5 ms·

I've seen two types who fit the six month pattern: 1 Devs who simply can't code and get fired/managed out/not contract renewed 2 Unlucky people who don't put

I've seen two types who fit the six month pattern: 1 Devs who simply can't code and get fired/managed out/not contract renewed 2 Unlucky people who don't put up with crappy work environments The first groups should be easy to weed out with decent interviews. The second are a goldmine as long as your company isn't as dysfunctional as the companies that drove them away previously.

amyjess 10y ago
Or, for that matter: 3 Unlucky people who have a tendency to get hired just before the company changes course and begins laying people off That was the case with my last employer. Right after I was hired, our revenue sources began to dry up, and we couldn't stop the bleeding, so eventually a third of the company, including me, got laid off. I lasted 15 months before the axe fell, and I was worried when applying for new positions that my resume would be thrown out because I was there less than two years.
- derefr 10y ago
  As just this sort of person, I get the sense that I'm probably looking for new employment the wrong way, because I only start hearing about opportunities at startups when those startups are fait-accompli dead-in-the-water. My hypothesis: most startups don't bother advertising openings publicly while they can get by using private word-of-mouth in their network. Since I'm not well-enough-connected, none of the private word-of-mouth ever reaches me; so I only ever hear about these companies once their well of private leads has run dry—which really should be taken as a vote-of-no-confidence from their network.
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
I've found that the type of person who "[doesn't] put up with crappy work environments" is often the type of person who finds all sorts of perfectly fine work environments to be crappy.
- flukus 10y ago
  I'm that person. For me it's the code quality, attitude and direction that matter the most. There is an awful lot of terrible code out there and an awful lot of companies that are either oblivious to it or lying about it until post hire. I can handle terrible code, but if there isn't a solid plan in place to improve it for whatever reason (or if it's getting worse) then I'm out of there.
  - jimmaswell 10y ago
    Personally, I don't foresee caring this much about the quality of the codebase I'm hired onto, the direction of the projects, etc. as long as I'm getting paid for it.
  - MyNameIsFred 10y ago
    So you're an example. What's your rate of job turnover with a policy like that?
    - flukus 10y ago
      It varies from years to months/weeks, although a lot of the months ones were contract jobs. My longest stint was 3-4 years, which I only left because I relocated. The shortest is weeks, this is at places that have mountains of technical debt as well as other problems, like managers that don't understand the limitations of that technical debt and want everything done yesterday. The last job was 18 months. despite a lot of bad code I had a free hand to add gradual improvements. The current one is looking to be considerably shorter.
  - abawany 10y ago
    I can empathize. You have one life to live so why be miserable? When a company's management disrespects its talent by imposing on them one or more of bad processes, malicious and/or incompetent minders, poor technology, and other non-technical obstacles, you enable and enforce this behavior by staying. There is only so much one can ask before accepting an offer, especially when some have no problems with lying. I resent the implication that I must agree to be voluntarily Shanghai-ed by the omnipotent employer for fear that I turn off some nebulous good prospect down the road. I hope the people who I encounter in desirable employment situations in the future evaluate history individually vs. do the whiteboard-interview lazy equivalent.
angryasian 10y ago
I don't get this at all. As developers we should always be looking out for our best interests. If you think you can find something better for more money do it. The whole idea of company loyalty is bs in my opinion. They generally aren't loyal to you.
- piva00 10y ago
  I kinda agree with you on that but there's also another point: when a company hires you it takes some time for you to be really productive, in the meantime you must be a "loss" or just a tad bit of breaking even. From my previous job as a tech lead I've seen this ramp up time taking from 1 month (for a very well defined position with the perfect match) up to 6 months (someone who was curious about a new line of work and had to learn a lot but was a very intelligent person). So of course, company loyalty is bullshit but there's also a point where your contribution almost didn't pay off their effort and money, those are the people I'd avoid hiring. Anywhere after 1 to 1.5 years at the same job and I'd not bat an eye, many experiences lesser than an year would not put me off instantly just by looking at a CV but I'd definitely take more time to discover what happened.
- timv 10y ago
  Your immediate self interest may not end up being your long term self interest (or it might, I don't profess to be an expert on your career) As a hiring manager it's not in my interest to hire someone who is likely to leave in 6-12 months. If I have a team that is growing, then I am already spending a considerable portion of my time recruiting, I can't afford to have to rehire my whole team every single year. I do want people who have personal drive and high standards - who won't put up with a toxic workplace. So if you've left 1 or 2 places after 6-12 months, then that could be a good sign, and I'll probably get you in for an interview and ask about it. But if you never stay somewhere for more than a year, then I don't like my chances of being the place that breaks the pattern, and it's unlikely that I will bring you in for what is intended to be a permanent position. While I can absolutely understand why someone might want to jump around every 6 months for better pay, don't expect me to sign up to be the next stop on that trip.
- lloyd-christmas 10y ago

amyjess 10y ago

Or, for that matter: 3 Unlucky people who have a tendency to get hired just before the company changes course and begins laying people off That was the case with my last employer. Right after I was hired, our revenue sources began to dry up, and we couldn't stop the bleeding, so eventually a third of the company, including me, got laid off. I lasted 15 months before the axe fell, and I was worried when applying for new positions that my resume would be thrown out because I was there less than two years.

derefr 10y ago
As just this sort of person, I get the sense that I'm probably looking for new employment the wrong way, because I only start hearing about opportunities at startups when those startups are fait-accompli dead-in-the-water. My hypothesis: most startups don't bother advertising openings publicly while they can get by using private word-of-mouth in their network. Since I'm not well-enough-connected, none of the private word-of-mouth ever reaches me; so I only ever hear about these companies once their well of private leads has run dry—which really should be taken as a vote-of-no-confidence from their network.

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago

I've found that the type of person who "[doesn't] put up with crappy work environments" is often the type of person who finds all sorts of perfectly fine work environments to be crappy.

flukus 10y ago
I'm that person. For me it's the code quality, attitude and direction that matter the most. There is an awful lot of terrible code out there and an awful lot of companies that are either oblivious to it or lying about it until post hire. I can handle terrible code, but if there isn't a solid plan in place to improve it for whatever reason (or if it's getting worse) then I'm out of there.
- jimmaswell 10y ago
  Personally, I don't foresee caring this much about the quality of the codebase I'm hired onto, the direction of the projects, etc. as long as I'm getting paid for it.
- MyNameIsFred 10y ago
  So you're an example. What's your rate of job turnover with a policy like that?
  - flukus 10y ago
    It varies from years to months/weeks, although a lot of the months ones were contract jobs. My longest stint was 3-4 years, which I only left because I relocated. The shortest is weeks, this is at places that have mountains of technical debt as well as other problems, like managers that don't understand the limitations of that technical debt and want everything done yesterday. The last job was 18 months. despite a lot of bad code I had a free hand to add gradual improvements. The current one is looking to be considerably shorter.
- abawany 10y ago
  I can empathize. You have one life to live so why be miserable? When a company's management disrespects its talent by imposing on them one or more of bad processes, malicious and/or incompetent minders, poor technology, and other non-technical obstacles, you enable and enforce this behavior by staying. There is only so much one can ask before accepting an offer, especially when some have no problems with lying. I resent the implication that I must agree to be voluntarily Shanghai-ed by the omnipotent employer for fear that I turn off some nebulous good prospect down the road. I hope the people who I encounter in desirable employment situations in the future evaluate history individually vs. do the whiteboard-interview lazy equivalent.

angryasian 10y ago

I don't get this at all. As developers we should always be looking out for our best interests. If you think you can find something better for more money do it. The whole idea of company loyalty is bs in my opinion. They generally aren't loyal to you.

piva00 10y ago
I kinda agree with you on that but there's also another point: when a company hires you it takes some time for you to be really productive, in the meantime you must be a "loss" or just a tad bit of breaking even. From my previous job as a tech lead I've seen this ramp up time taking from 1 month (for a very well defined position with the perfect match) up to 6 months (someone who was curious about a new line of work and had to learn a lot but was a very intelligent person). So of course, company loyalty is bullshit but there's also a point where your contribution almost didn't pay off their effort and money, those are the people I'd avoid hiring. Anywhere after 1 to 1.5 years at the same job and I'd not bat an eye, many experiences lesser than an year would not put me off instantly just by looking at a CV but I'd definitely take more time to discover what happened.
timv 10y ago
Your immediate self interest may not end up being your long term self interest (or it might, I don't profess to be an expert on your career) As a hiring manager it's not in my interest to hire someone who is likely to leave in 6-12 months. If I have a team that is growing, then I am already spending a considerable portion of my time recruiting, I can't afford to have to rehire my whole team every single year. I do want people who have personal drive and high standards - who won't put up with a toxic workplace. So if you've left 1 or 2 places after 6-12 months, then that could be a good sign, and I'll probably get you in for an interview and ask about it. But if you never stay somewhere for more than a year, then I don't like my chances of being the place that breaks the pattern, and it's unlikely that I will bring you in for what is intended to be a permanent position. While I can absolutely understand why someone might want to jump around every 6 months for better pay, don't expect me to sign up to be the next stop on that trip.
lloyd-christmas 10y ago