A lot of wisdom in this thread. Let me highlight some key points:
This is very true. There is, in general, a shit-ton-and-a-half of disrespect for the PM profession, and in my opinion, it's well earned. Most PM's are, as someone else said, glorified secretaries/babysitters. The PM role was probably invented by a slacker VP who didn't feel like doing the less glamorous aspects of his job, such as project tracking and meeting with department leads/heads. That's not to say there aren't companies/projects that legitimately need PM's, but a lot of PM's exist because a Veep has his chin raised a little too high.
But if you're technically inclined and have direct experience in the fields of those on your project, you can tell when you're being BS'ed and when you're not. You'll be able to work more closely with these people, too, and provide a better service to them; one that goes beyond "are you done yet? I need to update my spreadsheet." You'll also inherently have more of their respect because you possess an actual skill that can produce something.
This man speaks the truth. The worst aspect of being a PM, no matter how good you are, is that you have more accountability than anyone on the projects, yet you have the least (read: ZERO) amount of authority. If someone isn't getting the job done, and you're at least talented enough to be able to pinpoint them as the problem (difficult if you don't have the technical background), the most you can do is start sending emails and copying their manager, their manager's manager, and your manager. Then you have to wait to see what those with authority over this other guy (who has authority) decide to do about it.
At the end of the day, though, if the project fails, it's usually your head that rolls down the street. The leads likely just move on to the next project. One of the largest obstacles a PM has is they're given deadlines/timelines before leads/SME's have actually assessed and staffed the project. So you're told the project has 6 months, THEN the project's leads are assembled at which point they tell you it's going to take 9 months due to critical path constraints (critical paths that you would have been able to work out on your own, had you had their background/expertise), and now you're fucked. You tell the VP, and he replies "get it done or I'll find someone who will." He's pissed at YOU. He's not even thinking of the leads' assessments. That sucks.
The key point here is that developers are far more in demand than PM's. PM's like to tell you that they're in the hottest field, but anyone being honest with themselves can see (and reason) that that's not the case at all. Consider a medium-sized IT project: You have 1 PM, say 2 - 4 developer leads/architects, and then 2 - 4 programmers for each lead. Just going by the numbers, does it really hold water that there are more PM jobs then technical jobs? "But they can be outsourced to India!" I've been hearing that for 10 years, and it's rarely the case... and I've had an Indian PM or two
Also, turnover in the PM field is extraordinarily high. Over the years I see few developers get fired, but many leave because the water coming out of the water fountain isn't cold enough. They're in such high demand that they are highly mobile by choice. I rarely see PM's quit - though I see a ton of them get fired. Not because of personal faults or anything like that, it's just the do-or-die nature of the job. Turnover between the two fields is probably close to equal, and yes, you see a lot of PM job listings... but odds are, the guy who held that PM job before it was posted probably got fired. That developer posting? 50% chance it's a new position, 25% chance the guy who had it last got fired, and 25% chance the guy quit for greener pastures. Numbers pulled from my ass, yes, but highly influenced from what I've seen myself and heard from others (including PM's).
I can't speak for construction, telecom, etc., but in IT, PM salaries are on par with Technical Leads. As a Solutions Architect or Software Architect (similar but different roles), you can (and should) be making more. In my area, PM's and Leads make $90k - $100k. Solutions Architects are making in the neighborhood of $95k - $110k, and Software Architects are making $100k - $150k. That said, if your criteria for a career path is how to maximize your salary, you're going to be miserable. If you're thinking of being a PM as an IT exit strategy (and almost every one of us IT people has looked down that road), that's fine. Just know what you're getting into. If you haven't worked on many projects with a dedicated PM, then I strongly suggest that you find a way to get yourself on those projects so you can see firsthand what a PM's job entails. It's stressful as hell. A good PM is worth his weight in gold, but there are just so few of them.
Facebook
Twitter