I largely agree with you, except that I think the most valuable experience gained is that of exposure to information a typical software engineer is not privy to. I think this is often overlooked and is what doing a short stint in consulting should be about. Getting the opportunity to understand the inner workings of an organization at, often, a senior management level, was one of the most lucrative lessons of my professional life and is a selling point that I use when interviewing candidates because it’s generally true if they conduct themselves intelligently. Also, to reiterate your point, consulting can be incredibly lucrative if you price yourself at market value — most freelancers and consultants I’ve met are too afraid or nervous or get caught up in imposter syndrome, etc. to charge their true value. $300k/yr (in the US) is near trivial to make annually as a consultant, $400k/yr is where most capable software engineers should be, and yet few get there for reasons I attribute to lack of self confidence — a shame really.

> understand the inner workings of an organization at, often, a senior management level, was one of the most lucrative lessons of my professional life

What is an example of something you learned about senior management?

> $300k/yr (in the US) is near trivial to make annually as a consultant, $400k/yr is where most capable software engineers should be, and yet few get there for reasons I attribute to lack of self confidence

It's not "near trivial" if few get there.

I've done consulting myself and I've networked with a lot of consultants. I see a lot of people moving back to full-time jobs because they pay more for less stress a lot of the time. Some people thrive in consulting positions, but many quickly realize that normal jobs are a pretty sweet deal in 2021.

A lot of consultants like to point to their high water mark compensation and imply that it's their normal rate. In reality, consulting work can be extremely hit or miss. Making $300K one year doesn't mean you're going to make $300K every year.

Consulting can be a good fit for people who have strong diplomatic, communication, self-marketing, and business skills, but it's not an easy button $300K/year job for someone who just likes to write code.

> I see a lot of people moving back to full-time jobs because they pay more for less stress a lot of the time.

If you find that job, it’s a keeper. I find consulting to be less stressful than employment. Not worried about being online during certain hours or the office politics, etc. Also, my code still has to work and be pushed to production. If anything the more levels of abstraction between me and the client just produces more stress and slows down the process.

Okay, I'll bite :)

Did you pull that kind of income over a year or longer?

How long did it take you to get there?

Were there major jumps/realizations along the way, or was it linear-ish growth over time?

(My own situ: started freelance consulting right before having two kids in a pandemic, and so have done near-zero bizdev & make about what a non-FAANG W2 employee would, if not a little less. For other readers--this has still been worthwhile, I've learned a _ton_ and am pressing on to give this a shot while less personally compromised.)

> Getting the opportunity to understand the inner workings of an organization at, often, a senior management level, was one of the most lucrative lessons of my professional life

Would you say one can learn similar things if they work in an early stage startup?

I learned a lot about the way the world works through consulting. It is a different perspective

After also working as a consultant for many years, multiple times, I proposed to my customers the following. Do not pay me per day, hour or week.

Pay me 1% of the money, I will save your Company. Nobody ever took me on this offer... :-))

What type of consulting did you do?

Software development

You are both taking it too literally and not abstractly enough.

The FACT is that you likely have a giant blindspot merely working "for the man" like you do that ultimately and adversely affects the quality of your work. Or minimally limits how far you can (or SHOULD) ever advance without reaching your Peter Principle or Dunning-Kruger limits!