Overqualified to be a Technician, Underqualified for Project Management

Hyburnate said:
Don't have any experience in the rail side of things as the customer base I deal with is primarily SME/Education.

Regarding assistants, there isn't really a requirement for assistants in my experience, it's a one man job to fusion splice.
Click to expand...

A lot of decent ideas and advice so far. What it all seems to highlight is that I am indeed stuck in the middle.

The main aim would be to get a mid-level position in rail telecoms (or even fibre-splicing), and working on the tools would be time-limited “stage-work” to get current rail telecoms/fibre experience under my belt. There does not seem any way around this.

My inclination is to apply to more professional contractors and companies that have more of a bias towards education and professional development as they may see my degree as an asset and recognise the need to spend a brief period of time at entry-level work in order to progress to a position that reflects my age and academic qualifications.
 
Just to summarise the issues that have come up:
1. 3 career path switches is off-putting to employers.
2. My CV is seen as “too academic”.
3. I’m overqualified at degree level for an entry-level role.
4. I’m seen to be looking for a stop-gap.
5. I’m seen as too well educated for entry-level jobs e.g., pulling/installing cables = bad 'fit'.
6. I’m too old (43) for entry-level jobs that mostly younger people are doing.
7. Grad programmes > too old, not a recent grad.
8. Companies are reluctant to hire someone who’s been doing something completely different and now wants to come back at entry-level.
9. Seen as someone who won’t stick around for long.
 
OK so first of all I like your approach on here. You have collated feedback and succinctly summarised it whilst also coming across as quite articulate in some of your other posts. The way you have presented your case I can see that you probably are actually suited for the types of roles you desire. You are not a complete novice with no practical experience, and also bring a breadth of experience from different walks of life.

The problem is that you don't get to type away on a forum when trying to get your foot in the door.
Do you have any old contacts you can lean on?

There is an anecdotal example I can give you. A good friend of mine fell into a similar space in that he had a degree, did some office work, went off to study again abroad... and then a while after returning decided he wanted to become a plumber. He actually removed his degree from his CV in the end because it was difficult to get taken seriously. I'm loathe to do that sort of thing, but I guess you have to ask yourself, is a Masters in Chemistry really going to be seen as a desirable attribute for these type of roles, or will it just start raising annoying questions and getting people thinking about your motivations?

I suppose reflecting on how I review CVs (different industry) I do notice things like people who have 'randomly' jumped around between careers and it sows seeds of doubt about what their motivations are, how long will they stick it out here before getting bored and wanting to go off and try something new etc. You need to be able to project a career pathway and demonstrate that if a company invests in training you in the latest 'telecoms stuff' that that is an investment that will pay off and you won't decide it is time to teach English to Mexican kids.
 
Pablo Picasso said:
Just to summarise the issues that have come up:
1. 3 career path switches is off-putting to employers.
2. My CV is seen as “too academic”.
3. I’m overqualified at degree level for an entry-level role.
4. I’m seen to be looking for a stop-gap.
5. I’m seen as too well educated for entry-level jobs e.g., pulling/installing cables = bad 'fit'.
6. I’m too old (43) for entry-level jobs that mostly younger people are doing.
7. Grad programmes > too old, not a recent grad.
8. Companies are reluctant to hire someone who’s been doing something completely different and now wants to come back at entry-level.
9. Seen as someone who won’t stick around for long.
Click to expand...

Being 45 and just been served redundancy notice yesterday :) I can appreciate. 4 years ago I was in the same boat. Then my CV is peppered with technical ideas - drones, image processing and quantum computing (although I did manage the last one as part of a company hackathon :)).

Back then - I switched from technical side of product management to P&L product management, however after a year the CEO got the boot and everyone was made redundant as they refocused on their core company strength and not building into a new business. Leaving me with a 1 year P&L and every other job being seen as "technical" (being accountable for presales, product to operation) by recruiters that do not understand.

I took a "step down" back to technical with a larger organisation (230,000+ people) specifically for experience in the larger organisation. The role I'm in now I'm technically accountable for our 90+ people (across many disciplines including project managers, business analysts etc). My day typically revolves around financial and optimising things to make the team more successful. I am the go-to person to solve the impossible (just part of the job rather than a brag).

When I apply for the next role I can no longer apply for "technical" roles. It's more management, possibly CIO/CTO. I like product management.. but I like owning the product if I'm going to obsess about it, the customers and the people in the team. We have a senior product manager and she freely admits I can do her role too however that's not what the recruiters will see based on my "technical" job title.

So what was the purpose of that ... You're focusing on what you aren't.

You have;
* experience
* you are someone that people come to when they have nowhere else to go to solve the issue.
* I suspect that you're naturally steady given a changing environment and able to cope with that.
* Adding an self-study for project management would indicate that you're serious and you can sell that as a team management and delivery. It would demonstrate that you can plan, execute and deliver - it's also something that recruiters "understand".

I would - define a direction, ignore the past and start building towards that.
 
HangTime said:
OK so first of all I like your approach on here. You have collated feedback and succinctly summarised it whilst also coming across as quite articulate in some of your other posts. The way you have presented your case I can see that you probably are actually suited for the types of roles you desire. You are not a complete novice with no practical experience, and also bring a breadth of experience from different walks of life.

The problem is that you don't get to type away on a forum when trying to get your foot in the door.
Do you have any old contacts you can lean on?

There is an anecdotal example I can give you. A good friend of mine fell into a similar space in that he had a degree, did some office work, went off to study again abroad... and then a while after returning decided he wanted to become a plumber. He actually removed his degree from his CV in the end because it was difficult to get taken seriously. I'm loathe to do that sort of thing, but I guess you have to ask yourself, is a Masters in Chemistry really going to be seen as a desirable attribute for these type of roles, or will it just start raising annoying questions and getting people thinking about your motivations?

I suppose reflecting on how I review CVs (different industry) I do notice things like people who have 'randomly' jumped around between careers and it sows seeds of doubt about what their motivations are, how long will they stick it out here before getting bored and wanting to go off and try something new etc. You need to be able to project a career pathway and demonstrate that if a company invests in training you in the latest 'telecoms stuff' that that is an investment that will pay off and you won't decide it is time to teach English to Mexican kids.
Click to expand...

Hi Hangtime,

Thanks for giving a perspective on my summary points.

I'm actually just back from an interview with a very big UK rail organisation and got through it fairly well.
I was prepared and was able to answer most of the competency-based questions and was able to clarify the career changes well enough.

At the end of the interview, they did seem to have some reservations about my being more suitable for a tech support role rather than a technician and I countered it by explaining that the technician role was a gateway to further positions and I was more than happy to work my way up. Mid-level roles like tech-support don't come up often and usually require the technician level experience, so it still seems that entry-level roles are my best bet.
 
NickK said:
Being 45 and just been served redundancy notice yesterday :) I can appreciate. 4 years ago I was in the same boat. Then my CV is peppered with technical ideas - drones, image processing and quantum computing (although I did manage the last one as part of a company hackathon :)).

Back then - I switched from technical side of product management to P&L product management, however after a year the CEO got the boot and everyone was made redundant as they refocused on their core company strength and not building into a new business. Leaving me with a 1 year P&L and every other job being seen as "technical" (being accountable for presales, product to operation) by recruiters that do not understand.

I took a "step down" back to technical with a larger organisation (230,000+ people) specifically for experience in the larger organisation. The role I'm in now I'm technically accountable for our 90+ people (across many disciplines including project managers, business analysts etc). My day typically revolves around financial and optimising things to make the team more successful. I am the go-to person to solve the impossible (just part of the job rather than a brag).

When I apply for the next role I can no longer apply for "technical" roles. It's more management, possibly CIO/CTO. I like product management.. but I like owning the product if I'm going to obsess about it, the customers and the people in the team. We have a senior product manager and she freely admits I can do her role too however that's not what the recruiters will see based on my "technical" job title.

So what was the purpose of that ... You're focusing on what you aren't.

You have;
* experience
* you are someone that people come to when they have nowhere else to go to solve the issue.
* I suspect that you're naturally steady given a changing environment and able to cope with that.
* Adding an self-study for project management would indicate that you're serious and you can sell that as a team management and delivery. It would demonstrate that you can plan, execute and deliver - it's also something that recruiters "understand".

I would - define a direction, ignore the past and start building towards that.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, it's too easy to focus on trying to 'fix' the things that I'm not.
I am a 'go to' person which fits well with tech support roles, but I need to bridge the gap between technician and tech support level experience - something I can start building on whilst still plugging away at entry-level technician roles.
I could say the same for project management - need to start building towards that.

So, it leaves me with three options:
1) Keep applying for entry-level roles as gateway positions for a long-term career in the company.
2) Upskill technically to position myself for tech support roles
3) Upskill for project management roles.

No 1) is practically possible because I'm doing it now with various applications on the go, but no.2 and no.3 require either time self-studying or funds which I don't have. I do have some time outside of job applications though, so I can at least do a little self-study.

Project management and tech support are different directions essentially and I'd prefer tech support.
So it leaves me with continuing to apply for entry-level technician roles, any tech support roles that might be attainable and upskilling whilst working in ANY job in the meantime.
 
NickK said:
* you are someone that people come to when they have nowhere else to go to solve the issue.
* I suspect that you're naturally steady given a changing environment and able to cope with that.
* Adding an self-study for project management would indicate that you're serious and you can sell that as a team management and delivery. It would demonstrate that you can plan, execute and deliver - it's also something that recruiters "understand".
Click to expand...

Hi Nick, and just to add, you hit the same point the interviewer noticed today: he said, I'd be ideal as the tech support guy that people came to to solve impossible problems - I just wish I could solve this one!
 
Its a tough one, im almost in the same boat - but its about being patient and finding the right employer\recruiter. One employer says im worth 20k, one says 38k, one says "get this certificate" and youre worth 50k, one says 265 a day, one says 345 a day etc

Ive learnt that if i put down all my skills and experience (ie tailoring to me and current role), im "not suitable". But if i tailor to the job spec, i do better.

*edit* apologies didnt realise old post
 
morbid42 said:
Its a tough one, im almost in the same boat - but its about being patient and finding the right employer\recruiter. One employer says im worth 20k, one says 38k, one says "get this certificate" and youre worth 50k, one says 265 a day, one says 345 a day etc

Ive learnt that if i put down all my skills and experience (ie tailoring to me and current role), im "not suitable". But if i tailor to the job spec, i do better.

*edit* apologies didnt realise old post
Click to expand...

Yeah, it does seem that it's down to finding the right employer - or even becoming self-employed.

My understanding of the root cause of my unemployment has really sharpened between when I originally posted this and now.

Office Roles vs On The Tools Roles
A few people suggested more office-based roles, e.g., project management as being "more professional" as a future outlook, rather than my interest in "staying on the tools": I thought about it for a while, but now I know it is completely wrong for me: I spent 3 weeks recently, working in an office-based IT placement recently. The result? I felt like a CAGED ANIMAL and hated every second of being stuck in an office in front of a screen! I'd rather be out and about working with 'things'. Office work is far too sedentary and unhealthy IHMO. So that's that issue settled once and for all! I need a technical job, working with things, that involves outdoor and mobile work.

The Career Switching Issue
Basically, through feedback from a good few employers/recruiters, the consensus is that it's not really the issue - perhaps an eyebrow-raiser, but not much more. The core issue is pretty simple: NO RECENT EXPERIENCE. Also, education doesn't seem to hold much weight with most recruiters and many employers (some exceptions of course) in the current market/climate. It also seems to be seen negatively by more than a few employers for various reasons (e.g., feel threatened, overqualified, poor fit etc). So, the key is to get ANY experience, in any context, e.g., placement/work for free/shadow experience workers etc.

Going Back to Step One Career whilst being Generally Massively Overqualified and Older than other Technicians
The comments that touched on this were really on the money as they sum up the general issues. I was a telecoms installation/maintenance and faulting technician in the past - it's a great job, but I am also interested in any of the fields cognate with electronic engineering and telecoms. The trouble is, as has been suggested, I'm seen as 'too academic' and just overqualified for tech positions in these fields. This is compounded by not having RECENT EXPERIENCE in the role and so means I look like a misfit. This has been the consistent experience I've had with almost all employers and recruiters. At least 3 have said outright that my CV 'scares people'. It really isn't that scary, or at least wouldn't be to the vast numbers of alumni in the UK - it's just scary for the types of employers in the fields I'm looking at.

Sooner or later I'll find the right employer, hopefully in telecoms or fibre-optics where they will be willing to take a chance, recognise that I could quickly move up to a senior technician position and get me started. It all goes back to getting a foot in the door...which ain't easy as an ex-pat who knows no-one...
 
If you're getting feedback that your CV "scares people" (seems very odd tbh..) then perhaps tailor your CV to the role you're applying for.

If you don't want office work but are interested in project management then perhaps look at a different career change - pretty sure there are plenty of people involved in some form of project management in the construction industry for example who frequently spend time on various sites... perhaps quantity surveyor etc..

This career change might well require some additional qualification/education etc.. though you've probably gotta figure out what you want to do first. No such thing as overqualified when you're getting to professional roles.
 
dowie said:
If you're getting feedback that your CV "scares people" (seems very odd tbh..) then perhaps tailor your CV to the role you're applying for.

If you don't want office work but are interested in project management then perhaps look at a different career change - pretty sure there are plenty of people involved in some form of project management in the construction industry for example who frequently spend time on various sites... perhaps quantity surveyor etc..

This career change might well require some additional qualification/education etc.. though you've probably gotta figure out what you want to do first. No such thing as overqualified when you're getting to professional roles.
Click to expand...

Yes, tailoring to the role means deprecating or deleting qualifications/skills that aren't considered relevant to the industry, e.g., my master's in chemistry and previous position as a university lecturer on my CV was seen as scary by the last manager who interviewed me for a rail technician role - he said he was worried because he couldn't "employ some potentially eccentric professor in an engineering environment as they might not be a good fit". I'm not an eccentric professor, but a down-to-earth hands-on guy - the real issue was not having recent industry experience.

Construction, for example, has no relation to anything I've ever done (background is scientific, electronic/telecoms/fibre engineering), so that's definitely out as is project management...it's a technical job, tools based, preferably fibre-optics or telecoms that I'm aiming for.

I agree that qualifications are important, but since I have just spent £2000 on getting a City & Guilds in Communications Cabling, which is the industry standard for fibre splicers in the UK, and have had continuous knockbacks due to lack of recent experience, there is no way that I see qualifications as being remotely useful in this context. Nearly every fibre-optic technician I've spoken to got their job through connections and getting a foot in the door. It's experience of any kind that gets jobs from many employer's viewpoints as a lack of experience is seen as a risk. Highly qualified is fine for professional roles, but the issue I'd highlighted previously is that high-level qualifications are ignored without recent, relevant experience, as my recent City & Guilds adventure shows... In the current market, there are an abundance of recently-qualified, unemployed people, who are now in debt and can't get a job due to lack of experience...

Just have to keep plugging away at getting a foot in the door....
 
If you lower the bar further...might it be useful to you to just to do something like contact an existing self-employed contractor, explain your situation, and offer to be their free or cheap TA (trades assistant) for a couple of weeks?

The reasonable trade-off being, if you are any good, they agree to give you a reference based on an on the job go at doing under supervision (as it suits them) what you trained in.
 
If you ultimately want to become a Project Manager, "being on the tools" is no longer the required route in most industries. I can't talk directly to comms but have worked in Engineering (mostly upstream oil and gas) as a Project Manager having jumped from IT (though specialised in ERP implementation so it wasn't as big a jump as it reads), and since have moved into a completely different industry again (I'm a senior legal project manager for a global law firm now...yup, big change). Project Management is Project Management, and the best PMs I've worked with have not "come up" from the people on the ground delivering the work (and in fact the worst ones have been....though lots of crossover in the middle).

Perhaps look for "Project Engineer" roles (which certainly in engineering in are more junior than a proper PM, might have a different title like Project Coordinator) as your entry into that world? I suppose the difficulty if I was hiring would be trying to figure out why somebody academic looking to move into a reasonably academic role (IE project management) would have bothered to do the splicing course, it's completely irrelevant to the job. Being able to "do" does not make you able to "manage", and most industries are splitting that now.


EDIT: just realised you don't want to be a PM from your post a few above, ignore all of this :D
 
Last edited:
Anyone can be a project manager, you just need to be a high level gobs***e with no attention to detail.

Delays? Business decisions, poor performing staff you didnt hire, lack of communication, scope change etc

Project fails? Get new job instantly as you can talk your way into a job.

Or be clever and leave before tipping point, as most bad decisions arent seen for months or a year - that way left a "success"
 
Definately, but its just a role that you can deflect most failures and leave before flaws are noticed.

Thats one reason so many companies have so many issues.

The best pms are the workers overburdened with tasks due to cutting costs (that actually increase costs)
 
Many problems I see in project management are due to premature rush to agile methods (implementation) without sufficient prior emphasis on a robust conceptualisation and analysis. Some complexities cannot be solved merely by skilled and competent haste. Getting "there" on time and within budget is laughable when the "there" got to is market-inept - eg. trying to postfix a business model on at the end.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom