bet that's not gonna be a three monther.

What's the tech, environment, how good will it look in the CV.

There are many more considerations to make rather than rate v initial duration.

On the Cv point. Write it properly, get good format, get the words in etc. If you have been doing the same thing for decades it won't matter. If you are a two years PM, one year BA, a year SDM types you could be screwed but I'd argue you are anyway so won't make much difference

Fair comment re the notice period. Sure, you have to look at the likelihood of the notice being used for purposes such as rate reduction, for example.

I get the impression that by asking questions such as the tech, environment and how good it will look on the CV you are advocating that you would hold out for the better project rather than taking something short term as a filler or do I misinterpret your comments?

While fundamentally I'd agree there should be many more considerations to make rather than rate v initial duration, experience is showing that many clients/agencies are making the binary decision that short term contracts=bad, long term contracts=good which is not the complete picture.

[northernladuk]

Fair comment re the notice period. Sure, you have to look at the likelihood of the notice being used for purposes such as rate reduction, for example.

There is that but I was more talking about the fact you take the longer gig and a week later you are out on your arse. There is no guarantee you'll see the end of the gig out so the length of the gig is not the most stable factor.

I get the impression that by asking questions such as the tech, environment and how good it will look on the CV you are advocating that you would hold out for the better project rather than taking something short term as a filler or do I misinterpret your comments?

Correct. You could take a long term gig implementing Lotus Notes at a company or take a short term one working with cutting edge cloud etc. Your contracting career is a marathon not a race so you've got to think about how each gig is going to set you up for the next one.

A rather extreme example is sitting on my desk right now. I've got a CV from a guy where his last gigs have been PMO, Service Analyst, Service Delivery and a PM and he's looking at a Service Transition position. If he get's it what's he going to do for the next one? Just try plumping for anything he can do? He's not going to go forward with me because he's not a specialist and even if he did he's going to struggle with the next one and so on. Does he take mine because it's longer or does he take a shorter PM gig so he's got 2 back to back PM roles. I think the ability to get the next gig will change quite significantly depending on the choice he makes this time.

While fundamentally I'd agree there should be many more considerations to make rather than rate v initial duration, experience is showing that many clients/agencies are making the binary decision that short term contracts=bad, long term contracts=good which is not the complete picture.

I don't see that as I've done the same thing for a very long time so no matter if I have lots of shorter ones or a few long ones the CV still tells the agent what he wants to see. I don't see that agents take this view so not really a consideration over all the other ones I've mentioned. Could just be my experience though so will see what anyone else says.

[ShandyDrinker]

There is that but I was more talking about the fact you take the longer gig and a week later you are out on your arse. There is no guarantee you'll see the end of the gig out so the length of the gig is not the most stable factor.

Correct. You could take a long term gig implementing Lotus Notes at a company or take a short term one working with cutting edge cloud etc. Your contracting career is a marathon not a race so you've got to think about how each gig is going to set you up for the next one.

A rather extreme example is sitting on my desk right now. I've got a CV from a guy where his last gigs have been PMO, Service Analyst, Service Delivery and a PM and he's looking at a Service Transition position. If he get's it what's he going to do for the next one? Just try plumping for anything he can do? He's not going to go forward with me because he's not a specialist and even if he did he's going to struggle with the next one and so on. Does he take mine because it's longer or does he take a shorter PM gig so he's got 2 back to back PM roles. I think the ability to get the next gig will change quite significantly depending on the choice he makes this time.

I don't see that as I've done the same thing for a very long time so no matter if I have lots of shorter ones or a few long ones the CV still tells the agent what he wants to see. I don't see that agents take this view so not really a consideration over all the other ones I've mentioned. Could just be my experience though so will see what anyone else says.

Some helpful comments so thanks for those.

Again, perhaps my interpretation but the theme I see running through your post is one of consistency and by that I mean you should choose your niche and stick to it hence your point about the CV with the person not being a specialist. I accept this could be seen as a problem with my CV as over the last 15 years or so worked on both desktop and web development, with a healthy amount of business intelligence thrown in for good measure. As a contractor I have swapped between these disciplines as and when the need arises but perhaps that does hurt me more these days than I had given credit for.

For me this then raises another important question. Is telling a concentrating on a niche all important? Perhaps it's just another way of saying should you be a specialist or a generalist?

While I'm sure many on here will say being a specialist is all important - sometimes a consultant is brought in because they do have a broad ranging background and would be perfect for the project they have planned.

[SueEllen]

A rather extreme example is sitting on my desk right now. I've got a CV from a guy where his last gigs have been PMO, Service Analyst, Service Delivery and a PM and he's looking at a Service Transition position. If he get's it what's he going to do for the next one? Just try plumping for anything he can do? He's not going to go forward with me because he's not a specialist and even if he did he's going to struggle with the next one and so on. Does he take mine because it's longer or does he take a shorter PM gig so he's got 2 back to back PM roles. I think the ability to get the next gig will change quite significantly depending on the choice he makes this time.

The guy needs to learn how to write a CV. If his roles involve doing the same thing he needs to make that much clearer.

[SueEllen]

Again, perhaps my interpretation but the theme I see running through your post is one of consistency and by that I mean you should choose your niche and stick to it hence your point about the CV with the person not being a specialist. I accept this could be seen as a problem with my CV as over the last 15 years or so worked on both desktop and web development, with a healthy amount of business intelligence thrown in for good measure. As a contractor I have swapped between these disciplines as and when the need arises but perhaps that does hurt me more these days than I had given credit for.

Are you using the same or very similar technology stacks in your different roles? Then no it won't hurt you.

The problem comes when you are selling more soft-skills, and the role objectives and delivery changes dramatically.

[northernladuk]

The guy needs to learn how to write a CV. If his roles involve doing the same thing he needs to make that much clearer.

They weren't though. He's just a generalist taking any gig he can get. Not sure how he's managed so far to be honest.

[northernladuk]

Some helpful comments so thanks for those.

Again, perhaps my interpretation but the theme I see running through your post is one of consistency and by that I mean you should choose your niche and stick to it hence your point about the CV with the person not being a specialist. I accept this could be seen as a problem with my CV as over the last 15 years or so worked on both desktop and web development, with a healthy amount of business intelligence thrown in for good measure. As a contractor I have swapped between these disciplines as and when the need arises but perhaps that does hurt me more these days than I had given credit for.

For me this then raises another important question. Is telling a concentrating on a niche all important? Perhaps it's just another way of saying should you be a specialist or a generalist?

While I'm sure many on here will say being a specialist is all important - sometimes a consultant is brought in because they do have a broad ranging background and would be perfect for the project they have planned.

But a consultant will know and have experience on how to deliver that consultancy. He will know enough about other stuff to aid his delivery. Doing 5 different roles on the past does not mean you can consult.

I don't get generalists in contracting and can't understand how they get their gig's TBH, just like the guy in my example. There are so many others with much more experience so surely get passed over so maybe I'm not the one to give positive advice on what a generalist should do.

Edit : excluding those that have 10s of years of experience. It becomes more plausible. I'm talking those that have 2 or less years in each of all sorts.

[ShandyDrinker]

Are you using the same or very similar technology stacks in your different roles? Then no it won't hurt you.

The problem comes when you are selling more soft-skills, and the role objectives and delivery changes dramatically.

All tends to be around the same Microsoft .Net technology stack, typically with C#/SQL Server as the development language and database platform of choice but also working around other technologies such as various javascript frameworks (such as AngularJS).

Can you expand more on the highlighted point?