Or some more sage advice: keep interviewing and an eye on salaries and compare that to your realistic prospectives at your job. Employers aren’t dumb, and if they see that you move around a lot they might not even bother hiring you.
2ish years is the Goldilocks zone of job hoping. Less then that and you look more trouble than you are worth. More than that and you miss out on real pay raises. Though of course if you have it good then you don’t have to jump.
It does work for a while but eventually higher end stuff they will pass you on. Training a new employee is about 6 months worth of work, so spinning someone up just on new projects/ history takes a good chunk of time.
This depends on the job and role, I know plenty people who tend to be flung at a project for 6-8 months, then pivoted to another, ad infinitum. For them, changing company etc is only slightly more inconvenient for them and the employer than shifting internally.
My manager does this. If he sees that a job candidate hops jobs a lot he won’t give them an interview. That being said, our yearly raises meet/exceed inflation and he’s a pretty good manager
If someone’s spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs, there’s a high chance they’re job hopping. Especially if they’re engineers in a discipline that can take months to a year to be fully capable of the tasks needed.
Im pretty senior now, you’d pass me by and the most valuable thing I’d do is to reduce that learning time.
I don’t know what you do, but in my IT jobs I’ve seen long onboarding times are due companies not focusing on their product, eg: a finance company writing their own authentication system, or maintaining someone’s vanity project who has long since departed. Get rid of that and you can bring people in off the street.
Get rid of that and you can bring people in off the street.
Yeah, you can’t do that with engineering. Especially when you’re building models to support multiple product lines and have physical testing you have to match to
That’s about as logical and as loaded as an assumption as being fickle. It could also mean the person isn’t qualified and other employers figured that out. But again these are assumptions. In their shoes they are right to be wary and probably have some experiences backing up that caution.
For junior positions maybe. For senior and especially principals there is a ton of value to continuity. When a senior engineer leaves it’s almost like replacing the entire team in terms of overhead if there isn’t a natural successor. And when principals leave you end up losing vision as well as that leadership. This can kill entire projects of it happens unexpectedly.
My position required at least a year to learn everything, and I’m a pretty fast learner. My coworkers jobs require a similar level of training, even with experience. If a candidate spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs then I agree with my manager that they weren’t worth potentially wasting time on.
This is pretty dumb advice, because someone who’s hopping every 2 years and getting passed on interviews is still getting more interviews than someone who’s not applying at all.
How much is moving around a lot? Because 2-3 years turn over is pretty common in IT and it doesn’t seem to prevent being hired. It may even be considered as better experience than the one of an engineer that worked on a single system for 10 years.
I’m not saying you’re wrong…and as I age, I’m asked more and more about my job hopping history…but I am starting to feel like the negatives of a long history of job hopping are in many ways balanced out by the long history itself.
I’m a CAD drafter with 17 years of experience in 5 different jobs. In interviews it’s more and more common to get questions about my plans for the future and how long I plan to stay with (company that is interviewing me). Each time, I tell them that I’m prepared to retire from their company in a few decades as long as they take care of me and keep a good working environment and competitive compensation.
Whether I’m just in a good market for my skills, or job hopping isn’t the deterrent some people seem to think it is, I have been getting a constant stream of recruiters filling my inbox for the past decade, whether I’ve been looking or not, and I’ve honestly never not gotten an offer for any position I was actually interested in.
If I felt it was a good fit and was interested in talking to them, it has always led to an interview, and if I was still interested after that, an offer. Every time. Granted, often the offer was way less than I was currently making or in the interview we realize it’s not a good fit…but never once has my job history been an issue that comes between a position that’s a good fit and a job offer.
From one person’s experience (mine): They don’t read CVs that closely. I’ve got a couple of 1 year jobs (not contracts) and they’re more interested in what I did rather than why so short. If they ask I tell them it’s because I didn’t like the position but gave it a go for a year. I also have a 2 year gap in employment none of them are interested in for 4 jobs now, they don’t even spot the missing years and I’ve had to point it out in interviews because it’s a story of how I deal with big tasks.
If they are that petty that they’ll pass me over because of something like that then that employers policies would raise more flags than I’d want to deal with anyway.
When hiring you have hundreds of CVs pass by, I’m looking for experience, we’ll sort out these other details in the interview.
Caveat: I am older now, more senior but never had issues finding work.
Or some more sage advice: keep interviewing and an eye on salaries and compare that to your realistic prospectives at your job. Employers aren’t dumb, and if they see that you move around a lot they might not even bother hiring you.
I have a lot of acquaintances in my field that seem to have no problem changing jobs every 1-2 years and keep doing better each time.
2ish years is the Goldilocks zone of job hoping. Less then that and you look more trouble than you are worth. More than that and you miss out on real pay raises. Though of course if you have it good then you don’t have to jump.
It does work for a while but eventually higher end stuff they will pass you on. Training a new employee is about 6 months worth of work, so spinning someone up just on new projects/ history takes a good chunk of time.
This depends on the job and role, I know plenty people who tend to be flung at a project for 6-8 months, then pivoted to another, ad infinitum. For them, changing company etc is only slightly more inconvenient for them and the employer than shifting internally.
My manager does this. If he sees that a job candidate hops jobs a lot he won’t give them an interview. That being said, our yearly raises meet/exceed inflation and he’s a pretty good manager
Just because they are good and your job gives raises doesn’t mean previous employers did.
If you want loyalty get a dog, I work to get paid.
If someone’s spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs, there’s a high chance they’re job hopping. Especially if they’re engineers in a discipline that can take months to a year to be fully capable of the tasks needed.
Im pretty senior now, you’d pass me by and the most valuable thing I’d do is to reduce that learning time.
I don’t know what you do, but in my IT jobs I’ve seen long onboarding times are due companies not focusing on their product, eg: a finance company writing their own authentication system, or maintaining someone’s vanity project who has long since departed. Get rid of that and you can bring people in off the street.
Yeah, you can’t do that with engineering. Especially when you’re building models to support multiple product lines and have physical testing you have to match to
That’s not a very logical approach.
If the qualifications are in place, your manager may be losing out on good and qualified workforce that would be loyal if they got treated well
That’s about as logical and as loaded as an assumption as being fickle. It could also mean the person isn’t qualified and other employers figured that out. But again these are assumptions. In their shoes they are right to be wary and probably have some experiences backing up that caution.
For junior positions maybe. For senior and especially principals there is a ton of value to continuity. When a senior engineer leaves it’s almost like replacing the entire team in terms of overhead if there isn’t a natural successor. And when principals leave you end up losing vision as well as that leadership. This can kill entire projects of it happens unexpectedly.
My position required at least a year to learn everything, and I’m a pretty fast learner. My coworkers jobs require a similar level of training, even with experience. If a candidate spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs then I agree with my manager that they weren’t worth potentially wasting time on.
This is pretty dumb advice, because someone who’s hopping every 2 years and getting passed on interviews is still getting more interviews than someone who’s not applying at all.
How much is moving around a lot? Because 2-3 years turn over is pretty common in IT and it doesn’t seem to prevent being hired. It may even be considered as better experience than the one of an engineer that worked on a single system for 10 years.
I’m not saying you’re wrong…and as I age, I’m asked more and more about my job hopping history…but I am starting to feel like the negatives of a long history of job hopping are in many ways balanced out by the long history itself.
I’m a CAD drafter with 17 years of experience in 5 different jobs. In interviews it’s more and more common to get questions about my plans for the future and how long I plan to stay with (company that is interviewing me). Each time, I tell them that I’m prepared to retire from their company in a few decades as long as they take care of me and keep a good working environment and competitive compensation.
Whether I’m just in a good market for my skills, or job hopping isn’t the deterrent some people seem to think it is, I have been getting a constant stream of recruiters filling my inbox for the past decade, whether I’ve been looking or not, and I’ve honestly never not gotten an offer for any position I was actually interested in.
If I felt it was a good fit and was interested in talking to them, it has always led to an interview, and if I was still interested after that, an offer. Every time. Granted, often the offer was way less than I was currently making or in the interview we realize it’s not a good fit…but never once has my job history been an issue that comes between a position that’s a good fit and a job offer.
That’s very interesting stuff, thank you for your perspective.
From one person’s experience (mine): They don’t read CVs that closely. I’ve got a couple of 1 year jobs (not contracts) and they’re more interested in what I did rather than why so short. If they ask I tell them it’s because I didn’t like the position but gave it a go for a year. I also have a 2 year gap in employment none of them are interested in for 4 jobs now, they don’t even spot the missing years and I’ve had to point it out in interviews because it’s a story of how I deal with big tasks.
If they are that petty that they’ll pass me over because of something like that then that employers policies would raise more flags than I’d want to deal with anyway.
When hiring you have hundreds of CVs pass by, I’m looking for experience, we’ll sort out these other details in the interview.
Caveat: I am older now, more senior but never had issues finding work.