Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: phranque
I feel kind of weird about picking my own title, being that I do so many different things (as I'm sure most of you do also). Example of a few things:
1. The only one that does all Layout, Graphic & Flash Design
2. In charge of all design & programming decisions
3. In charge of all web marketing (hiring SEO, etc.)
4. In charge of interviewing and picking web developers (basically if I say no, then there not hired)
5. In charge of interfacing proprietary Server based system and million dollar web app. (requires pretty good knowledge of proprietary language)
6. In charge of practically every and any decision that involves any sort of web technology.
7. Looked at as THE expert in all server side & scripting languages we work on - ColdFusion, ASP, JSP, etc. (I handle all training as well).
8. All web project management, prioritizing and giving projects to the other developers.
These are just some of the things I do or am responsible for there. Now these are some things I don't deal with.
1. Someone wants a day off they request it from the IT director.
2. Someone needs a talking to, the IT director does it (although I just did this a couple of days ago - I was asked to).
3. Any employee paperwork or HR issues is handled by the IT director.
I report to the CFO & the IT director. More to the CFO than the IT director. My current title is Web Developer. I feel that Lead Web Developer wouldn't be enough, but I'm not sure what to suggest. I'm not even sure if what I do IS what a Lead Web Developer is supposed to do. If any of you have some feedback on this I would love to hear it.
Thanks in advance.
Not that it's a bad thing. Senior Developers tend to get grandiose visions about themselves - after all, you make sure that the ship runs every day, right?
But don't call yourself a "web architect" or "manager" - archictect is somewhat meaningless and you aren't managing anyone. (Manager ALWAYS means managing people, not projects - even project managers manage people) Plus, you probably don't want to manage people. You won't write any code, it takes so much work.
And ALWAYS take a raise over a promotion. ;)
I feel kind of uncomfortable doing that since I'm not really their supervisor or manager. If a "senior" co-worker wanted to do that to me, then I think I might resent it since they wouldn't be my "manager".
Anyways, many people (CEO, CFO, VP) refer to me as "webmaster", which I don't mind but I really don't see that used to much as a proper title. What are your thoughts on this?
That leaves the people management issues and decisions with others, and describes your leadership role in the ongoing, every-day functional aspects. You don't manage the people, but you direct, provide leadership and direction, and advise.
Of the titles given so far Director of Internet Services sounds the best but that may conflict with the IT Director.
Remember one thing though if you increase the name stature too much, without an increase in salary at the same time, they (the comp) have gained.
Although is it really a promotion? The title might change but I'll be doing the same things I have been doing ...
That's a skill most developers don't have. If you can do that, they will pay you double (and if they don't, you can leave, and somebody else will!)
You'll have to get familiar with Powerpoint and MS Project. And spend a lot of time with the CTO explaining why they can't have the project done in 2 weeks, even though it SEEMS like such a minor change.... :)
Although is it really a promotion?
Always think of your resume. Always. ALWAYS!
(Well, unless you are a partner in a company and never plan to leave or be fired).
So instead of:
19xx-20xx - xxxxxxx
20xx-20xx - yyyyyyy
19xx-20xx - xxxxxxx
In the same company. And that always looks good.
And if your next employer decides to verify it - it's all kosher :)
I decide on what my deadlines (and my groups' deadlines) are. If I do have to explain why something will take longer than what they expect, I explain it to the CFO.
If the IT Director wants me to work on a project that will take some time, then she first asks me whether I have the time to work on it (I've said no from time to time), then she must get approval from the CFO to have me work on it.
I report more to the CFO than I do her, she handles HR issues for me, but she only has a vague idea of what I'm working on. Her knowledge on anything related to the web is almost non-existant. It's kind of a weird situation for me. Don't get me wrong, I love it since I practically have complete control.
By the way - bcc1234, that's a good point ...