3 ms·

"Job hoppers NEVER make good employees." I don't agree with this. I think the author can make the case that job hoppers aren't good employees in his experienc

by j_baker 17y ago

"Job hoppers NEVER make good employees." I don't agree with this. I think the author can make the case that job hoppers aren't good employees in his experience. And maybe he can even say that job hoppers are generally bad. But human beings are quirky animals. Any statement about human behavior that contains the word "always" or "never" is almost certainly wrong.

ellyagg 17y ago
This criticism is a pet peeve of mine. People use "never" and "always" all the time and everyone knows (ok, almost everyone) that they don't literally mean "never" and "always". For example, in this case he means, "Don't make the mistake of hiring a job hopper because you somehow think this time it'll be different. You're almost certainly wrong, and there's no way to tell in advance besides, so don't bother taking the risk. There are other similar candidates without that risk."
- j_baker 17y ago
  'People use "never" and "always" all the time and everyone knows (ok, almost everyone) that they don't literally mean "never" and "always".' I think it still makes a difference though. I mean consider the following two sentences: "Job hoppers NEVER make good employees." "Job hoppers ALMOST NEVER make good employees." The former is much more strongly worded to the point of requiring overwhelming evidence that I feel you won't be able to find when dealing with human behavior.
  - lyudmil 17y ago
    In your criticism you've missed an important factor. The former sentence is better writing. I also struggle with this when I write, but I try to catch myself and avoid going down that slippery slope. You can spend the time trying to make each of your statements precise so that no one can challenge it like you've challenged this one. Alternatively, you could choose to put something strongly, trusting your audience to see your point and find your readers are more engaged and eager to discuss your ideas.
    - j_baker 17y ago
      "The former sentence is better writing." That's highly debateable. And even if it's true, it's very much situational. I think it depends a lot on the purposes behind your writing. Are you writing to persuade people? Then perhaps you should consider the more strongly worded phrase. Are you writing to inform people (as this author does)? Then you're likely better off prioritizing accuracy. Like Einstein said: "If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor." Mixing persuasive and informative writing is generally a bad idea (although informing people of what your opinion is is a bit of a grey area). At best, it convinces your reader that you're trying to persuade rather than inform and makes you lose credibility. At worst, it's unethical because it's stating opinion as fact.
javajones 17y ago
Good point. What if a "job hopper" is someone who is looking for a good fit and won't settle for less? I don't see that as a negative.
ible 17y ago
I suspect that in many, especially larger, organizations excellent people need to hop to advance. Think about how co-workers and bosses react to a junior employee who quickly outstrips more experienced colleagues. Promoting someone junior rapidly past other people can cause resentment, or be structurally unavailable. The company may have policies about maximum annual raise, so an excellent person may advance in responsibility but not in pay. When taking a new job your position and pay are determined by your capabilities to a greater degree. There are definitely alternatives to 'job hopping' including consulting/contracting to get rid of the stigma while essentially doing the same thing. Alternatively you can get a job with (or start) a start-up so you can have 'measurement and leverage'.
melling 17y ago
Never look back!
abalashov 17y ago
Yet hopping is, within the working world, the fastest way to advance in rank and income.

by j_baker 17y ago

ellyagg 17y ago

This criticism is a pet peeve of mine. People use "never" and "always" all the time and everyone knows (ok, almost everyone) that they don't literally mean "never" and "always". For example, in this case he means, "Don't make the mistake of hiring a job hopper because you somehow think this time it'll be different. You're almost certainly wrong, and there's no way to tell in advance besides, so don't bother taking the risk. There are other similar candidates without that risk."

j_baker 17y ago
'People use "never" and "always" all the time and everyone knows (ok, almost everyone) that they don't literally mean "never" and "always".' I think it still makes a difference though. I mean consider the following two sentences: "Job hoppers NEVER make good employees." "Job hoppers ALMOST NEVER make good employees." The former is much more strongly worded to the point of requiring overwhelming evidence that I feel you won't be able to find when dealing with human behavior.
- lyudmil 17y ago
  In your criticism you've missed an important factor. The former sentence is better writing. I also struggle with this when I write, but I try to catch myself and avoid going down that slippery slope. You can spend the time trying to make each of your statements precise so that no one can challenge it like you've challenged this one. Alternatively, you could choose to put something strongly, trusting your audience to see your point and find your readers are more engaged and eager to discuss your ideas.
  - j_baker 17y ago
    "The former sentence is better writing." That's highly debateable. And even if it's true, it's very much situational. I think it depends a lot on the purposes behind your writing. Are you writing to persuade people? Then perhaps you should consider the more strongly worded phrase. Are you writing to inform people (as this author does)? Then you're likely better off prioritizing accuracy. Like Einstein said: "If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor." Mixing persuasive and informative writing is generally a bad idea (although informing people of what your opinion is is a bit of a grey area). At best, it convinces your reader that you're trying to persuade rather than inform and makes you lose credibility. At worst, it's unethical because it's stating opinion as fact.

javajones 17y ago

Good point. What if a "job hopper" is someone who is looking for a good fit and won't settle for less? I don't see that as a negative.

ible 17y ago

I suspect that in many, especially larger, organizations excellent people need to hop to advance. Think about how co-workers and bosses react to a junior employee who quickly outstrips more experienced colleagues. Promoting someone junior rapidly past other people can cause resentment, or be structurally unavailable. The company may have policies about maximum annual raise, so an excellent person may advance in responsibility but not in pay. When taking a new job your position and pay are determined by your capabilities to a greater degree. There are definitely alternatives to 'job hopping' including consulting/contracting to get rid of the stigma while essentially doing the same thing. Alternatively you can get a job with (or start) a start-up so you can have 'measurement and leverage'.

melling 17y ago

Never look back!

abalashov 17y ago

Yet hopping is, within the working world, the fastest way to advance in rank and income.