3 ms·
Maybe I'm more conservative than others here, but anything less than 2 years tenure at a company seems suspicious to me. The people I've known who bounced after
by jurassic 9y ago
Maybe I'm more conservative than others here, but anything less than 2 years tenure at a company seems suspicious to me. The people I've known who bounced after ~18 months or less were often the ones I would've wanted to quit anyway, who weren't cutting the mustard and weren't on track for promotion. For them, talking a big game at interview time every two years probably is income-maximizing because the longer they stick in the same job without promotions the more obvious their stagnancy is on the resume.
- shados 9y agoIn the big tech hubs, 2 years is pretty much the norm, for a variety of reasons (what's talked about in this article, but also just the sheer amount of opportunities). It's not a great thing, but thats simply the reality. It's not too uncommon to see a company open an office outside of SF/SV/NYC/Boston/Whatever with the primary goal being to attract employees that will stay longer.
- therealdrag0 9y agoYou only have my word for it, but I've had the highest marks from both co-workers and managers at reviews and have gotten higher than average raises. But my last job was for a consulting company and we finished the job in 10 months and it wasn't that clear what other gig I would be moved to so I accepted a job with someone who I had worked with before and was now a technical manager (another point that I'm not someone you wouldn't want to work with). My job before that I finished a project in 18 months and was transitioning into maintenance mode. I was bored and under paid, so I took another job offer also with someone I had worked with before. Each of these were 10-15% raises, so that was incentive too. So your intuition might fit some cases, but definitely not all.