Slashdot Mirror
Is Switching Jobs Too Often a Bad Thing?
Career Hot Potato asks: "I've been out of school for little more than a year and I have only good things to say about the job market. So far, there doesn't seem to be any lack of demand for a good .NET developer. I've got to admit, though, I feel a little disloyal at this point. Several great job offers have come my way and I've taken them. My resume is starting to make me look a bit restless and it worries me. Until now I've just chalked it up to 'I'm just settling in,' but now another opportunity has been dropped into my lap. Would I be digging my own grave by taking this job? It'd be my fourth job in 16 months but each offered a promotion and a 30% to 40% raise. I know better than to put a price on job satisfaction but I'm pretty certain I'd be happy there. Is being branded as a 'hot potato' enough to keep you from switching? What's your price on this stigma?"
The way I see it, if you end up getting a job you are pretty much set. The only thing it could hurt is your ability to GET a job, not KEEP it. As long as you are happy with the latest offer and stick with it you should be able to put in enough time to get passed the whole 'hot potato' phase before you need to look for another. Go with what will make you happy while making the most money =P
Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. --- Voltaire
I've got a book here by Gordon Miller, called Quit Your Job Often and Get Big Raises.
Switching jobs regularly can be fantastic for your career - but you have to do it intelligently: leave AFTER you finish a big project.
(disclaimer: I'm a contractor - it's a whole other way of making a living.)
"Be afraid to die until you have won some victory for humanity" -Horace Mann
You can do it once but your resume should have a job that spans several years right after it. That way you can lie about the short job and get away with it.
Hmmmmmn, I'm not so sure, while a job change every four months is a little much, while the offers keep flowing in (ie, he's not actively job hunting), no problem.
As far as resumes go, who cares, fluff it out. Drop off the the job who'll give you the worst references/referee & extend the other jobs in a month, with a two month 'sabbatical'* in the middle.
Switching jobs can be bad, but if you're being offered jobs, basically, don't stress about it. Take the job if you think its better (pay, stability, working environemnt, proximity to home, etc).
* When you're asked about your sabbatical in your interview, say you wanted time to learn $.Net_related_thing and had enough saving to take some time off.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
As far as I can tell, the closer to the CEO end of the hierarchy you are, the less of a stigma is attached to it. If you've taken six different busboy jobs in a year, you're fucked. Six senior management positions in a year, you're just ambitious.
If you're getting offers of 30-40% higher and taking them, as an employer I don't think I'd blame you for hopping.
The problem is going to be this: You're costing your employers money every time you do this. Lots and lots of money. It costs money to go through the hiring process, the process of orienting you (during which time you are less productive and still getting paid), the process of processing you (HR setting up payroll, insurance, etc), and worst of all -- the opportunity cost of hiring someone who leaves in a couple of months (ie, loss of productivity due to your orientation time + hiring time of the next guy + orientation time of the next guy).
Unless you are extraordinarily compelling, I'd be inclined to pass on you as an employer unless I was sure there was something I could do to keep you should you get a better offer -- and I'd have to be willing to do it, too.
Mostly, when you make a habit of hopping, what you need to consider before you hop is:
1. If the new job turns sour, am I willing to put up with any shit they give me, no matter how bad it is.
2. Is the company going to be in a position to release me in the near future (ie, due to layoffs or because I'm a fuck up)
The reason you need to consider these is because with each hop you make in a short amount of time, the danger of the aforementioned hiring manager passing on you due to your hopping increases. You do NOT want to be without a job when you cross the line and become a radioactive hire due to job hopping.
If you're being offered jobs then your new employer is fine with the amount of job-hopping you're doing. If you're not, then you're stuck in your current one until your CV looks better. In either case, you don't need to worry about anything - except for taking a job that you hate, in case you get stuck there.
My Journal
"My resume is starting to make me look a bit restless and it worries me."
We had to get through about 100 resumes for two positions that are currently open, and job-hoppers did not make the short list.
The positions are important ones in our company and the learning curve is too high to keep retraining, so we just don't hire people with resumes such as yours.
Why is it so bad to only be in it for the money? The vast majority of jobs out there, even if challenging or non trivial, are horrifically menial and unexciting.
You, the average IT coder/admin-person, are not cutting edge. You might write mainframe control scripts or think out test cases for the intranet support web app or code out bussiness logic or write requirements all day. You don't have to be an expert in the field to do your job, although it would undoubtedly help.
Very little of what the vast majority of people in this industry, be they developers or support minions, can be accurately described as "eventful" or "exciting". Only in companies inside the tech industry (and possibly only 'Industry Leader' companies like GOOG or MSFT) and academia will you probably produce anything tangible and worth getting worked up about. If no one working on the same project as you are is writing whitepapers or presenting at conferences or even discussing it at length with an entrenched and involved user community, well, chances are you are probably part of the 90%* of the industry whose work will never be seen outside of your company's intranet.
I used to think that way, too. I was mildly shocked when the manager who was interviewing me for a co-op/junior sort-of-dev position at Large Retailer replied "Well, the money. And I get to see my family" when I asked him the same question. But then I realised, so what? That's perfectly valid. I know very, very few people who work for their self enjoyment first and to pay their bills second. I'd go as far as to say that outside of satisfaction in a job well done, which many people have and share, virtually no one is in a position of actively caring about the Job Itself.
Ideally, I'd love to do something exciting and stay late at work with a smile on my face. However, I know that this is very unlikely unless I start my own company. To that extent, I'm happy to get my self fulfillment through my own free time - my own projects, the girlfriend, etc.
Why is it not enough to be competent and capable? Why demand an unrealistic level of commitment from your employees? Why must we define our life by what we do in our day jobs?
Disclaimer: I'm a young pup who is about to embark on his very first, over-compensated job in Large Bank, still halfway through university.
*Made-up-but-close-to-real-value