More or less responsibility for the money?

[northernladuk]

Aren't you too sick to take on a high profile role...

+1 to that! You ain't gonna be in a high profile role long once you start taking time off.

[sal]

Aren't you too sick to take on a high profile role...

...Due to personal choice and more recently health issues...

[kaiser78]

I'd take the role with greater scope, i.e. the first one. If you prove yourself, there's probably more upside with the rate on renewal and, even if there isn't, it won't hurt with securing future roles with greater scope. Business comes first, of course, but not boring yourself stupid comes a close second (at least, it does to me, which is why I do this).

+1 - few things worse than doing a boring role whereby you end up clock watching all day...

[jamesbrown]

I'd take the role with greater scope, i.e. the first one. If you prove yourself, there's probably more upside with the rate on renewal and, even if there isn't, it won't hurt with securing future roles with greater scope. Business comes first, of course, but not boring yourself stupid comes a close second (at least, it does to me, which is why I do this).

[cherhill]

I have two offers on the table - one is very high profile project, with lots of responsibilities and potentially quite a lot of scope.
Another is plain, maybe a bit boring coding.

The catch is that they both pay nearly the same so in a way I don't see the value of doing more for the same amount of money.

If this was permieland, perhaps I could fall into the 'promotion' thing trap etc, as they are both contracts and both expected to last similar amount of time, I am really at a loss.

The high-stakes role has some scope to delegate some work, the coding role, I will be on the receiving end of that.

Any ideas, what would you go for?

Biggest regrets I have had are taking the boring role cos it was closer to home or less stress. In contracting taking the easy role can really harm your CV in my experience.

[Ulukai]

The high-stakes role of course.

For me personally, time passes 10 x slower when doing uninteresting boring things instead of exciting and challenging assignments.

+ it would be bad for your skillset, which would diminish your chances for later projects.

Taking the easy road will dumb you down and bore you.

Taking the challenge has the potential of being exciting, and you will probably learn a thing or two with it.

If you take the challenge, you just have to make sure that you have the energy to go for it.

If you feel tired, take a break, then take the challenge.
Taking a boring job because a lack of energy now will just make you more tired.

at least, that's my opinion

[yasockie]

I have two offers on the table - one is very high profile project, with lots of responsibilities and potentially quite a lot of scope.
Another is plain, maybe a bit boring coding.

The catch is that they both pay nearly the same so in a way I don't see the value of doing more for the same amount of money.

If this was permieland, perhaps I could fall into the 'promotion' thing trap etc, as they are both contracts and both expected to last similar amount of time, I am really at a loss.

The high-stakes role has some scope to delegate some work, the coding role, I will be on the receiving end of that.

Any ideas, what would you go for?