4 ms·

> the rational person abandons ship at the first available incremental improvement. The problem with this take is that over time, those incremental improvement

> the rational person abandons ship at the first available incremental improvement. The problem with this take is that over time, those incremental improvements become harder to find for someone who has established a pattern of job hopping. It’s not a big deal when you’re 24 years old and you’re not really owning major initiatives and long-term projects. It becomes a big problem when you’re at 15 YOE and your resume has ten different companies where you never stayed long enough to even see the long-term consequences of your decisions. I’ve seen a lot of pattern job hopper candidates who clearly have “One year of experience repeated 10 times” who can’t really compete with someone who has fewer jobs but stuck around long enough at each company to make a bigger impact. If job hopping continues, it catches up to you later in a career.

mejutoco 4y ago
I think these concepts are orthogonal. You can have one year of experience 10 times by working 10 years in a single company and not self-actualising. One could argue an employee can stay too long at a job for the comfort and lack of ambition, coasting. Even at the executive level, staying long does not guarantee owning to one‘s mistakes, since there are many ways to deflect blame and many places where top of the org has little accountability.
- hnaccount_rng 4y ago
  Genuine question: How can you ever learn from feedback loops that take 2-3 years if you only ever stick around for a year?
  - mejutoco 4y ago
    TLDR: you cannot. I am saying they are independent concepts. Basically, if you stay for one year it is not possible to learn the effects of longer projects (very valid point you mention). _But_, staying 10 years does not mean necessarily that you did learn from 2-3 years cycles. It will be _possible_. It could mean you are very good at deflecting, coasting, or playing golf with the right people, among many other possibilities. Unrelated: today is on the news that Unilever's CEO will be resigning after 3 years, which also seems short to me.
    - UncleMeat 4y ago
      Sure, there are plenty of people with decades of experience who haven't actually developed beyond a mid level engineer. Long stints aren't proof that somebody is skilled. The point is that short stints are a worrisome thing on resumes at some point. Not a hard line - if I've got a personal relationship with somebody or strong recommendations from people I deeply trust it changes things. But somebody coming into a leadership role needs a lot of time to even understand an organization well enough to propose changes, let alone see those changes through. "Some new director showed up, reorged us, and left" is a failure mode for organizations. It causes huge problems and needs to be avoided.
      - romdev 4y ago
        That used to be called a 'seagull manager' - one who flies in, sh*ts on everything and flies away.
    - thrwyoilarticle 4y ago
      >Unrelated: today is on the news that Unilever's CEO will be resigning after 3 years, which also seems short to me. Wait til you hear about Australian Prime Ministers
vsareto 4y ago
>If job hopping continues, it catches up to you later in a career. This is not guaranteed. You will limit yourself out of some jobs, but that's true with any career decision you make. Someone somewhere isn't going to like what you did and not give you a job because of their views. But as long as the pool of jobs is large enough, you can find something. If the pool of jobs shrinks so dramatically that this isn't supported, you might survive but you'll end up having a lower salary for it long-term. These arguments seem to be against full time position job hoppers, but you may not be asking if they were doing contracts or purposeful short-term engagements. And perhaps a contractor is looking to go full-time. But before getting the full story, you've already made your decision. There is not a optimal path which grants you maximized salary and maximized opportunities. The industry supports multiple career archetypes right now. Don't cast doom and gloom to make people feel anxious that they chose the wrong path when there are viable alternatives.
pc86 4y ago
Counterpoint: I have 11 YOE and am at my 6th company (not including freelancing), currently a Senior EM. I've been at my current role for less than 6 months, the place is a toxic nightmare, and have had no problem whatsoever getting interviews for senior IC and team lead positions. The longest I've been at any one role was just under 3.5 years, with most under 2 - basically the first time I asked for a promotion or raise and didn't get it, I'd leave. Now, it's certainly possible that another 3-5 years and another 2-3 companies would negatively impact my ability to land interviews, but I haven't seen the slightest impact yet.
- hackitup7 4y ago
  At least from my perspective your 3.5 year stint shows that you can stay for a while at one company, so personally I would probably not view your background as one of a "job hopper."
- aaronax 4y ago
  So you are able to get jobs at places that are "toxic nightmares". Perhaps with your job-hopping history you would find it more difficult to get a job at places that nurture a positive culture and high retention. Might be some correlation.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    This seems like a premature conclusion based on one data point out of six.

mejutoco 4y ago

I think these concepts are orthogonal. You can have one year of experience 10 times by working 10 years in a single company and not self-actualising. One could argue an employee can stay too long at a job for the comfort and lack of ambition, coasting. Even at the executive level, staying long does not guarantee owning to one‘s mistakes, since there are many ways to deflect blame and many places where top of the org has little accountability.

hnaccount_rng 4y ago
Genuine question: How can you ever learn from feedback loops that take 2-3 years if you only ever stick around for a year?
- mejutoco 4y ago
  TLDR: you cannot. I am saying they are independent concepts. Basically, if you stay for one year it is not possible to learn the effects of longer projects (very valid point you mention). _But_, staying 10 years does not mean necessarily that you did learn from 2-3 years cycles. It will be _possible_. It could mean you are very good at deflecting, coasting, or playing golf with the right people, among many other possibilities. Unrelated: today is on the news that Unilever's CEO will be resigning after 3 years, which also seems short to me.
  - UncleMeat 4y ago
    Sure, there are plenty of people with decades of experience who haven't actually developed beyond a mid level engineer. Long stints aren't proof that somebody is skilled. The point is that short stints are a worrisome thing on resumes at some point. Not a hard line - if I've got a personal relationship with somebody or strong recommendations from people I deeply trust it changes things. But somebody coming into a leadership role needs a lot of time to even understand an organization well enough to propose changes, let alone see those changes through. "Some new director showed up, reorged us, and left" is a failure mode for organizations. It causes huge problems and needs to be avoided.
    - romdev 4y ago
      That used to be called a 'seagull manager' - one who flies in, sh*ts on everything and flies away.
  - thrwyoilarticle 4y ago
    >Unrelated: today is on the news that Unilever's CEO will be resigning after 3 years, which also seems short to me. Wait til you hear about Australian Prime Ministers

vsareto 4y ago

>If job hopping continues, it catches up to you later in a career. This is not guaranteed. You will limit yourself out of some jobs, but that's true with any career decision you make. Someone somewhere isn't going to like what you did and not give you a job because of their views. But as long as the pool of jobs is large enough, you can find something. If the pool of jobs shrinks so dramatically that this isn't supported, you might survive but you'll end up having a lower salary for it long-term. These arguments seem to be against full time position job hoppers, but you may not be asking if they were doing contracts or purposeful short-term engagements. And perhaps a contractor is looking to go full-time. But before getting the full story, you've already made your decision. There is not a optimal path which grants you maximized salary and maximized opportunities. The industry supports multiple career archetypes right now. Don't cast doom and gloom to make people feel anxious that they chose the wrong path when there are viable alternatives.

pc86 4y ago

Counterpoint: I have 11 YOE and am at my 6th company (not including freelancing), currently a Senior EM. I've been at my current role for less than 6 months, the place is a toxic nightmare, and have had no problem whatsoever getting interviews for senior IC and team lead positions. The longest I've been at any one role was just under 3.5 years, with most under 2 - basically the first time I asked for a promotion or raise and didn't get it, I'd leave. Now, it's certainly possible that another 3-5 years and another 2-3 companies would negatively impact my ability to land interviews, but I haven't seen the slightest impact yet.

hackitup7 4y ago
At least from my perspective your 3.5 year stint shows that you can stay for a while at one company, so personally I would probably not view your background as one of a "job hopper."
aaronax 4y ago
So you are able to get jobs at places that are "toxic nightmares". Perhaps with your job-hopping history you would find it more difficult to get a job at places that nurture a positive culture and high retention. Might be some correlation.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  This seems like a premature conclusion based on one data point out of six.