Making a career out of Desktop / Endpoint support?

Hey Folks,

Lately I've been contemplating the likelihood of being able to make a career out of desktop / endpoint support. I use the term endpoint, because I realize the use of true desktops in the work place may be on the decline. With that said, I still feel as though there will always be an endpoint to support. The user will continue to use some type of hardware, whether it be a mobile device or thin client. Not to mention printers, and phones etc.

What are your thoughts on the long term stability of these positions? At a bit of a cross roads right now.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

networker050184

You could work that type of job your whole career, but it won't be very lucrative financially. I know a few people that have never had the desire to move up from user support. You could possibly also get into desktop management.

NetworkVeteran

If you enjoy it, why not? As Networker says, it's not the most lucrative path, but it's certainly a viable one. If you decide at some point you want more challenge and/or income, at that point you can make a change.

One advantage of an easier job is you may have more spare time for your life. I know someone who intentionally under-achieves, no family, and in her spare time she's an avid volunteer and tri-athlete!

ptilsen

Honestly, it sounds horrible from all aspects. Sure, there will always be support, but after so much time doing it, your job prospects start to look bad. Most companies don't want someone with 10 years of end-user/endpoint support, because such people are widely regarded as unambitious or incapable of moving up, and not without reason. Frankly, I would be really hesitant hire someone with five-ten years of pure helpdesk experience. Lack of progression is really bad in this field.

There are some exceptions. There are support positions that are high-skill, high-tier that and that isn't a bad thing and can signify progression. But endpoint support is almost by definition not high-tier.

Ultimately, if you enjoy it and find the right company you can do well enough and be content, but the thing I would worry about is where you go if something happens to that job. Technology changes too fast for any support position at any company to be realistically expected to stay around for 20-30 years. It will happen, sure, but it definitely isn't something I'd bet my career on.

I think a more realistic strategy would be to stick with support, but not limit yourself to endpoints. If you just want to do support, I think that's viable, and I can even understand it (even though it's not me), but I would try to get into supporting something a little more advanced. Networks, servers, applications, whatever.

On top of that, I actually think all forms of endpoint support are becoming less viable job choices. What I've seen (mostly anecdotal, but some salary studies back me up) the last few years in the market is major downward pressure on entry-level salaries, even while higher-level jobs keep going up. I actually have some friends that work for a company that provides US companies contracted support teams, essentially handling all the personnel and training for them. A couple notable clients are Oracle and Apple, specifically supporting, IIRC, some software Oracle sells (surprisingly, I cannot remember for the life of me) and iOS devices. They make $12 or $13 an hour and have no tech credentials whatsoever, or even tech career aspirations. Endpoint support is really seeing a lot of tech-savvy, mostly younger people come in who are happy to do that for $10-15 an hour because there's very little else widely available. To me, this really points to it being solely a way to get one's foot in the IT door for bigger and better things, not a real long-term career path.

networker050184

Good point ptilsen. Years and years of no progression on the resume isn't going to look good even when applying for other support jobs.

paul78

The concept of "progression" is relative though. After 15-20 years, it's more about adaptability and breathe. We have a few workstation/end-user support folks with 15-20 years of experience and they are highly efficient and provide comprehensive support for many aspects workstation support.

If anything - at least in large companies, I would expect local high-end desktop/endpoint support to be more stable over the long-term. Feet-on-the-ground type support in those environments are less likely to be outsourced over-seas.

iBrokeIT

What is your reason for wanting to stay in desktop / endpoint support and not wanting to progress beyond that?

"desktop / endpoint support" is kind of vague role description that vary widely from company to company. You can still work primarily with client machines but higher level: OS migrations (WinXP to Win7), Imaging and WDS, WSUS servers and SCCM ect.

blargoe

Smart companies understand that the desktop is a production envrionment just like the network, datacenter, etc. Some have a true guru or two on the client/desktop side of the house, more of a desktop admin/engineer than just support or call center. These are the guys who are strong in Windows internals, can manage enterprise class solutions like System Center to effective manage software versioning/compliance, security standards, inventory, and imaging, and just good business sense. My company is lucky enough to have a guy like that. Yeah, the top end of the income spectrum is not going to be a high as a network engineer or a software developer, but career enjoyment is something that you can't put a monetary value on.

iBrokeIT

blargoe wrote: »

but career enjoyment is something that you can't put a monetary value on.

This can't be stressed this enough.

“Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.”
― Confuscius

ptilsen

Blargoe just described one version of a desktop/endpoint engineer. It can involve varying levels of support, but I do not interpret what OP is describing as an engineer. It interpreted as pure support. I don't think many, if any companies are going to pay much for that, and I don't think it's a viable long-term career unto itself. Knowing OS internals and having in-depth knowledge of tools like System Center is very different from being pure support. I should know, because Blargoe essentially just wrote my current job description (although admittedly I do no direct user support).

minit

ptilsen wrote: »

Most companies don't want someone with 10 years of end-user/endpoint support, because such people are widely regarded as unambitious or incapable of moving up, and not without reason.

I have to respectfully disagree with this. What do you mean 'most' companies? Do you have statistical evidence to back this up? Widely regarded as unambitious or incapable by whom exactly?

networker050184

Not to speak for ptilsen, but 'most companies' as in people hiring in general aren't looking for someone unmotivated and looking settle. It's no secret people want ambitious 'go getters' working for them. Whether that is true about someone staying in help desk is pretty irrelevant, it is the perception most would get when looking over a resume with years of no progression.

paul78

It's generally not a good idea to generalize - opps - did I just generalize?

It depends on the job and function. I don't always feel the need to hire people that are 'go getters'. In some roles, having someone that can be happy and would stay at that job is much more valuable. Keeping turnover rates low is a legitimate cost-avoidance metric. In some jobs, like desktop services, I would rather have someone that is reasonably well-compensated with decent enduser service mindset who is willing to learn about the business needs than someone looking to find that next job after 2 years.

ptilsen

minit wrote: »

I have to respectfully disagree with this. What do you mean 'most' companies? Do you have statistical evidence to back this up?

Nope. None exists, to my knowledge, so I have to go with my experience in the industry and with these sorts of discussions with industry peers.

minit wrote: »

Widely regarded as unambitious or incapable by whom exactly?

Exactly this:

networker050184 wrote: »

Not to speak for ptilsen, but 'most companies' as in people hiring in general aren't looking for someone unmotivated and looking settle. It's no secret people want ambitious 'go getters' working for them. Whether that is true about someone staying in help desk is pretty irrelevant, it is the perception most would get when looking over a resume with years of no progression.

I, for one, am extremely reluctant to hire someone with a history of career non-progression, especially in IT. People that are content to stay on helpdesk for 5+ years are exactly the kind of people I wouldn't want to see on a helpdesk. There are exceptions to this, as with almost anything, but relatively few.

TheCudder

ptilsen wrote: »

Nope. None exists, to my knowledge, so I have to go with my experience in the industry and with these sorts of discussions with industry peers.

Exactly this:

I, for one, am extremely reluctant to hire someone with a history of career non-progression, especially in IT. People that are content to stay on helpdesk for 5+ years are exactly the kind of people I wouldn't want to see on a helpdesk. There are exceptions to this, as with almost anything, but relatively few.

I'm not saying its good to be stagnant, but just to have another perspective on things...

Depending on the environment, I don't see why you feel this way. Some people will try the network or systems admin role and simply don't enjoy it so they return to end user support. Because believe it or not, some people actually enjoy the customer interaction, being able to walk around and be hands on. Also depending on the location & employer you can do fairly well financially doing so. At least you know they're likely to be capable of bringing experience, an ability to train/teach others, dedication & longevity (in other words, they won't be gone in 2 years since they're using you as a stepping stone). At the end of the day, some people would prefer to be paid 45K to do something they enjoy, versus being paid 75K to be miserable 8 hours a day.

MentholMoose

networker050184 wrote: »

You could possibly also get into desktop management.

This is a good option if you enjoy working with desktops / endpoints. It pays better, there is a lot of cool stuff to work on such as VDI (e.g. VMware View / Citrix XenDesktop) and application virtualization (ThinApp, App-V, RDS, XenApp), and may have better long-term prospects.

loxleynew

I think if you stay in the same role or "title" for more than even 5 years is bad on a resume unless you have reached the pinnacle of your career. This is more true for IT than any other industry because IT changes so much. If you are not constantly pushing yourself to learn you will be left behind. So I think that is what everyone means here by saying that. Desktop support is pretty narrow of a scope and is being phased out from what I can tell.

Also when you think of cost cutters when downsizing the easiest ones to be let go are those that are A) at the bottom of the IT totem pole (desktop support) and

expensive for their job description (those low totem polers who have been there 5+ years).

I would recommend like others mentioned get a niche that you like alongside desktop management. Such as SCCM or CCM to support so you are a "dual threat" It person. This lets you stay mostly desktop management but have something else valuable to add to the company.

Also keep in mind if you get laid off from one company after long term, getting a new job with the same job duties you would be taking a huge pay cut as you would have to GO BACK to the going rate. They can easily hire a 21 year old out of college to do what you have been doing for 15 years for half the price.

ptilsen

TheCudder wrote: »

Some people will try the network or systems admin role and simply don't enjoy it so they return to end user support. Because believe it or not, some people actually enjoy the customer interaction, being able to walk around and be hands on.

I've yet to meet one person that was actually good at it. People who have a drive for technology are good at it, and because of that drive want to move up. People that don't have that drive don't move up and aren't that good to start. People that are driven by customer interactions rather than technology aren't going to be as good at troubleshooting and actually resolving issues, for that matter. That is not to negate the importance of customer service, but someone who makes the customer feel good but can't actually solve problems very well is next to useless to me, in a typical support role. I'm sure there are exceptions to these generalizations, but I'm still waiting to meet them.

Mind you, part of it is that very, very few employers give opportunities that would necessitate somebody ambitious even staying with the company for a long time, much less in the same position. I can see moving through different roles and growing within a company, in theory, but a lot of organizations seem to get people stuck, with minimal rewards for growing, whether it's within the same position or not.

blargoe

I find that people that voice some of these opinions about endpoint management related work are the folks that have moved up and feels that work is "beneath them". I have seen a handful of hiring managers have a similar view, but most I have worked with do not.

In reality, I have seen management go after both the types that look like up-and-comers looking to move up, and the desktop/helpdesk lifers. Having a mix is good. I have worked with quite a few folks on Tier1 or Tier2 who excel in those areas and never expressed a desire to move toward the datacenter or application specializations. It's not always about being too lazy or being too stupid to "move up". Now sometimes, folks in these positions have progressed as far as they are capable. And that's fine too, as long as they are competent and meet the requirements of the position.

networker050184

blargoe wrote: »

It's not always about being too lazy or being too stupid to "move up".

I definitely understand that is true, but there is a negative stigma with not moving up in this field whether it is justified or not. I've honestly never met someone that was really good at their job that never advanced. Sure I've met the lifer help desk guy that is pretty good at it, but he's not the type to go above and beyond or push his knowledge of his craft. Again, that isn't always the case, but it would be my first thought when seeing the resume only. First impressions are everything.

rreed2438

doing the same 4th desktop class in 4 terms

WafflesAndRootbeer

Where I live, the only real way to advance in your career is to find some way to jump into another area of IT - usually by certing up and outward - that is considered above whatever you are doing at the time because you most likely won't be advancing in any sort of "move on up" way since so many IT jobs are contracted - everything here is government-related and most IT stuff is outsourced - and many of those companies are a few core guys with a bunch of hired help. Given that, it's not uncommon to work for several different companies in the space of a year around here doing the same kind of work and it's certainly not uncommon to see people working at the same level for a few years or even six or more.