3 ms·

I've had 3 jobs in the past 6 years (5 in 10). So I spend about 2 years/gig on average. Reasons: 1. Learning. I find that I learn 80-90% of what I will learn a

by Maro 8y ago

I've had 3 jobs in the past 6 years (5 in 10). So I spend about 2 years/gig on average. Reasons: 1. Learning. I find that I learn 80-90% of what I will learn at a company in the first 12-18 months. Staying at a job for too long is risky because I will miss out on new things happening in my area. In the long term this is the most important, because this is what will get me more money, and make me competitive/valuable. Example: it's hard for people in traditional data roles to do ML/DL without switching jobs. 2. I prefer dynamic equilibrium over static equilibrium. I very strongly prefer being able to go out and get a good job at any time over having a "cozy job". The only way to be good at getting a job is having practice at it. 3. Impact. I find that I deliver most of my impact on the job in the first 2 years, after that it levels off and I tend to do more maintenance stuff of all the things I've built (both systems and teams). 4. More money. This is almost a side-effect of 1-3. But also in itself: if I want to get more money in my current job, it's partially up to me, but it's also up to my manager and the company/culture. If I get unlucky with my manager/company, I'm not going to get it. Also, sometimes I hit a glass ceiling, and there's simply nowhere to go (eg. I'm already the Head/Director whatever, but the company isn't that successful and/or/but pay levels aren't that high). On the other hand, switching jobs is entirely up to me: if I am good at what I do and have a good track record to prove it, practice interviewing to be good at it, and play the numbers game (apply to lots of companies), I will succeed at finding a higher paying job. Overall: 1. I have to be ruthless and watch out for my own interests. Nobody else will. The world doesn't owe me anything, I have to go out, work for it, make smart decisions and then pluck the rewards myself. 2. I don't think this is unfair towards companies. If a company/org is badly run, people leaving is valuable feedback. Assuming a company can hire good new people, those will deliver new impact, bring new knowledge, etc. Having said that, there are companies where you can work and make more and more money (usually stock options play a big role here), and keep learn more and more (because the company is growing like crazy). These are the startups that are run well and are rocket ships (the FAANGs were like this).

notyouravgdoge 8y ago
Does switching jobs so often raise any red flags when you interview?
- mirceal 8y ago
  2 years in one place raising flags? Hahah. No. Good places where you want to work are more than glad to get strong engineers working for them, even just for a couple of years. In the age of the cloud 2 years is an eternity. Be careful not to burn any bridges thought. Even in suboptimal situations take the high road and cultivate relationships with the people there that you want to work with again. In the long run this is going to pay dividends.
- jogjayr 8y ago
  No one blinks at multiple 2-year stints, especially if they were spent at smallish companies (< 500 employees). Spending 2 years usually means you went through at least 2 performance review cycles, accomplished or delivered something and are looking for something new to work on. At smaller companies it's not always possible to change group, so it's logical that you might look to change your job instead. My own work history so far has been similar - 3 jobs lasting between 1.5 and 2.5 years, and I'm now currently on my 4th. It's never been brought up as an issue in interviews.
- commandlinefan 8y ago
  Not OP, but - I graduated in '95 and started working right away. Back then, the market and demand for developers was insane, and I ended up switching jobs - for 10-20% more every time - four times in four years. Then, right around 2000, the market crashed and I started interviewing again, and suddenly I had a really tough time finding anything: they brought up my short tenure at all my past jobs very negatively. I did finally find something, and have slowed down my job-hopping a bit (averaging 5 years per job now), but the "four jobs in four years, back in the late 90's" thing came up just last year during an interview - for a job that I didn't end up getting. In short - be careful, they're watching.
  - bootsz 8y ago
    Personally I feel like an employer who is overly concerned with something like that (especially when it was so long ago) is a huge red flag. People evaluate others based on their own experiences and ideas of success. If they feel that staying at one job for a long time is the utmost important factor above all else, what does that tell me about the kind of person they are and the kind of company they’re running? It tells me it’s probably a run of the mill mediocrity-factory full of people mostly just punching the clock every day. I’ve ignored these signs in the past and learned the hard way. IMO places that have strong engineering cultures that are run by smart and driven people understand that your technical skill is what matters and aren’t going to hold it against you if you’ve hopped jobs to maintain your career growth, because they’ve most likely done the same thing themselves. Ambition recognizes ambition, and ambitious people HATE to stagnate.

by Maro 8y ago

notyouravgdoge 8y ago

Does switching jobs so often raise any red flags when you interview?

mirceal 8y ago
2 years in one place raising flags? Hahah. No. Good places where you want to work are more than glad to get strong engineers working for them, even just for a couple of years. In the age of the cloud 2 years is an eternity. Be careful not to burn any bridges thought. Even in suboptimal situations take the high road and cultivate relationships with the people there that you want to work with again. In the long run this is going to pay dividends.
jogjayr 8y ago
No one blinks at multiple 2-year stints, especially if they were spent at smallish companies (< 500 employees). Spending 2 years usually means you went through at least 2 performance review cycles, accomplished or delivered something and are looking for something new to work on. At smaller companies it's not always possible to change group, so it's logical that you might look to change your job instead. My own work history so far has been similar - 3 jobs lasting between 1.5 and 2.5 years, and I'm now currently on my 4th. It's never been brought up as an issue in interviews.
commandlinefan 8y ago
Not OP, but - I graduated in '95 and started working right away. Back then, the market and demand for developers was insane, and I ended up switching jobs - for 10-20% more every time - four times in four years. Then, right around 2000, the market crashed and I started interviewing again, and suddenly I had a really tough time finding anything: they brought up my short tenure at all my past jobs very negatively. I did finally find something, and have slowed down my job-hopping a bit (averaging 5 years per job now), but the "four jobs in four years, back in the late 90's" thing came up just last year during an interview - for a job that I didn't end up getting. In short - be careful, they're watching.
- bootsz 8y ago
  Personally I feel like an employer who is overly concerned with something like that (especially when it was so long ago) is a huge red flag. People evaluate others based on their own experiences and ideas of success. If they feel that staying at one job for a long time is the utmost important factor above all else, what does that tell me about the kind of person they are and the kind of company they’re running? It tells me it’s probably a run of the mill mediocrity-factory full of people mostly just punching the clock every day. I’ve ignored these signs in the past and learned the hard way. IMO places that have strong engineering cultures that are run by smart and driven people understand that your technical skill is what matters and aren’t going to hold it against you if you’ve hopped jobs to maintain your career growth, because they’ve most likely done the same thing themselves. Ambition recognizes ambition, and ambitious people HATE to stagnate.