Software Architect vs. BAs, Managers, etc [closed]

Question

At some point in their careers developers tend to see a fork in career paths between something that leads to Software Architects (dev -> senior dev -> team lead -> architect) or more business-related paths like Business Analysts, Project Managers, etc.

As I look at the salaries, requirements, and "time to get there" the Software Architect path appears unfavourable. It tends to require certification, you handle a lot of responsibility (anything that is a technical problem lands on your head), and the pay is not great compared to the alternatives. It is also the terminal station in the career path train (these people never become VPs, etc in my experience).

Can someone shed some positives? Personally, I like to code and the thought that "moving up in life" necessarily means getting out of it makes me very sad. That being said I am having a very hard time justifying sticking to this path in terms of lifestyle. Am I missing something obvious?

EDIT

Thank you all for your input. I understand the fallacy of my question in that it's hard to pick one right answer. At the same time I imagine that my sentiment is probably experienced by others, and your answers will be useful to them.

EDIT 2

I understand that architect is an archaic term, it's just the thing that popped into my head. Where I work now it's called 'Senior Technical Specialist'. I'm generally referring to senior developers that get to call the shots. These kinds of people will always be around.

Answer 1

Your question isn't exactly clear. You need to identify what you see yourself doing in 5 and 10 years. If your ultimate career goal in life is to become a technology or business executive then you will want to pursue the career path that takes you in that direction.

The reality of the technology industry and software in general is that managers typically don't write code. If you see yourself in 10-20 years writing code because thats what you like to do then fine, do that. If however, you really want to be running the department in the same amount of time its time to realize that you won't always be writing code. Again, this is the decision and life planning you have to do on your own, we can't provide that for you.

However, I can talk about the Architect versus the Developer roles. What I think you have rightly pointed out is that it is often far easier to make the switch from a Business or even Systems Analyst position into that of a manager. The easiest explanation for this is that these are the people who review and study the organization(s) that the software aims to fix. They have the most insight, knowledge, and background which make it really easy for two things to happen:

1. If a replacement candidate is needed, they already have a lot of the business background knowledge making their promotion a simple decision.
2. They often have direct working relationships with executives and senior managers at the firm. This is a no brainer in terms of promotion. Out of sight, out of mind.

So again, I return to my original point, what do you see or want to see yourself doing in 10-20 years from now as regardless of the current career path and what you like to do now, this will dictate what you should be looking to accomplish in the future.

Answer 2

That was certainly true as recently as 10 years ago. Now there are other options.

Many companies understand that business analysis, programming, project management and people management are all different skills. And every company seems to handle that knowledge differently.

If you're good enough, you can become a lead developer in some companies and earn a lot of money doing it. Often more than your managers, certainly more than your project managers or BAs.

Personally, I got out of programming because I became more interested in the process of software development, so I became a manager. And then I got bored of managing (after a decent time, not the next week) and got back into software development. With a pay rise.

Architects are pretty much a thing of the past. Or they should be. Most companies figured out that having one or two developers who made all the technical decisions, but never had to live with those decisions (while mere developers did have to), is a bad idea.

The software industry is still relatively new and still in flux. You can basically do whatever suits you, as long as you find a company who want your skills at the price you want to sell them.

Answer 3

Am I missing something obvious?

Developers by and large never transition to BA roles. PM happens on occasion, but it is uncommon; it happens most often to developers who find they don't like the technical work, or don't have the chops to be a Sr. Developer. Neither position is a promotion for a developer.

It is also the terminal station in the career path train (these people never become VPs, etc in my experience).

Some do. CTOs and/or VP of engineering/R&D often come from the technical side of things.

The main career path for a developer is Junior -> Developer -> Senior -> Lead. They then branch into two choices: Manager or Architect. Managers don't write code, but have more advancement opportunities. Architects write less code, but if they do it tends to be the vital, core code. They usually make more than managers, but have a less clear path to the executive tier. And fewer companies need a dedicated Architect than Development Manager.

Occasionally developers "fall out" of the developer path into SCM roles, UI designer, Project Manager, or occasionally high-end QA paths. These though all tend to happen pretty early on, and more due to personality or capability issues rather than concious advancement.

There are a few programming paths that are above Lead that still involve programming. Certain programmers are great Evangelists for their technologies. They spend a lot of time doing great code, but some time getting others to make great code. Some particularly skilled or specialized developers get paid handsomely to continue in that vein. I know of a few network card driver developers who make VP money because they're one of maybe a dozen people in the world who can do their work. These of course are less common, but that sort of path does exist.