4 ms·
This article flies in the face of what I have been reading for years. This article is taking some simple data "employees that change jobs get X% raise" and extr
by bitexploder 9y ago
This article flies in the face of what I have been reading for years. This article is taking some simple data "employees that change jobs get X% raise" and extrapolating it to a whole lot of wrong. It does vary by organization.
For example if you are at an organization where you are basically the most senior employee already and you can take on a new role at a larger organization with new responsibilities or skill growth a job change can make sense. If you are just bouncing around between say Amazon, Google, and Facebook this can often be a dud strategy in the long term.
Take this with a grain of salt, since I don't have time to dig up citations, but I have read that the long term compensation is actually higher for individuals that don't switch jobs so often. I guess the career employee is a bit of a legend in IT these days so we could have a lively discussion about the selection and difference in a big tech firm and a more traditional F500, but I think in the long run these things will normalize because they are basic human nature and organizational structure problems and nothing is intrinsically special about technology companies. They are the special darlings of the era, so they get to break the rules a bit. Maybe it really will foment a long term change in "the rules" or always be a bit of a bubble in terms of how the organizations operate.