> much of my job satisfaction came from the sense of comradery of working on a team
I think this is a seriously undervalued factor and something I was completely unaware of.
I used to always judge job opportunities either by how well they pay, or how interesting the work is. But in reality, the social factor is just as important.
So some time ago, I was trying to hire my first employee. I paid a lot of money for job ads, and got very little applications. I offered the same salary as the other tech companies in my city, and I really tried my best to attract people.
I couldn't understand why people instead only applied to work for boring consultancies or even for an online gambling company -- why would people prefer such mind numbing or even morally questionable jobs?
I realized that the social situation at work is really important. When I met people who worked at the online gambling website, they weren't talking about the actual work; they just told me about their awesome boss, and how they had fun with their team mates, etc. It didn't matter how interesting my project was, nobody wanted to sit all day in an office just alone with me.
Consultancy might have a boring image, but the work can be extremely varied. I was at one of the big names and got to go behind the scenes at a major theme park, spend a night with police officers on blue light calls, watch open heart surgery in person, meet a lunar astronaut and eat lunch in a tv studio watching a live broadcast.
I think you make your own luck for things like this. I was a technology architect which had the advantage of being quite broad in scope. I came to the company with a deeper technical background than some which helped, but I also built a specialism after I joined that was rare in the company. That meant if there was a need for that skill, I had a high chance of being asked to assist. And of course, when it came to change projects, choosing ones that held an interest helped. But for example, anyone who joined the project with the police force had an opportunity to join a shift, anyone who worked on the TV project could have lunch where I did, so it isn't all about the role.
I'll chime in since I also worked in consulting for a long time (still do). It depends a lot on what vertical you get pulled into, but I'd say it's 50% luck and 50% you putting in the effort to develop and prove you have skills (including social ones) to get staffed on interesting projects. Many consultants never see more than conference rooms and the home office, but the parent commenter's experience also happens quite a bit. It's worth noting that in my experience the more advanced you get in your career the more likely you are to work only in a specific industry.
Years ago, I remember someone talking about working in film. Ideally, you work on three movies a year; one for the pay, one for the script, and one for the people you work with. I've tried to keep this in mind when looking for full-time work and I think it lines up with what you're saying.
I think the OPs point was that the past employer effectively leveraged the social aspect to underpay. Now that there is a hobby outside of work, the latter is suddenly not a center of life anymore. The pay raise is the ironic reality of employers catching up with the real cost of labour.
That assumes that these social aspects are valued at zero. Money isn't everything in a job. Your compensation consists of the money, yes, but also everything else in the job. Good social aspect at work takes effort to build and maintain, so maybe, actually, those employers weren't underpaying at all. Again, money isn't everything.
It assumes exactly the opposite of that. The underlying economic principle at work is that the social aspects of a job do have an equivalent monetary value, and now that they're gone, employers have to make up the shortfall by paying more in plain money.
Counterpoint: with basic human decency and almost every company following the same blueprint when catering to that social aspect, odds are in practice it really doesn't matter. Either you're an outlier socially and lucky to hit it without turning your CV into Swiss cheese, or you're more average and almost every company will cater to you the same way, so odds are high you'll fit in similarly regardless.
Good social aspect is still in the eyes of the beholder, and for people like me, this blueprint absolutely isn't beneficial. Nor is the risk of looking for an outlier culture worth the potential benefits, when that same outlier culture can be much more easily found outside work.
I think this is a seriously undervalued factor and something I was completely unaware of.
I used to always judge job opportunities either by how well they pay, or how interesting the work is. But in reality, the social factor is just as important.
So some time ago, I was trying to hire my first employee. I paid a lot of money for job ads, and got very little applications. I offered the same salary as the other tech companies in my city, and I really tried my best to attract people.
I couldn't understand why people instead only applied to work for boring consultancies or even for an online gambling company -- why would people prefer such mind numbing or even morally questionable jobs?
I realized that the social situation at work is really important. When I met people who worked at the online gambling website, they weren't talking about the actual work; they just told me about their awesome boss, and how they had fun with their team mates, etc. It didn't matter how interesting my project was, nobody wanted to sit all day in an office just alone with me.