4 ms·

> 5 years is a lot There must be something wrong in this industry if 5 years is a lot. 5 years per company over a 40 years time spam yields 8 different compani

> 5 years is a lot There must be something wrong in this industry if 5 years is a lot. 5 years per company over a 40 years time spam yields 8 different companies. That seems a lot to me.

stefantheard 9y ago
The thing that is wrong is compensation. It is much more lucrative to not be loyal. If you are loyal you are compensated with really slim raises, a lot of times single digit percentages.
prepend 9y ago
Really? 5 years seems really long to me. A university is only 4 years. Changing companies every few years helps to expand networks and learn new skills.
- escanda 9y ago
  Not really. Beware you can be easily replaced in your new company without any compensation. Risk is often not accounted for. If you're a twenty something it's ok, but imagine you're a parent of 3 and you have to switch jobs every two years: unbearable.
  - user5994461 9y ago
    There are very few projects spanning 5 years or even close to that. Even if you want to stay in a company, you might not have the option.
  - lsc 9y ago
    >Not really. Beware you can be easily replaced in your new company without any compensation. Risk is often not accounted for. My perception is that the sort of people who stick around too long have a much harder time getting their next gig when their current job ends (as nearly all jobs do, sooner or later.) Now, certainly, this has something to do with the fact that people who do badly in interviews tend to stick around longer once they do score a decent job, but I think it also has to do with the fact that interviewing and starting a new job is a skill, and improves with practice, like any other skill, and if you don't have any practice, and then suddenly have to interview in 'hard mode' [1] you are going to have a hard time. I am one of those people who interviews better than their job performance would suggest, but even so, I personally would much rather swing for a better job while the economy is hot and get fired after a few months (and have to find a new job while unemployed in a hot economy) than ride a company all the way down during a downturn and then try to find a job while unemployed in a bad economy. Of course, that's not really a fair either/or; it's super hard to predict what companies will do well in the downturn while the economy is still doing well. I'm just saying that as long as the economy is hot, the consequences to losing your job tend to be small (unless you have a really serious problem with interviewing; I know some people that are actually really good programmers, but who are... disabled in that regard.) - when the economy is not hot, the consequences of losing your job are much greater. [1]It's so much easier to get a better job while you have a job than it is to get a job after you've been laid off, both because the new employer will think less of you if you are currently unemployed and because you are dramatically more likely to get laid off when demand for your job role in the economy as a whole is reduced. Getting a programming job in 1999? super easy. getting a programming job in 2002? extremely difficult.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    You can easily be replaced at any company without compensation. Like one on my coworkers said, always keep your running shoes around your neck. I'm prepared to change jobs st a moments notice. My resume stays up to date. I keep my PluralSight account and my network current. Also keep a savings account with enough in it to cover your expenses until you can get another job. In my neck of the woods (not on the west coast) for the last 20 years it's been about a month at most.
dougmwne 9y ago
I wonder what your context is. I've reviewed many hundreds of resumes from a dozen industries in the USA. 5 years truly is a long time in a single role for any corporate work experience from the last 15 years.
sodosopa 9y ago
I did some research with an old boss of mine and we found 2.5 years was the average based on the resumes we received. It's different now and specifically different than what it was in the 80's and 90's. I'm fortunate, I've been at my company for 13 years.
- pfranz 9y ago
  Did you just take the average? People with multiple 2 year stints will be over represented compared to the ones with 13 years since you're only sampling people looking for work (opposed to sampling all employees in the market).

> 5 years is a lot There must be something wrong in this industry if 5 years is a lot. 5 years per company over a 40 years time spam yields 8 different companies. That seems a lot to me.

stefantheard 9y ago

The thing that is wrong is compensation. It is much more lucrative to not be loyal. If you are loyal you are compensated with really slim raises, a lot of times single digit percentages.

prepend 9y ago

Really? 5 years seems really long to me. A university is only 4 years. Changing companies every few years helps to expand networks and learn new skills.

escanda 9y ago
Not really. Beware you can be easily replaced in your new company without any compensation. Risk is often not accounted for. If you're a twenty something it's ok, but imagine you're a parent of 3 and you have to switch jobs every two years: unbearable.
- user5994461 9y ago
  There are very few projects spanning 5 years or even close to that. Even if you want to stay in a company, you might not have the option.
- lsc 9y ago
  >Not really. Beware you can be easily replaced in your new company without any compensation. Risk is often not accounted for. My perception is that the sort of people who stick around too long have a much harder time getting their next gig when their current job ends (as nearly all jobs do, sooner or later.) Now, certainly, this has something to do with the fact that people who do badly in interviews tend to stick around longer once they do score a decent job, but I think it also has to do with the fact that interviewing and starting a new job is a skill, and improves with practice, like any other skill, and if you don't have any practice, and then suddenly have to interview in 'hard mode' [1] you are going to have a hard time. I am one of those people who interviews better than their job performance would suggest, but even so, I personally would much rather swing for a better job while the economy is hot and get fired after a few months (and have to find a new job while unemployed in a hot economy) than ride a company all the way down during a downturn and then try to find a job while unemployed in a bad economy. Of course, that's not really a fair either/or; it's super hard to predict what companies will do well in the downturn while the economy is still doing well. I'm just saying that as long as the economy is hot, the consequences to losing your job tend to be small (unless you have a really serious problem with interviewing; I know some people that are actually really good programmers, but who are... disabled in that regard.) - when the economy is not hot, the consequences of losing your job are much greater. [1]It's so much easier to get a better job while you have a job than it is to get a job after you've been laid off, both because the new employer will think less of you if you are currently unemployed and because you are dramatically more likely to get laid off when demand for your job role in the economy as a whole is reduced. Getting a programming job in 1999? super easy. getting a programming job in 2002? extremely difficult.
- scarface74 9y ago
  You can easily be replaced at any company without compensation. Like one on my coworkers said, always keep your running shoes around your neck. I'm prepared to change jobs st a moments notice. My resume stays up to date. I keep my PluralSight account and my network current. Also keep a savings account with enough in it to cover your expenses until you can get another job. In my neck of the woods (not on the west coast) for the last 20 years it's been about a month at most.

dougmwne 9y ago

I wonder what your context is. I've reviewed many hundreds of resumes from a dozen industries in the USA. 5 years truly is a long time in a single role for any corporate work experience from the last 15 years.

sodosopa 9y ago

I did some research with an old boss of mine and we found 2.5 years was the average based on the resumes we received. It's different now and specifically different than what it was in the 80's and 90's. I'm fortunate, I've been at my company for 13 years.

pfranz 9y ago
Did you just take the average? People with multiple 2 year stints will be over represented compared to the ones with 13 years since you're only sampling people looking for work (opposed to sampling all employees in the market).