41 ms·
If you've been there longer than 3 years, then yes, you're making the mistake.
by victor9000 5y ago
If you've been there longer than 3 years, then yes, you're making the mistake.
- rsynnott 5y agoThis is a strange attitude; if you change jobs every three years, then how much are you going to get done, really? If everyone took this approach, then would any large project ever get finished?
- Hydraulix989 5y agoWhy wouldn't six months be more than enough time to ship a project?
- derwiki 5y agoIt can take time to build political capital to be trusted to lead/ship a project.
- hn_go_brrrrr 5y agoDepends on the project. I just launched something last week I'd been working on for the previous 18 months.
- benhurmarcel 5y agoNot every company works only on small software products.
- victor9000 5y agoWell, OP is talking about their first job, so my advice is targeting that specific situation. As a general rule, engineers see a fairly large bump in pay when going from their first to their second job, particularly if they did a poor job of negotiating their first salary. So yes, in terms of career development and realizing your earning potential, you should not stay at your first job for more than a few years.
- smitty1e 5y agoAt the company, or in a specific position? I'd say continuity is fine, if the firm is large enough to offer a career path.
- jtwaleson 5y agoIn many startup product companies, the specific knowledge about the product is not interchangeable with other tech companies. The tech skills and the soft skills are, but a large part is know-how about the product and the market. It makes sense to stick around longer if you see yourself as a "knowledge worker" rather than as an interchangeable techie. It certainly makes sense from the company's perspective to keep knowledgeable people around.