Careers: How to choose???

<p>It seems that choices don’t stop with college. I made a commitment to myself that when D left for freshman year I would begin my own college education. That was 2.5 years ago, and I’ve made no progress at all except that I’ve completed the research and now have my list of schools at the ready.</p>

<p>During D’s freshman year, my employer was acquired by a far larger company; the incumbent president of that larger company became my new boss. He offered me a promotion and relocation, which I accepted. Being a cautious person by nature, I didn’t sell our home, but rather simply rented a new home in the new city. Within four months of my arrival in the new city he was fired by the board of directors; this was followed by a series of new bosses and then ultimately a new president who eliminated and outsourced my position in March 2004. This is the first time in my entire career I’ve been unemployed.</p>

<p>Since then - for over a year - I have been consulting, and very successfully. I can pick and choose my work, my schedule, etc., but, I really don’t like it - I read somewhere that being a consultant is like waking up every morning unemployed, and this is certainly true. I’ve had many, many jobs offers, but have turned them all down, mostly because they were not exactly what I want to do, and I’m not interested in accepting traditional employment just for a paycheck - I’m interesting in doing something that gives me some intellectual growth and reach, and also that positions me into the $250K/year earning range. </p>

<p>So I’ve turned everything down - until today - suddenly I have two offer letters on my desk and both are excellent, and I’d like to choose one, and now I cannot decide, and unlike college choices, I don’t have until May 1 - I have mere days to respond.</p>

<p>The first I was recruited for by my former supervisor - he was my boss for four years, and he was not offered a position during the MA. He sent me an email initially; when I ingored the email, he called me; long story short, after several interviews with his bosses, a background check, etc., I was offered the position; it is entirely satisfactory. It’s a large publicly traded company, approximately $100 million annual revenue, and it would be based in the city where my D attends college, and where she will be for another two years (owing to pursuing two separate undergrad degrees); there is also a college in that city on my target list for my own undergrad degree. The money is perfect too; income projections for a clearly outlined career path are about $300K around/after year three, and, it’s headquartered in my favorite city in the U.S., and the city where I would ultimately like to live and possibly attend law school or grad school. The chain of command is deep but the incumbents are highly credentialed. </p>

<p>I shared this information with my D, and she said “oh cool - we can live together again and play in this city together”! - (we’re very close). </p>

<p>The second offer is very interesting as well - I landed it by responding to a job posting - it’s also publicly traded, but with smaller revenues; the company only employs 40 persons worldwide, however, I would be in charge, and I would get to use the fullest possible range of my skill set - I would get to work with federal government, academia and large businesses, and it’s headquartered in my second favorite city in the U.S., where there are even more colleges that are of interest to me both for undergrad and grad school. </p>

<p>I like the second offer better because it seems like a better “fit” for me - on the one hand, with the first offer, working for my former supervisor would be a breeze - he thinks I walk on water, we get along very, very well, etc., however, since I’ve worked for him for four years, I’ve learned everything possible from him, and I’m wondering how much sense it makes to go back to work for the same person, although certainly the environment would be different. I’m sort of a believer of the “pick your boss, not your job” ideology. </p>

<p>But with the second offer, I’m nervous because the company is so much smaller - and, I would not be able to live in the same city as my D (though why she thinks this is a terrific benefit is beyond me). </p>

<p>With the first offer, the company is larger, certainly has greater revenue, but, it would only require about a third of my skill set. However, this could be o.k. since I will require some energy left over to do college level coursework evenings and weekends. With the second offer, my concern might be that it is so interesting that it may consume my intellectual endurance, and I wouldn’t have anything left to use to complete college level work outside of work hours. However, the second offer would put me in a “seque” position in my career, which I really, really need; whereas the first would be more of the same thing I’ve always done, I’d just be doing it with larger revenues. </p>

<p>I have been trying to digest the SEC filings and financial reports for both companies, but, I do not understand some of the information in terms of how to use it to make assumptions about long term stability, and so am having difficulty evaluating long term viability of both. </p>

<p>I did ask my D how she would choose; she said “whichever pays best”; both are equal in that regard. Of course, both offers support my long terms goals, so, maybe I should just flip a coin?</p>

<p>Latetoschool:</p>

<p>You’re my top choice for posting on the thread about successful people who did not go to Tier 1 schools!</p>

<p>It looks like you don’t need a college degree to be wildly successful, so you need to ask yourself why you want that degree. It is very likely that you want to give yourself the time to acquire the liberal arts education that passed you by when you were younger rather than another set of skills that can translate into a better paying job. If that is the case, I suggest Option #1. For two years, you will be near your D, which sound like you will both enjoy it. You won’t be coming home exhausted and unable to focus on whatever the prof is saying or the assigned reading or problems. I’m thinking that when your D has finished college, you may want to hang on for a bit longer to finish your own college degree, then you can move on to a different company/job. That job may be in the same city or it may be elsewhere. Makes sense?</p>

<p>LOL Marite - by strict definition, I’m actually a high school drop out. I do have a high school diploma, but it’s from a correspondence school, because that is what I could do with my resources and time during that horrific period. I am very interested in and want to study election science, politics and law (global - even to the point of nation-building), although I have no idea how that might eventually translate into anything anyone might pay me to do - but I am gratified to discover that in researching various law school websites, there are many graduates out there in their 50’s and 60’s, and many are practicing law. (I am 45.) Also, some law schools, Tulane being one of them, allow application to law school without completion of an undergrad (Tulane does require 3/4 of the undergrad to be completed). (People who know me well assure me I would hate New Orleans but that’s far afield of the point.)</p>

<p>Neither company has anything to do with this interest, however, the second company comes a bit closer in supporting this goal - at least it appears that way right now. In the interview process, one of the execs drilled deeply into this subject with me and so they understand my goals - the first company doesn’t care anything at all about my goals, they just want to buy my skill set.</p>

<p>Interesting too, the first company vetted me by more traditional standards - computer check of credit, education, work history dates, criminal background check, drug test, etc. The second company did none of these things - instead, they asked for my professional reference list, which I provided. That list offers fifteen names - execs in larger corporations, federal government agencies, and two top-ranked universities. I assumed they would do a sort of “pick from the menu” check - but they didn’t - they called every single one of my references, and asked all sorts of unusual questions. One of my references called me to report that the company kept him on the phone for 45 minutes, asking questions such as “what do you like best about latetoschool as a person” etc. </p>

<p>But of course my D would prefer I be closer to her. And the first company seems more viable in terms of revenue and profitability. And I have the option of simply renting a home in the city where she goes to school, which she prefers. But I sort of like the second company better, both in terms of culture and their understanding of my long-term interests, but then their revenues worry me, to the extent of what I can understand after reading their quarterly filings and SEC reports.</p>

<p>Latetoschool,
I think you’ve already made your choice for option number two, but just wanted to put it down in writing.</p>

<p>Objectively,it seems that option one would make more sense - you would see your daughter often, go back to college and work at a job that would be pleasant and well paying. Sometimes we follow our heart and sometimes we follow our head…</p>

<p>Latetoschool:</p>

<p>It is possible that company #1 did a perfunctory check because your previous boss was there to vouch for you and really seems to want you. I am a bit skeptical that a law school degree would enable you to earn substantially more than the salary you are currently pooling, but I may be totally wrong.
Another way to look at things is that your D will be in college for only two more years while it will take you longer than that to earn your law degree part time. Afterward, she will want to spread her wings, and may get a job elsewhere. So you should go with the job in the city which appeals to you the most, and not worry too much about proximity to your D. There are always planes!</p>

<p>First, I would read analyst reports on the two companies to assess their stability and promise. A $100 million dollar company is easily acquirable, and you could have a repeat of merged company with shake ups. Get those reports for a small amount on line.</p>

<p>As for the job that will pay $300K in three years, huh? What does it pay now and what hoops do you have to jump through to get there? Is it a commission position? If yes, how many of your peers are making that salary now? Ask how many bonus checks were written the last 4 quarters and for how much. </p>

<p>That said, if grad school is a priority, the job that you know you can do well in with little effort is ideal, especially working for a boss whose expectations you know you can easily meet. Expecting career growth, good salary and time for grad school is a lot to ask for. Good luck!</p>

<p>Also, go into yahoo finance and look at the message boards for both companies. Investors on the board always have good gossip.</p>

<p>As your old boss thinks you walk on water, would he be able to create a job for you if you chose job # 2 and it didn’t work out? If that is in the realm of possibility, it might be less of a risk to go for the job that is clearly sounds like you prefer. Besides, listening to your posts, I don’t think it is possible that you will tap out your intellectual resources. It might take you a little time in the learning curve, but you are obviously a quick study. You’ll be thirsting for that academic opportunity in no time.</p>

<p>Does either job encourage/support/sponsor outside education? Would that make a difference? I ddoen’t sound like you need them necessarily to pay for it, but if they see it as a proiorty and encourage employees to pursue education, that’s a nice message.</p>

<p>Thanks for responding; I am a bit troubled now and am wondering if I shouldn’t turn them both down, and keep consulting, and keep interviewing. </p>

<p>I went to Yahoo finance as Zagat suggested; I also read the analysts reports. I didn’t understand a lot of the technical terms, but understood enough to be slightly worried, I also read the message boards and came away very concerned. The first company is indeed ripe for acquisition - and I just went through that, and it wasn’t pretty. The second is more troublesome though - some of the posts on the message board seem to have almost a hysterical quality to them, and I almost wonder if they aren’t seeded by the company or a friend of the company. For example, nearly everyone says “buy”, however, one poster in particular keeps posting over and over “this company is wonderful” and “great things are going to happen” and “watch the headlines for very big news soon” and the like - but without posting any empirical data in the posts that would back up these prophesies. When challenged by other posters who are mostly receptive/neutral, this poster still does not back up the statements but instead offers lame responses like “just wait - you’ll see” etc. In addition, one or two posters asked questions on matters that I had also been wondering about, though for entirely different reasons (no one had any answers). I might be interpreting it all incorrectly, but my radar is pretty good and something doesn’t “feel” right about the entire group of messages. I also listened to the ceo interviews on Wall Street Report and do not know what I think about that yet, except that as a scientist he comes across more as a salesman. Perhaps it’s just me - I need to think about this. </p>

<p>Also, the second company just acquired a software company in Israel. Yesterday - because it came up in another discussion - I asked the COO what is the sustaining competitive advantage. He didn’t understand my question, so I broke it down in simpler terms, but he still didn’t get it. Basically, I was asking “why would anyone license this software that hasn’t been through beta and that isn’t accredited when they could simply license U.S. code” - anyway, he sort of said “because it does this and this” - but what he described is simply a matter of writing more code. I’m not understanding how it is possible that a Wharton MBA doesn’t understand my question. </p>

<p>jym626, both companies offer tuition reimbursement, but it does have to be job related. I am interesting in coursework that does not relate to what I do now. However, it’s more a time concern; with my former supervisor, one of the reasons he likes me so much is because in the past I would work 14 hour days etc. to reach objectives. Past experience tells him he can simply sit back and trust that no matter how little I’m supported, I’ll still find a way to get work done. I’m not willing to do that any more (for any company), and so I am not sure how well we would continue to work together. </p>

<p>Marite, I think you are right - I do not think a law degree will result in more money. But it does interest me very much - particulary election law. However, I’m such a long way from ever getting there. I really need to resolve my career first. My sense is that - especially after spending a lot of time on yahoo finance - that perhaps neither of these companies is right for me. Actually, my radar has been warning me all along, otherwise I would never have posted - would have simply accepted one of the jobs and moved on. It’s not usually a difficult decision. </p>

<p>Frustrated…I need to think some more.</p>

<p>Late, I was going to send you a pm but you don’t seem to receive them. Take what you read on Yahoo with a grain of salt. It’s great for getting a feel for what people are thinking, but there are a lot of day traders trying to impact the stock. </p>

<p>When a Wharton MBA can’t tell you what his product differentiation is, there isn’t one. Is he fairly new to the company? There are a lot of senior people out there now looking at companies that they can help get acquired for a nice pay out. Crazy, but it seems to be a situation easier to find than a promising stand alone company.</p>

<p>It’s crazy out there with the maturing of the tech industry. Good luck!</p>

<p>Zagat, I will look at my account registration later and see if I can figure out how to set it up to receive PMs. Meanwhile, I don’t understand why company #2 would acquire Israeli intellectual property management software. It’s sort of in line with their core business (but not really), but, if one were going to acquire such a thing, there’s surely no shortage of such companies or at least products in the U.S., and in India. I have to think that anything coded here or in Bangalore is going to be of far better quality, and available at lower price points.</p>

<p>I’ve managed to stall both decisions until early next week, but definitely about to decline #2, because there is too much that isn’t logical or at least troubling. I have a headache - seems like it’s more work chosing a job than doing the actual job once hired.</p>

<p>There could be a lot of reasons for the acquisition. Keep in mind that most technology mergers are failures and really didn’t make sense. </p>

<p>It is a lot of work choosing a job now, especially if you’re looking at technology companies. Many believe there are still more than 7,000 companies in Silicon Valley alone that won’t survive. It sound like you’re in demand so take your time and research the heck out of them.</p>

<p>Latetoschool: jym has a point:

</p>

<p>The first company probably did a less thorough background check because they will follow your boss’s recommendation to some extent, and being larger they can more afford to take a risk on you. The second company called everyone because at this stage - 40 employees, they feel they can’t take a risk on anyone and want to be as sure as possible that any new hire will totally fit in with their plans and their people. Passing on both accounts makes you a top-rated individual.</p>

<p>(I agree with the posters who say to disregard comments on stock-related message boards.)</p>

<p>Not going to give you career advice; for one thing, you’ve done fantastically without mine up to now. However, it should be a given that working for a small company, even though it’s already gone public, is probably going to consume more of your time and energy than working for the larger one. So if you are factoring in attending college part-time, the small company may not give you enough time to do that, no matter what they may say at an interview, including about tuition reimbursement.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, great day in the morning! Someone thinks I said something useful! Dadofsam, you are my new best friend :D</p>

<p>Latetoschool:
I was a bit disappointed when you began to discount both possible job opportunities. You obviously know what you are doing, and I imagine you reached the level of success that you have by taking a few risks here and there. Granted, I also understand if you are a bit gun-shy after the takeover experience during your D’s freshman year, but you sounded pretty excited about job # 2.</p>

<p>I am not in the business world per se (I am in healthcare) so some of the financial stability stuff is out of my area, but I do know that some of the Israeli tech/software firms are pretty cutting edge. So, depending on what field you are in, this acquisition might be a sound investment. Also, I agreee with everyone else-- the Yahoo message boards are filled with comments from disgruntled employees, stockbrokers and investers trying to play with the stock value, etc etc. At least here on CC most people don’t have a hidden agenda for posting here. Don’t put too much stock in what you read on the messageboards.</p>

<p>And, as your former boss tracked you down and recruited you, he obviously wants/likes/respects you. I think he would respect you if you followed your heart and accepted an opportunity that just happened to land in your lap at the same time his email did. After all, that is true. And, as I said before, he might be able to provide a fallback-- his is a bigger company where they can almost always make room for talent.</p>

<p>

As someone else said, actually Israel is one of the sources of very able software engineers. Look at Software 250 companies, any of them have Israelis at the helm. </p>

<p>Did you trust your boss’ judgement when you worked for him? If so, at this stage in high tech careers I have figured out you have to go with the people. Everything else can disintegrate at a moment’s notice. So if you are a tecchie, you can choose a good technology because you are building skills even if the company tanks. For the rest of us, find a team you like to be part of and go there. my $0.02</p>

<p>At this point in time in high tech firms, the boss’s interest can easily be a very different thing from those of his staff. Key people are incented to meet the company’s goal which is often a quick acquisition. The boss is then incented to put together a great team and show some great numbers short term. At the time of the buyout, he gets a golden handshake and the rest of the team gets fired with a couple of month’s pay. It’s a whole new world out there so don’t align yourself with a boss in a tech company unless his package is fully disclosed.</p>

<p>The good new is that if you can negotiate significant options at a good strike price, it could be fine. But if you’re relocating, I’d really research and ask some hard questions.</p>

<p>I would call the customers of the products and see how satisfied they are. Will they continue to keep using the products? Salesmen also know how well the company is doing and are a good resource.</p>

<p>Do these companies have earnings? Do they have positive cash flow? They are pretty small. Do they have a niche?</p>

<p>Will you be given stock or options in case there is a takeover and your job is eliminated?</p>

<p>This thread is of great interest. The average smart person, clearly not in a business career, believes there are companies that would pay someone $250K and support their going to school, too (Okay people, no way! For that you’re expected to slave day and night). And who expect that if they liked your last product they’ll buy your next (again no way, there are 50 companies telling them why their product is better). Wow!!</p>

<p>“. . .with my former supervisor, one of the reasons he likes me so much is because in the past I would work 14 hour days etc. to reach objectives. Past experience tells him he can simply sit back and trust that no matter how little I’m supported, I’ll still find a way to get work done. I’m not willing to do that any more (for any company), and so I am not sure how well we would continue to work together.”</p>

<p>This doesn’t tell me that job 2 is the way to go, but it would wave a big red flag across job 1. Without this interesting dynamic I would have definitely said job 1. </p>

<p>Stepping back, I’d go where you feel you would be the most successful. If you have doubts about both. . well it appears you are doing just fine now, and able to attract substantial job offers. Not a bad situation to be in.</p>