Never Hire Job Hoppers. Never. They Make Terrible Employees

by Mark Suster on April 22, 2010

This is part of my startup advice series.  This post isn’t going to be popular.  I’m sure of that.  That’s OK.  It’s still important advice for startup founders and something that I’m passionate about.  And I care more about the debate than trying to be popular.  And it’s important because it’s true.

I never hire job hoppers.  Never.  They make terrible employees.  I can tell that the heat is going to fly from people on this post.  It all started yesterday when Jason Calacanis sent a Tweet telling GenY’ers / Millennials or whatever people under 30 want to be called these days that job hoppers look like “flakes.”  I simply sent a supporting Tweet saying that I agreed.  He specifically called them “trophy kids” a reference that this is the first generation in which everyone got a trophy as Bill Sledzik outlines in this posting, “Dear Millennials: Your Parents Lied to You.”  One simple Tweet and I started getting flack (Trev, if you’re a founder and have tried to build 3 companies you get a carve out) on Twitter (Sumit, your business school professor was wrong).

I’m not staying become a lifer.  If you want to understand my views from the employee’s point-of-view please read here.  James, 6 years is fine.  12 is getting long unless your company is totally rocking!

But this isn’t a post about Millennials – it’s about job hoppers of all ages and I know plenty of my fellow Gen X’ers who are running for the door at the first sign of trouble.  Look at some of the uber-successful icons of Silicon Valley / Technology: Larry Ellison, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Larry/Sergey, Eric Schmidt, Andy Groves, John Doerr.  Not job hoppers.  I’m sure some job-hoppers have made it big (just to save your having to research to prove me wrong).

UPDATE:  Somehow the biggest criticism in the comments is that my arguments in this post are “lazy.”  I find this ironic since trying to apply a simple “label” to me rather than trying to debate the other side of my position is exactly that.  Hiring an employee has analogies to acquiring a customer.  It costs a lot to “acquire” so you want your LTV (lifetime value) to be as great as possibly given the upfront costs of acquisition.  If you have limited resources you want to put them against your potentially best long-term customers.  Hiring employees is no different.  Frankly, I’m astounded that this is so controversial.

People argue that somehow I need to hire this potentially great employee and give them a shot even though they’ve never committed to any job in their career.  Hogwash.  I’d rather more money and effort go up front to getting a larger potential employee pool than feeling forced to hire somebody who’s had 6 jobs in a row of 18 months or less.

As I’ve said now repeatedly in the comments – quitting 1-2 jobs early when you’re young is acceptable.  I get that when people are young they’re exploring life and work.  But 6 times is a pattern.  One person accuses me of “not trying to get to know the person but just judging them by their past.”  Um, yes.  Of course!  It’s like a woman who is dating a man who has had 6 wives and cheated on all of them before divorcing them but she somehow thinks SHE will be different.  Philanderers establish patterns that they don’t easily break.  Career job hoppers are no different.  They might perform well while they’re there but in the end they’re just not likely to stick around.  END UPDATE.

You won’t even get through my filter (unless I know you or you’re recommended).  No matter what your job hopping excuse isWhenever I recruit somebody on my own (e.g. without an agency) I take my big, fat pile of printed [yes, I print them] resumes and stack them on my desk.  In the last job I recruited for (our associate) I had more than 1,000 resumes.  I then really quickly race through looking for some minimum qualifications such as companies for which they worked, education, grades, etc.  With a stack of 1,000 resumes you have to filter.  Tools like Identified.com haven’t existed for me to do this in an automated way as they are starting to emerge.  Hopefully going forward we can all save trees.

This quickly gets me to a stack of 200 resumes.  The next quick thing I look for is how long people stayed at their jobs.  Here I can get rid of another 50-75 or so without even trying.  But even in a focused search through recruiters I’m always looking to eliminate the job hopper.  If I’m sent a stack of 10 resumes the first thing I look for is how long the person has been at their past 4-5 jobs.  If they’ve had 5 jobs of 2 years or less each – buh bye.  Yes, I will look to see whether you worked at some Dot Bombs that blew up and would give you a break for that.  But you know the routine.  And I’m not the only one who feels this way so you’re already at a disadvantage.

What is the definition of a job hopper?

It’s kind of like that famous saying about art, “you know it when you see it.”  If you’re 30 and have had 6 jobs since college you’re 98% likely to be a job hopper.  You’re probably disloyal.  You don’t have staying power.  You’re in it more for yourself than your company.  OR … you make bad decisions about which companies you join.  Yes, if you were a startup CEO I would probably cut you some slack.  Yes, 2% of you have legitimate reasons for having 5 jobs.  But in a competitive job market you’re less likely to get the chance to tell me your sob story.

Are you 25 and worked for 3 companies – each 18 months?  You’re on the borderline.  If they are Google, Facebook and then a startup – you’re fine.  That’s less than 1%.  If you’re 42 and the longest you’ve EVER worked at a company is 3  years – TOAST.  That means you’ve likely had 7 short-term jobs since college.

Why do job hoppers make such bad employees at startups? -

You’re a startup founder.  You have tough choices to make about whom you hire on your team.  You’re going to have some great days when you hit it out of the ballpark.  Everyone loves you.  Your older sister saw you on TechCrunch.  You have Google guys sending you CVs.  Then your competitor launches better shit.  Google offers your product for free.  You start fighting with your co-founder whom you thought you understood.  Your revenues are “just around the corner.”  Your angel investors are nervous because the VCs aren’t moving that fast to fund your next round.  Their not committing quickly to that bridge.

Now is the time that you need “all hands on deck.”  That awesome gal you hired in engineering has job options and she knows it.  Your biz dev guy has a Rolodex and friends bugging him to join their startup.  And he has already vested 75% of his stock options at your company.  Job hoppers are the first people to the door.  They’re self centered.  They don’t have a sense of loyalty to you despite the risks you took with them.  They don’t understand the word commitment.  Believe me – you WILL have dark days.  And you will only have a handful of people you trust.  That person you’re thinking about hiring who’s 30 and had 5-6 jobs ins’t one of them about right now.

And as you know it is completely all consuming to find great new employees.  It is soul destroying to have to train “yet another head of QA.”  It is bad on team morale when good people quit.  The people who stay are often with you.  But sometimes it weakens their own resolve.  Especially when this job hopper has them out for drinks to talk about his cool new gig where the grass is currently greener.

And good VC’s feel the same way.  When my company hit the fan in 2001 I could have easily walked and gotten a better paying job.  Anyone around then knows that B2B stood for “back-to-banking” and B2C stood for “back-to-consulting.”  I took people’s money.  It was my job to stay and try and make things better.  When I’m looking to fund somebody I care about that loyalty and integrity.  I can never know for sure but as I’ve written about before I’m certainly looking for resiliency.

Why are independent consultants just as bad? -

I also avoid hiring people who have been independent consultants for the past 5 years “advising” companies on the sideline.  I know, I know.  I just added a whole new slew of people to hate me, but while they might make good consultants or even full-time contractors, they seldom make great permanent employees.  They’ve already voted with their careers that they’re not “company people.”  Yes, they too have their excuses.  ”It was a tough economy.  I had to do what I could to earn money.”  Cough.  If you want to hire them as contractors fine. They’re not bad people.  Just don’t give up one of your valuable full-time management positions.

Why?  Their fallback is too easy.  1) they know they can earn more money as a contractor and 2) they’re already not worried about what being a long-term contractor looks like on their career trajectory.  By definition!

Why are so many people angry when you speak the truth on this topic? -

Simply because the last 20 years has produced two generations of job hoppers.  It started with GenXer’s.  Many of us cut our teeth at work in the early 90′s.  We came off many generations of people who stayed their whole careers at IBM, DEC or XEROX.  We all lost our jobs through downsizing in the early 90′s and we felt scarred.  We realized that there was no such thing as “corporate loyalty.”

So you combine my generation of cynics with the GenY generation of  ”entitlement” (until 2008 – you only saw BOOM years other than a short dot-com blip).  And you saw a crazy amount of 20-somethings become millionaires and you confused that with yourself.  If you are a job hopper or semi-permanent contractor you’re angry with me – but regardless – I speak the truth.

What can you do if you think you have too many transitions in your career? -

All is not lost.  Renounce your past sins.  Grab a seat at your current employer and prove you can stay committed.  Or if you need that next job here is some advice:

  • Try to merge jobs on your resume.  I’m not talking about lying.  Not at all.  But if your company was acquired after you were there for 15 months just merge it with the acquiring company.
  • If you worked somewhere for 6 months leave it out.  It’s not worth it.  Listing it is a negative and unless it was interning for Ted Kennedy  or Ronald Reagan it’s most likely a liability.  A resume does not require you to list absolutely everything you’ve ever done.  Do not lie.  If asked in an interview about the gap you can simple say, “I joined a company for 6 months that was a total mistake.  I regretted it.  I figured I didn’t accomplish enough to put it on my resume.  Trying to make what I did there sound good on a resume would have been false.
  • If a company went bankrupt – put that in big words right after the company and title
  • If you’re in a job interview own up to your mistakes.  Come right out with, “yeah, I probably rushed into those two jobs because I was young.  I now realize the importance of picking the right company and I’m looking for somewhere I can build my career.”
  • If you get to the interview deal with the Elephants in the Room.  Talk about your mistakes and emphasize why in your future you’re going to be so focused on longevity.

Or take this advice from Todd Defren at SHIFT communications

“My advice then — and you may see it as biased — is to stay put for a while.  I am talking 3 – 5 years, at least.  There is no such thing as a perfect fit.  You must create the perfect fit.  This is your apprenticeship period.  It is supposed to suck.  There are supposed to be crummy days when you feel under-appreciated.  Such days will occur no matter who signs your paycheck.

But there are rewards for loyalty, I promise.  When I look around the table of my senior staff meetings at SHIFT, for example, most of the people at the meeting have been with the Agency for 5 – 10 years.  Some of them started out as interns, and now they run million-dollar teams.  All of ‘em are under 40 (i.e., it doesn’t take forever).”

What are some key things to avoid saying in an interview? -

1. “I was recruited away from that job.  The new company was willing to pay me more money / give me a title increase” – what I hear, “Three times?  You were recruited away three times?  You aren’t loyal.  The first company that offers you a higher check means you going to jump ship.  You’re only about the money and yourself.”  Believe me – people WILL offer you employees more money.  Job hoppers take it.

2. “I was working for a lame boss.  I had to get out of there.”  What I hear, “You’re difficult to work with.  You don’t have gravitas.  Anybody with any common sense would know not to talk badly about a prior boss.  What will you say about me after you’ve left?  What will you say about me to your peers in my company when I make difficult decisions?”

3. “My stock was already vested so it was time to move on.”  What I hear – “You’re in it for the money.  The day the carrot is gone so, too, are you.”  I’d rather fire you before I hire you.

OK.  Bring me the heat.  I can take it.  Especially since I’m right on this one ;-)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • FriendFeed
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • HackerNews
  • Suggest to Techmeme via Twitter
  • email
  • Print
  • Joshwar
    I completely disagree with this. As someone who worked for a startup several years ago, and job hopped many many times since, I would argue that startups have more of a likelihood in keeping "job hoppers" like myself that get absolutely bored and fed up with the lack of input they can give a company that has already been well established and treats you like just another pawn in the game. After job hopping many menial jobs I actually joined said startup as a volunteer. Completely pro bono work because I believed in getting it off the ground and doing great things. 3 1/2 years later I was still making a barely livable wage in Los Angeles and had increased my responsibilities ten fold and was working 60+ hours a week on this salary. Even at that point I was more than willing to continue throwing my all into the company because it was a startup. Unfortunately the company I worked for laid me off because it was still cheaper to hire someone out of the country to telecommute than to pay my modest salary as their customer service manager. It wasn't an easy decision on their part, and they didn't get the same amount of work or commitment out of the following string of employees that replaced me.

    Since then I have worked for major corporations and always found it incredibly difficult to stay with them for very long. I haven't hopped to get better pay ... in fact I've many times over taken a pay cut just to get out of the stuffy and stale world of a major office building where you are nothing more to the employer than a number.

    My argument would be that startups need passionate people like me that will stay with a company because they truly believe in what they are doing. That doesn't mean a non-job hopper couldn't be just as passionate ... it just means in my opinion that startups should focus more on the strengths and commitment someone might have with their particular company and less on how long someone has managed to truck through a job they are bored with. I would argue also that if you've made it past the 1 year mark with a company you should be looking seriously at if you feel you can stay there long term or if you are just going through the motions. To me a career is something you care deeply about, and corporate drones have no ability to achieve this.
  • Jimbo831
    I just have to disagree with the theme of this article summed up in this sentence: " You’re in it more for yourself than your company."

    Do you honestly think your company is in it for anyone but themselves? I have worked for 2 large companies the last 5 years and I can promise, they are looking out for themselves only. As soon as they think they can save money by getting rid of you, or there's someone better, or you are no longer useful to them, you are gone. Loyalty is a two way street and you shouldn't expect employees to stick with a company, passing on better opportunities when their company would get rid of them at the drop of a hat for financial or other reasons.
  • Ned
    Great post. When sorting through a pile resumes, it quickly becomes clear to me that candidates who have managed to stay longer have done so because they were able to sustain fulfilling contributions. It's also revealing when candidates haven't remained long enough to see their stated contributions validated, or, in the case of sales and marketing, long enough to show shipped product or fully booked revenue. On the other hand if someone has put in a series of 2ish year stints with clear accountability and verifiable results (recognizable company, known role) in a rapidly emerging and morphing arena (VOIP, Mobile, Social Gaming), the sum of the experience and results coupled with the domain expertise can, in my experience, tilt the scale.
  • This was a really thought-provoking post and I agree with most of it. I'm guessing a more accurate title would be "if you're going to hire a job hopper, buyer beware - you'll probably getting someone who'll be gone in 24 months or less" - that wouldn't have grabbed my attention as much as the use of never and ever. And, as you said, this is written from the perspective of the employer, not the employee.

    I would probably fit your definition of a job hopper. I've had a number of jobs, the shortest of which was 7 months (I was trying out a new function post business school) and the longest of which was almost 4 years. In general, I think your core premise is right - if someone moves around a lot, they're likely to keep moving. It's up to the employer as to whether he or she wants to investigate the reason for all of the mobility.

    I just left a company that was sold - I had been at the company for 18 months when the deal closed. I had no intention of leaving had we remained independent. What was different about this company (and a few others where I've worked and stayed)? It's pretty simple - it really comes down to people. Look, most startups don't work out. On average, if you leave and you think the company is doomed, you're probably right - you're staying probably won't change the fate of the enterprise. The most surprising insight that can come to most job hoppers is to come to work one day and realize that the company might not live up to its grand dreams and expectations and still want to be there. That usually only happens where you find a place where you fit in and like the people as much or more than the you like the business or the idea. That's not just a startup thing, that's a work thing - good culture and good co-workers can make even a mediocre job feel like a place you want to be. You can't really observer that a priori in all cases. But when you find it, it can be highly illuminating for those who are accustomed to bolting when it appears things won't end well. I think you need to have an experience or two like that to shake the urge to bolt.

    One more tip for my job hopping friends. Every now and then, just commit to staying. Even if you know things won't work, stick around. If you have options to jump today, you'll have options to jump in 6 months as well unless the company you're in is engaging in fraud. The thing you miss out on by bolting as soon as things get bad is the opportunity to learn about people. You learn a lot about your colleagues, management, the board, and everyone involved in the company when things get bumpy. You learn a lot about which people you'd want to work with in your next startup when the chips are down.

    For what it's worth, if you know the startup isn't going to work and you don't love the people, you won't stay. If you're on the fence, stay every now and then - you'll learn a lot about yourself and the startup process.
  • George
    If you want loyalty, buy a dog.
  • Mark, thank you for this. This would have saved me at least one bad hire of a primadonna developer who was a rockstar but extremely impetuous. I only wish I had seen it a few years ago. Hiring and selecting people is the hardest part of being in this field, I'm pretty sure.
  • pauldix
    I disagree that job hopping is good filter. You say that it's a sign that the person is disloyal, self-serving, lacking in integrity, and has no sense of commitment. That's just not the case. There are plenty of reasons to have many entries on a resume that have nothing to do with whether or not someone is loyal. They could have moved to a new city, gone back to school, the company folds, it's not the right career move (which doesn't prove disloyalty). I wrote a ridiculously long counter-argument here.
  • scottuhrig
    3 points. First - I'm a headhunter for tech startups. You perspective on job hoppers is a no brainer. Nothing more to say about that. Second - the opposite is also true. If you are a candidate contemplating a VP Sales opportunity, and you would be the 4th VP Sales in 5 years, do NOT take the job. Something is wrong with the company, hiring manager, role, etc. Third - the idea of sifting through 1000 resumes makes me cringe. Next time you have a position to fill, ask yourself the question - if I could hire anyone for this role, who would it be? Pose the question to your colleagues, to your network - and create a list of 15 - 20 people that, if you could get them interested, would likely be great candidates. Then figure out a way to attract them.
  • graduatingsenior
    What about Penelope Trunk's arguments at http://blogs.bnet.com/career-advice/?p=811 ?

    People in their 20s on average change jobs every 18 months. People in their 30s — at least the ones that continue to do well in their careers — change jobs frequently as well, although at a slower pace than the 20 somethings. So if you think job-hopping is bad, change your thinking. Job hoppers are not quitters. In fact, they make better co-workers and better employees and I bet are generally more satisfied with their work life.

    Here’s why:

    1. Job hoppers have more intellectually rewarding careers.

    In almost any job, the learning curve is very steep early on. And then it goes flat. So by the end of two years at the same job, you often have little left to learn. Which makes me wonder what people are doing to keep their brains alive if they stay at the same job for 20 years. It also makes me certain that job hoppers know more.

    If you change jobs often, then you’re always challenged with a lot to learn — your learning curve stays high. This is true for office skills, and industry specific knowledge. It also applies to your emotional intelligence. The more you have to navigate corporate hierarchies and deal with office dramas, the more you learn about people and the better you will become at making people comfortable at work. And that’s a great skill to have.

    2. Job hoppers have more stable careers.

    Corporate America doesn’t provide stability for its employees. The only people who think it does are really old and completely out of touch. There are layoffs and downsizing and just-in-time hiring and contract workers — realities that barely existed a generation ago. The stability you get in your career comes from you. If you’re counting on some company to give you stability, realizing this is scary. But if you believe in yourself and your abilities and treat your career with this understanding, then it’s no problem. You can create career stability — you just have to do it on your own.

    The way you do that is through networking. Because you can be sure you’ll need to find many jobs in your lifetime, you want network as efficiently as you can. After all, the most efficient way to find a job is through a network. It’s how most people land jobs. People who work for lots of companies have a larger network than people who stay in one place for long periods of time. Which is why job-hopping creates stability.

    3. Job hoppers are higher performers.

    If you know you are going to leave your job in the next year, you’re going to be very conscious of your resume — that is, what skills you’re tackling, what you’re achieving, whether you’re becoming an expert in your field. These issues do not generally concern someone who has been in a job for five years and knows he’s going to stay another five years. So job hoppers are always looking to do really well at work, if for no other reason than it helps them get their next job.

    You can’t job hop if don’t add value each place you go. That’s why job hoppers are usually overachievers on projects they are involved in; they want something good to put on their resume. So from employers’ perspective, this is a good thing. Companies benefit more from having a strong performer for 18 months than a mediocre employee for 20 years. (And don’t tell me people can’t get up to speed fast enough to contribute. Fix that. It’s an outdated model and won’t attract good employees.)

    4. Job hoppers are more loyal.

    Loyalty is caring about the people you’re with, right? Job hoppers are generally great team players because that’s all they have. Job hoppers don’t identify with a company’s long-term performance, they identify with their work group’s short-term performance. Job hoppers want their boss to adore them so they get a good reference. Job hoppers want to bond with their co-workers so they can all help each other get jobs later on. And job hoppers want to make sure everyone who comes into contact with them has a good experience with them; it’s not like they have ten years on the job to fix a first impression.

    This is why job hoppers care more about their co-workers and will go further to make them happy than long-term employees. And it if you think about it, this makes sense for a company, too: The company isn’t hiring you with any decade-long commitment, so you would be foolish to think you have to give one.

    5. Job hoppers are more emotionally mature.

    It takes a good deal of self-knowledge to know what you want to do next, and to choose to go get it rather than stay someplace that for the moment seems safe. It takes commitment to personal growth to give up career complacency and embrace a challenging learning curve throughout your career — over and over. And it’s a brave person who can tell someone, “I know I’ve only been working here for a month, but it’s not right for me, so I’m leaving.”

    Doubtless you’ll hear that you should stick it out, show some loyalty, give it at least a year or two. But why should you take time out of your life to spend your days doing something you know is not right for you?

    It is okay to quit. No career is interesting if it’s not engaging and challenging, and your most important job is to find that — over and over. Do not settle for outdated workplace models that accept complacency and downplay self-knowledge. Sure, the job market is tough nowadays - but that’s no reason to settle.
  • pradipbepari
    I couldn't agree with you more. The story is even bleak in startups in India.

    Being in the management position of a successful startup (VP Engg, and GM, PicoMobile Networks) and part of a failed on (Ionic Microsystems), I have realised the biggest headache for a management team is the job hoppers.

    They are impatient, manipulative, self centered and always in the lookout for personal gain. When things are hunky dory, job hoppers are the first to demand great incentive and when it is bad, they are the first set of people to leave. When they leave you have a high risk of losing other talented employees of your company. I do not want to generalize; but my experience has been these individuals are only passionate about their own personaly growth even if it is in the expense of someone else or the very foundation of the company.

    My recommendation that you should never hire job-hoppers for critical postions and definitely not the first 6-8 core employees. Even if you have compromised and hired a full-time employee of this category, keep looking out for possible replacement.

    Pradip Bepari
  • All I can say is that every time we have had a disastrous experience with an employee it has been someone with a shaky job history and often we talked ourselves out of questioning the 3-4 jobs in the last 3 years because we needed / liked the skillset so much. Tech people leaving 6 months into a job? "Sorry this job offers better commute or lets me do more of what I want to do." WTF, you have no future if you are thinking like that IMO. In a complicated business we have often spent tens of thousands just getting someone up to speed and then they leave or flake. ugh.

    On the other hand when you find someone that was a company through a growth period for 4-5 years and progressed in responsibility and is leaving because the company flamed out or some other reasonable scenario like a merger, hire them right away. They are all most always amazing.
  • Finally a post I can comment on, bc of my experience.

    Mark, totally agree with your job hopper thesis;
    - depending on the company size, market, industry - hiring process costs $2k and upwards. As far as I remember (2005/6), the number in UK for some average technical person IBM hired (not lots of team lead or managerial or project experience), was in the ballpark of £25k. An the hire didn't even work 1 day. Guess now what it costs Apple, Google, MSFT, ... for them you are a blip on the cost center side but because they have their cost centers, they easily can see what their hiring costs are for one person/average/from quarter to quarter.

    For startups with seedmoney ($100k-500k) or an A round of 1-5 million - every effing 1 large counts, is visible.

    Do you spend the money on yet-another-hire-bc-somebody-left-for-greener-fields, or do you spend the money on ad campaigns, customer development, or an part-time assistant so you can concentrate on your product development.

    Then, it hurts the team, individuals, the moral of the crew, it takes air out of the marathon runner - the startup. You are hurting the startup in so many levels you can't imagine.

    That is why @Jason is so ... 'Jason'. Because he knows that this behaviour (job hopping) has transmission effects, endangering the whole company, his vision, mission, product, ... never reaching the finish line. Because the marathon runner is out of air.

    That's just my take on it. Next to the 300 other comments.
  • Job hoppers hop when the company starts getting crap. If you run a good company and everybody gets the proper wages for the post, no one hops. People hop when they sense that they entered the company based on promises and then the line manager says something completely different from what was discussed at the job interview.
  • Marcus
    Analogues, just as right, mostly wrong:

    "Never join a startup. Never. They make terrible employers." (i.e. god complexes, lies, broken promises, dumb ideas, untested leadership)

    "Never join a publicly traded company. Never. They make terrible employers." (i.e. quarterly earnings statement syndrome, god complexes, layoffs, corporate culture, brain-dead middle management, political infighting)
  • You pose some interesting points Mark and on most levels I agree with you. I think in part it depends on the position you are hiring for. I am less likely to find someone that had been in their previous jobs for an extended period of time when hiring a call center employee vs hiring a network engineer or developer.

    I have been at the same company since graduating college a little over 8 years ago. Over the course of that time I moved vertically within the company and played several roles until we were ultimately acquired three years ago. I now run that business unit for the company that acquired us. How would you recommend breaking out someone who held various positions within a company?
  • I think that if you worked for the same company under several jobs / responsibilities I always looks good. Well done.
  • mikedunn001
    From a "job hopper" who spends two to three years (if they are lucky), I've found that the legacy employees (yes, the old timers who wear comfortable shoes) have no idea of the new technologies out there and are very focused in their work processes, which amounts to "we've always done it that way." They are clueless to new technologies and improvements to do business. So what happens? The job-hopping executives keep these loyal dinosaurs to do the mundane work and bring in new people (pay them much more than the dinosaurs too) to bring some freshness and new ideas to the company. These may be employees, who the execs know won't stay long, or consultants. Either way, the companies don't care about your job hopping - they care about what you can bring to the company from your experiences. They hope you get them implemented, train the resistant dinosaurs and don't care if you leave at that point. After a couple of years of the dinosaurs, you either leave or you morph into one of them, and then let's face it, life is over at that point. You just get old, fat and gray and sit in meetings looking important when everyone knows you are nothing but a dinosaur. As John Malone famously said, "employees are a necessary evil." I couldn't agree more. As far as the author, well, everyone has their point of view. His is just the wrong one.
  • Possum336
    The problem with your view here is you are asking for loyalty and corporate Amrica ofefrs none in return, You want loyalty, offer security. You words are hollow. No one wants to change positions unnecessarily, but everyone relizes that the real undoing of GE was Jack Welch's policy of management through turnover. As long as corporations downsize because of management miscalculation, employee loyalty will be hard to come by. My simple answer is, you want talent, pay for it. You want to keep talent, respect it and promote it, make it feel welcome. One other thought. Jerk employers attract jerk employees. Most people with any business experience will walk away from person that has unreakistic expectations. Work is a huge consumer of life expecctancy. if you want 1/3 of my life, you better act like you need and respect my efforts. In most economic times, and we will be there again soonr than you realize, you will need me more than I need you. When that time comes, employee retention had better be at the top of your list, or you won't be needed for long. Just Sayin.
  • nm2005
    This is another good and relevant post. How do you view those who were in finance such as investment banking and who have made the career change to tech entrepreneurship? Generally, I know must people viewing hiring former bankers as a mistake.

    My question deals with the number of jobs. As an analyst/associate in banking there tends to be high attrition because of low moral, layoffs, and of course better pay opps. I have moved largely driven by the objective of taking on more responsibility. One job hop was a pay cut, but the chance to help start a hedge fund with partner-level duties and that did not last long.

    About two years ago, I decide make career change to a tech startup. I think I have shown a strong commitment as I went months without salary, invested my own money into the business, and covered travel and other expenses. This is job #5 in 8 years. So, at what point can someone work himself out of the penalty box? I am not looking to leave, but I definitely would appreciate your thoughts? Thanks
  • Obviously it's case specific. I will write a separate post from the employees perspective so I'll try to address your question there.
  • Moschops
    "You’re in it more for yourself than your company."

    Of course I am. I have a job because I need money, not because I really want to help some other people make money.
  • I've been a job hopper for 30 years and I'm laughing all the way to the bank. Every time I hop I get a salary increase, I try and hop after my last annual increase so I get two increases in the same year, yes please! Of course I'm in it for myself, anyone who isn't, anyone who suppresses their own best interests for a company they don't even own is in for a horrible shock when they turn 50.
  • charlesfork
    I worked for a startup for the last 2.5 years, one of Nolan Bushnell's brainchildren, actually. I was a loyal, albeit naive, software engineer, working 10 hours days for adequate pay, living off the passion of the founders. Too bad I wasn't a little more self-centered, because when they stopped paying us two days before our next checks without ever even mentioning that our capital had run out, I stayed on for more stock and worked for free for 9 months. Looking back, I can understand why you recommend altruism as a founder: it serves YOU. Whether or not it serves an engineer to disregard their own welfare in favor of a tiny sliver of equity and a massive amount of promises, well, that's why I work for myself now.
  • Thing is, layoffs happen too. I'm not a job-hopper, but I've started 3 jobs in the last 2 years. One was admittedly a hop--to a company i'd wanted to join for a while. The other two were layoffs. I'm pretty darn loyal, generally. I choose my job carefully. But I think you would throw my resume out on the basis of job-hopping, unjustly, if you saw it.
  • Not necessarily. If you had worked for 10 years and never stayed anywhere more than 18 months I probably would. But a few job changes is understandable. I recommend that if you left due to downsizing - say it on the resume.
  • kennicholas
    Too many people agreeing with Mr. Insight here; amazing. I didn't even need to read the rest of this article, to know what a complete moron this guy is. Myopic isn't even the word for it.

    Hey Mark: By your standard...I am a 'job-hopper.' Want to know why? Well, aside from the economy nudging companies to shed their workers by the dozens [or hundreds, or thousands], you seem to not have the capacity to understand the OPPOSITE side of this equation: the companies being skittish...not the workers.

    To wit: In the last several years, I have had one company sold outright 5 mo's after my arrival, another one shut down two of its properties just after hiring 45 people [yes, 45!] to work at those sites, and another shut down an entire division within a year of arriving.

    So, Mark...who bailed on who? Who can't take the heat? Uhh, right.

    Then again, I am glad you 'wouldn't hire me', because guess what? I wouldn't "hire" you, either. Spare us these types at BizInsider, please, Henry. TOAST, indeed. #fail
  • This makes absolutely NO sense. "Are you 25 and worked for 3 companies – each 18 months? You’re on the borderline. If they are Google, Facebook and then a startup – you’re fine." I don't see how someone who has worked at 3 great companies over 4 years is any better than someone who was work at 3 unknown companies. On the contrary, I would argue that the person who has worked at those 3 companies is incapable of appreciating the value/benefit of being at 2 of the best companies of the decade.
  • Fair point. I was just saying that in my view most potential employers would see those brands and want to interview you no matter what. That's all.
  • Hard Worker
    Oh back in the go-go '90s they wanted you to stay at least a year at a company. Now at least three years at unethical, scum bag companies?? I have seen managers lie, commit fraud impersonating other people to get detailed information on their employees to make employment decisions, etc... So now we are supposed to show one way loyalty and gratitude for a lousy 401K when previous generations got defined benefits and people at the top get management contracts and golden parachutes!!
  • I see some truth in this post but from a personal perspective I don't believe it applies to me and thus I think your blanket bad-mouthing of "job hoppers" is a little excessive.

    I've had five main jobs in the past 10 years of my career plus short contracts in between. By your definition that probably makes me a "job hopper". But I believe I have a strong work ethic and am loyal to my employers; I come highly recommended by every one of them ... but the work I do just doesn't fit with long-term engagement.

    I should probably be engaged as a project-based consultant and leave at the end of the project but instead I'm typically engaged as an employee or contractor on an arbitrary fixed-term basis renewed every 6 or 12 months and I end up just doing busy work and slipping quietly out the back door.

    That's not my fault - it's just the way the system works in this town.
  • OK, Nathanael, fair points. I probably was a bit excessive. I appreciate your taking the time to offer your point of view.
  • Mike
    I disagree with you on job hoppers. Yeah... but what about when the company you work for outsources your job to India. Then you join a small company hoping to gain some experience and growth. Find out shit; there is no work in the company and no growth. The reason they hired you was crap; as they fail to implement any of the suggestions you bring. 6 months later just after the christmas party they boot you out. Then you move struggle find a new job; just as you settling in the financial crisis hits. You don't get paid for 3-4 weeks at time and then they say sorry we have let go and if you want you rejoin us at 1/2 you making a godforsaken cold ass frozen city up north. Companies treat employees like shit. CEO and hiring managers blame us for shit. BS Corporate greed and mismanagement has destroyed an belief in an employer. Unless I'm top management and getting a great piece of the pie why the fuck should put myself and my family down on the line for you? No more real pensions; 401(K) sent off the pension management companies that fuck it up in the hedge fund sector. Eat shit mister. Fuck you and the horse you rode on. Last fucking company I worked for; the idiots had taken 2 million credit line in the late 90's. for 18% per annum with 2% management fee paid quarterly. 18 fucking percent. Thats fucking criminally stupid. You want me to be loyal that?
  • Chris Bennet
    Would you avoid hiring entrepreneurs as well? I could see were people who have started their own companies in the past (people like the author) might be viewed as likely to jump ship to start their own companies.
  • "this author" stayed in his first job (it was a big company) 8+ years, his second job 6+ years, third 2 years and I've been at my current job 2.5 years.
  • Mark, great post. I've been at Yahoo! a little over three years and have had numerous opportunities in that past couple years to jump ship (the grass is always greener no matter what) and know many people who leave companies at the first sign of trouble. However, I would also add that in the more turbulent times, I have learned more about management, product focus, monetization, and overall strategy than I ever have being at a company during good times or from jumping job-to-job.
  • So true, Adam. It's a shame people don't realize how much you learn in the lean years.
  • jessbg
    I have one point and one question that I don't believe have been touched on...

    1) There seems to be a lot of focus on how the resume represents one's career trajectory and how it will be read in a vacuum. While the post highlights what a hiring manager or potential boss see on your resume, most of our time (hopefully) is spent working, not job-seeking. Your reputation as a loyalist or job-hopper is also known to your colleagues, bosses, management team, possibly even your board if you're at a start-up, and these people that know you well can carry a lot of weight in determining your hire-ability, positively and negatively.

    If you've had a string of bad luck or made the wrong choices, but are a solid performer, you've likely built a strong network that can support you in various ways in your job search, even if your resume is less than stellar. The converse is true, as well. In my experience, people that have repeatedly shown value to companies will have an easier time getting hired than those that have not, in spite of any resume blips.

    2) Mark, would you view short stints at start-ups (<2 years), but multiple start-ups with same founding team, same board, etc. differently than unconnected companies?
  • Great points, thank you. re: short stings at startups - always case specific. But probably not a major negative.
  • No heat. You are spot on. Great post.
  • sallynotastayathomemom
    This is the same guy who posted on Linked In for a "part-time marketing" person for his firm and said it was great for "stay-at-home moms"!!!! He is a sexist in his hiring practices and should be ashamed of himself.
  • Sally,

    You are WAY off base. My wife used to work at Google. She wanted to work even after we had kids but she struggled to balance work / personal life. So when I had a role open for a marketing position I thought I'd try and help another smart mother by creating the kind of employment where somebody similar to my wife could have a meaningful job while still being home part time (at her choice!). I was SWAMPED with resumes so I'm guessing that there is demand for this type of job for working mom's.

    I'm sure Jacqui Jacobs, who now runs marketing for us 3 days / week would take issue with your characterization of me. I'd be interested to understand how you see this as sexist? I saw it as progressive.

    Mark
  • As a GenX'er and CEO, I agree with most of your points on this topic. While I may be considered a "job hopper" to some, I did what I was born to do...I started my own company and have finally stopped job hopping!

    As an employee, I would counter that looking out for yourself isn't such a bad thing but you should probably settle down into one long-term solution by the time you are 37 or so. Because then it's time to get serious about retirement planning and just having a bit of security and seniority.
  • Spot on.
  • I have worked as an agency recruiter for 13 years and the vast majority of the individuals we place have solid tenure (3+ years) at each of their previous jobs. Also, we rarely work with trying to place consultants because when they are on their interviews they usually ask if they can just consult.

    Another current topic we find is job candidates who have been out of work for an extended period of time (1 year plus). I know they are still holding out for a management position but it's getting harder for us to try and explain the gap to hiring managers.
  • DefenseGuy
    What I find sad about this essay are the two assumptions: 1) the end goal of a career is managing other people, and 2) new products aren't important to the economy. On (1), the only direction you can go if you stay in a company is management; at any large corporation the executives are the only true company employees. Most companies just don't create that many new products, and most new products are ready for some sort of release in 2 to 5 years. After that you either sustain the product you just developed or you manage other people sustaining that product (or you manage some other start-up's product that your company has purchased). If you want to continue developing your engineering skills you look for a new product to build, but that generally doesn't happen in the same company within the span of a decade. (2) follows from this: your essay values people who have a lot of experience managing other people's ideas, but not creating new products.

    While I understand that position, I still find it sad....
  • Ben Rombaoa
    There's a reason why I keep coming back to read your posts! All that I've read so far I take and apply to starting my venture. Awesome work Mark.
  • BOGdan Tudor
    What you write is valid for a bunch of domains, not for all. For a plaethora of countries, not in mine. In Romania, the employers are so stupid, lacking any perspective, that you simply have to , must, jump.
  • Su Zee
    I own small software business and I do exactly the same thing - cut the job-hoppers in the first round of resume look-throughs. Behaviors don't change, as you said. To those who argue that the most talent is in the job-hopper group, I have personally not experienced that at all. Maybe the most egotistic - those who THINK they are more talented. It fits the behavior - "I am such a talented superstar, therefore I am doing you a favor by working for you for any time period." Sorry, buddy, but no thanks.
  • Jared Goldsmith
    Mark, I live in the centrifuge of your argument: consulting being my own own, private version of "job-hopping" that actually helped my career growth in terms of skills and salaries.

    My consulting years or sabbaticals allowed me to walk into companies full-time that I consulted as opposed to semi-blind job searches, where I did research but hadn't "lived inside the company". I came in smartly, then after two years of accomplishments, realized it was time to try something new or roll-up a lot of new tech clients that all were using recruiters to lure me in (you know when they call and ask "If you know of anybody who fits this great job...")

    Now, most of the companies I consult request that I come in full-time at C-level (i.e., CEO or CMO). However, if I can help 5-6 companies consulting and make/learn more and have some lifestyle flexibility, why would I exchange that for a 3-6 year job, especially when most corporate jobs have little to no equity?

    I'm 38-years-old and have had 5 jobs in the past 16 years. Curious what you think, Mark.

    Here's the relative tenures in years:

    Undergrad + grad school + internships
    5 yrs = first job
    6 yrs = second job
    1 yr = at a well paid consultancy I co-founded that my next company hired me out...
    2 years = third job
    2 years = my current consultancy

    My first two jobs were all about building experience and leadership, but the pay was below-par. The consultancy changed it to $40k/month, not fixed of course but pretty steady. The next full-time job was at $300k base and the consultancy even in recession is $25k/month.

    Love to hear your thoughts to this real-life scenario. Thanks!
  • Jared, I can understand why you've chosen the past you've chosen. I don't have any beef with it. I'm guessing you prefer not to go permanent any longer and that's totally fine. I don't have any problem with independent consultants at all. But seeing how much you can make doing that it's unlikely you'll want to work for a startup company permanently again. So startups might be best to engage you the way that you want to be engaged - as a temporary consultant.
  • kimbui
    I've had 4 jobs in 5 years. Why? Because I was laid off TWICE by journalism enterprises.

    According to you, I look like a flake.

    Not fair. At all.

    I actually wanted to stay at one of those places for longer, but you know, recessions and falling newspaper revenue got in the way of that. I'm very clear in interviews that I was laid off, but I would never, ever put that on my resume. A resume is for accomplishments, not excuses.
  • I don't have any problem with you, Kim. If you've been laid off twice, just make sure to put that on your resume so people like me will understand why you left. And if any of them were super short leave them off.
  • JoeJoe
    You are correct. I hate you. There, I said it. And I'll stay loyal to this opinion at my next job too.
  • Wow. What deep insight.
  • Brian Blah
    Since when is "only being in it for the money" a bad thing? What are YOU in it for Mr. Anti-job-hopping? Are you in for the children? Are you in it for saving the planet? Are you in it to pay for the grandma's surgery? You make some fine points to be sure but you sound like a moron suggesting people who want to get paid are worth less than others. If you find hardworking employees who don't care about getting financially rewarded, they deserve to stick with an ass like you for 10 years. At least their resume will look more "stable."
  • Hard Worker
    Oh ya. Tell it to former IBMers who had their job outsourced to India and Argentina! The work force at IBM is 75% in India and those variable cost savings are being pocketed by management and dished out to shareholders!!! Good for the owner, bad for employees! Of course, all the old timers got taken care of but the new people get what? 401K? Companies should use defined benefit plans if they want to talk about loyalty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Dude, your comments have nothing to do with the post. Go troll somewhere else.
  • Hard Worker
    B.S. This is from the grease balls CEOs who watch CNBC and pat themselves on the back while they walk out the door with millions in stock options and crap on their employees. United Healthcare had a CEO who tried to walk out the door with $1.3 billion in stock options and the low level employees are supposed to like that?? Someone give the author a golden shower!
  • I never defended big company CEO's that worked off with huge amounts of corporate dollars. Never.
  • Hi, my name is Michael Locke and I'm a job hopper. :) I don't think I've made bad choices in the jobs that I've had. It's just that I'm so ambitious, that it's impossible to please me at any job for long period of time. I'm always wanting to do more. It's in my DNA. I'll eventually find that right place or eventually make enough money on my small biz ventures that I'll be able to do my own thing full-time.
  • That's great, Michael. I have no problem with that. But you've said it yourself, "it's impossible to please me at any job for long period of time" which is what a hiring manager needs to know. Maybe you're best employed as an independent contractor?
  • Clearly somebody wants to bring back the era working for a single company for 30 years, my grandfather whose 85 would appreciate this article. Let me frame this for you and please tell me if it sounds familiar.

    Here is my example:
    Your joining a new company as a sales person, psyched and ready to start selling for your new company. You've got yourself a decent base but you have also been told that the commission structure is going to put you close to 200k on target. Awesome, lets go do this thing says the motivated newly hired sales rep. Six months into the job things are going pretty well, your hitting goal and happy for the most part with what you are selling however your realizing that your earnings are not quite what they should be. Understandable, you are still fairly new and need time to build up your book of business. Pressing on, reaching your numbers grinding it out day after day you get your W2, 90k, 110k off what you've been "sold" on when you joined. You spend another six months working hard only to realize that the clients you have been selling are churning faster than you can get them in. Frustrated and disappointed by factors outside your control, your not earning what you need to be making. 18 months into it, you find yourself another job with new earning potential.

    Your calling this "job hopping" in which I disagree. Do not sell me a pocket full of dreams when I join your company. Be realistic about earnings and you will have happy sales people that will stay with your company. But don't lie to me about what is going on at your company from the get go, I'm going to work hard but after 18 months, I am also going to sniff out the BS and move on to greener pastures.
  • philsugar
    Amen, brother
  • Great post, Marc -- too many short-term job stints is a flag for me, as well but in the past, I rarely used it as a first cut, but rather see it as a reason that a resume doesn't feel right to me, when there are other things I like. Now, it'll be a first screen pass as well.
  • It seems that there is a belief out there that if you want to hire Millennials, you have to be prepared to hire job hoppers. I agree that this simply is not true. However, there will be some good people with good excuses that you might miss if you are quick sorting through 1000 resumes. You seem to be aware of this. Overall, I think that you've said something that needed to be said. Excellent advice. Like that you also gave advice to those who do have short jobs on their resume. Especially like that you say, "Do not lie." Some of the most important advice a job seeker can hear, no matter how desperate. Thanks, Mark.
  • Kevin
    The fact of the matter is, companies no longer stand by you. CEO's stand up at the podium and say "people are our most important asset!" and then a month later lays off 10% of the firm with a few months severance if he is generous. Bosses expect herculean efforts and nights and weekends and then don't give you much more recognition than a pat on the back when its done. Work/life balance often doesn't exist. We are often on call 24/7 these days via blackberry or VPN'ing in from home at night. You say employees are all "me me me" these days- I feel that companies are all "me me me" these days.

    I don't seem to fit your criteria for being a job hopper, but I am bordering on it (30 and just started my 5th job out of college). My second job was absolutely fantastic, I was treated well, doing high-value work, compensated fairly, and respected. I was ready to spend the rest of my life there, but then we were bought by MegaCorp and things went to shit pretty quickly. I have been trying to get that magic back- to have a job that after holiday weekends I couldn't wait to get back into the office. I haven't found it, but I am not willing to settle for the typical soul sucking job at Megacorp where I am just pushing tickets to a resolved state while slowly turning into the lifeless zombies I see on the train next to me every day.
  • I'm with ya, Kevin. No reason to stay at MegaCorp. Just find somewhere that you can stay and enjoy work for 3 years to prove that you can be committed somewhere. And it so happens that the longer you stick around often the more you actually learn. Yes, there are a lot of bad CEO's out there. For sure.
  • John Barrett
    I'm a retained recruiter who works every day with venture investors and entrepreneurs to recruit senior executives to their management teams. The start-up world is full of job-hoppers. You've nailed it with this post. It's very consistent with how I sort through candidates when I'm conducting a search. This is one of the best posts I've seen that all start-up CEOs should pay attention to. CEOs have to be able to separate the posers from those who really know how to make sustained contributions to a company.
  • Thank you.
  • john
    sometimes a sustained contribution can be made in 1 year, what matters most is results not wishy washy feelings and BS corporate jargon....
  • I totally agree! 'nuff said.
  • Dan
    How I wish I had read this article 8 months ago. On the other hand, I would have probably dismissed it as nonsense then, so it wouldn't have mattered. I now know every word of it to be true. Moral of the story: advice like in this article always arrives too late or too early. (Maybe that's why it elicits anger?)
  • john
    I agree with what you say in general, but being a "company man" isn't the greatest thing to aspire to in life....

    But on the flip-side as you preach startups and such most of these fail, what about the guy who tries 4 different startups over 6 years and they all fail... and he succumbs to I just need a paycheck, are you going to shun him?

    Most people in America have no idea what they really want to do, its the way our country is set up... 1-2 years off before college should be mandatory, I imagine job hopping tails off in your 30's. I don't think you can fault someone for trying different things out early on in their life, I think it makes someone more dynamic and less of a worker bee.

    Yes I have had 4 jobs since 2005, 3 working for others, one I tried to do something on my own... I only resigned from one though, the other companies went under... Am I a Job Hopper, according to your definition, YES, should people take a chance on me, that is their decision.. Will I always be tinkering with my own Ideas on the side, YES, am I in it for myself , to some extent everybody is....

    Also, most American jobs are the same, they are just pencil pushers behind desk, we have become the skilless nation of people who sue, leverage, buy/sell re and affiliate markers....

    There is also very little loyalty on the employer side these days, I would argue less than 25 yrs ago...
  • I don't take any issue with anything you've said. Thanks for taking the time to contribute to the discussion.
  • anon
    Everything is a negotiation. Mark would fire you the minute it was advantageous to his bottom line. You do the same.
  • It's true that people are sometimes fired to improve the bottom line. It's also true that some people quit early out of self interest. Both sometimes make sense. But if you're a CEO who always churns through employees few people will want to work for you. If you're an employee who always quits early not great company will want to hire you. It's reciprocal.
  • I hire a lot of freelancers to do contract work. I'm always amazed at how bad many resumes and presentations/inquiries are. I usually list the 5 most important parts of the job description at the top of my job listing. And it never fails, practically everyone appears to never read them. I'll say how much the job pays. Then someone will say they charge twice as much, and they expect me to accept their conditions. Or I'll say "This is detail oriented work, so please make sure there are no typos in your resume." And everyone has typos. Or I'll say "You need 10 years + of experience" and someone who is still in high school will apply for it. Or I'll say "Must be a friendly, professional personality" and I'll get a blank email with an attachment of their resume, with no further explanation. I once posted for a job as a copy editor, got 40 resumes, and picked the only two who didn't have typos in their emails. My conclusion is that people are just lazy and don't want to put the effort forward. The most important thing they rarely teach you in high school or college is how to find a job. Which is one of the big reasons you're getting a degree in the first place - to find a job.
  • Jax
    On the flip side, I recommend never working for start-ups. The managers at start-ups are "true believers" in their ideas, no matter how bad. They will tell you about their dreams and where they see their company in 5 years, and that you're getting in now will reap amazing rewards.

    The problem is most start-ups' products suck, and are usually run by people who are the WORST bosses with little to no experience in management. They'll hire you at rock-bottom wages, saying you'll more than make up for it when the revenue sharing kicks in. In a year, when the company still has no revenue, you'll begin to wonder if the bosses know what they're doing.

    It then comes down to the boss' incompetence begins to hold you back. You're peers are moving into jobs making twice what you are, but your boss won't give you that raise he/she promised because the company is broke. Then when you decide to move on, the boss gets overly angry because they feel you are abandoning the company just when they need you the most (and they ALWAYS need you the most).

    NEVER work for start-ups. It's just not worth it.
  • Jax
    On the flip side, I recommend never working for start-ups. The managers at start-ups are "true believers" in their ideas, no matter how bad. They will tell you about their dreams and where they see their company in 5 years, and that you're getting in now will reap amazing rewards.

    The problem is most start-ups' products suck, and are usually run by people who are the WORST bosses with little to no experience in management. They'll hire you at rock-bottom wages, saying you'll more than make up for it when the revenue sharing kicks in. In a year, when the company still has no revenue, you'll begin to wonder if the bosses know what they're doing.

    It then comes down to the boss' incompetence begins to hold you back. You're peers are moving into jobs making twice what you are, but your boss won't give you that raise he/she promised because the company is broke. Then when you decide to move on, the boss gets overly angry because they feel you are abandoning the company just when they need you the most (and they ALWAYS need you the most).

    NEVER work for start-ups. It's just not worth it.
  • I have always believed that a service which let companies rate their employees (with safeguards, rights to comment, etc.) would be extremely useful to weed out job hoppers. There are industries in which job hopping is a way to acquire Rolodex content at each company and moving on, earning a bigger salary at the next company thanks to the increased number of contacts. It is however politically incorrect at least, and illegal in most countries, do criticize employees. To me, this is unfair - case example: LinkedIn. Here, you can ask for recommendations, but you cannot give criticism. The result is (site-wide) thousands of cross-recommendations from colleagues which mean absolutely nothing, but for some reason count towards getting a job.

    Other type of job hoppers are serial con men - and yes, there are many out there, but for reasons of self-image, companies and VCs rarely talk about them, or admit their existence and passage through their ranks, and thus, they are free to continue their unethical and sometimes illegal behavior. I know first-hand of someone who is on trial for embezzlement of VC funds in his startup, yet he is now working at a company that helps startups get public funding... I wonder what due diligence they did before hiring him.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: