3 ms·
This sounds like it makes sense but in practice I've noticed two things: a) Many people who have only ever worked at 1 or 2 companies have some really critical
by roncesvalles 3y ago
This sounds like it makes sense but in practice I've noticed two things:
a) Many people who have only ever worked at 1 or 2 companies have some really critical gaps in their technical breadth. Every time I've switched jobs, I've had multiple "I can't believe we didn't use this at my last job" moments.
b) I've seen many "lifers" in big companies who built some great big system at some point in the past and now do very little other than maintain this hairball. It's very rare that, for someone who has been in the same role for 10 years, their last 5 years were as productive as their first 5. Despite promos and all. You get older, the job gets easier, and you get lazier.
- djur 3y agoa) This seems like a stronger argument for hiring multiple people with diverse experiences rather than favoring individual hires with lots of short gigs. b) This seems like a problem you can screen for during the interview process rather than engaging in resume discrimination.
- espe 3y agoyou both describe valid approaches, similar to a breadth- or depth-first search. one will get into deep waters with "some great big system", regardless of the specifics.
- stouset 3y agoAnd on the flip side, people who hop around every year or two always seem to be able to build things quickly… and then they leave and everyone else gets both the surprise of learning how badly everything was slapped together plus the joy of of maintaining that hairball for years to come. Somebody who never spends an appreciable amount of time in one role never has to deal with the long-term consequences of their decisions and misses out on that opportunity to learn and grow.