<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Never Hire Job Hoppers.  Never.  They Make Terrible Employees</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/</link>
	<description>Entrepreneur turned VC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:37:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshwar</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-8482</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshwar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 01:40:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-8482</guid>
		<description>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 &quot;job hoppers&quot; 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&#039;t an easy decision on their part, and they didn&#039;t get the same amount of work or commitment out of the following string of employees that replaced me.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Since then I have worked for major corporations and always found it incredibly difficult to stay with them for very long.  I haven&#039;t hopped to get better pay ... in fact I&#039;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.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;t mean a non-job hopper couldn&#039;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&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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 &#8220;job hoppers&#8221; 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&#39;t an easy decision on their part, and they didn&#39;t get the same amount of work or commitment out of the following string of employees that replaced me.</p>
<p>Since then I have worked for major corporations and always found it incredibly difficult to stay with them for very long.  I haven&#39;t hopped to get better pay &#8230; in fact I&#39;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.</p>
<p>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&#39;t mean a non-job hopper couldn&#39;t be just as passionate &#8230; 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&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joshwar</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-6755</link>
		<dc:creator>joshwar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 01:40:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-6755</guid>
		<description>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 &quot;job hoppers&quot; 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&#039;t an easy decision on their part, and they didn&#039;t get the same amount of work or commitment out of the following string of employees that replaced me.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Since then I have worked for major corporations and always found it incredibly difficult to stay with them for very long.  I haven&#039;t hopped to get better pay ... in fact I&#039;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.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;t mean a non-job hopper couldn&#039;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&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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 &#8220;job hoppers&#8221; 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&#39;t an easy decision on their part, and they didn&#39;t get the same amount of work or commitment out of the following string of employees that replaced me.</p>
<p>Since then I have worked for major corporations and always found it incredibly difficult to stay with them for very long.  I haven&#39;t hopped to get better pay &#8230; in fact I&#39;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.</p>
<p>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&#39;t mean a non-job hopper couldn&#39;t be just as passionate &#8230; 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&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimbo831</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-8483</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimbo831</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-8483</guid>
		<description>I just have to disagree with the theme of this article summed up in this sentence: &quot; You’re in it more for yourself than your company.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;s someone better, or you are no longer useful to them, you are gone.  Loyalty is a two way street and you shouldn&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just have to disagree with the theme of this article summed up in this sentence: &#8221; You’re in it more for yourself than your company.&#8221;</p>
<p>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&#39;s someone better, or you are no longer useful to them, you are gone.  Loyalty is a two way street and you shouldn&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimbo831</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-6754</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimbo831</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-6754</guid>
		<description>I just have to disagree with the theme of this article summed up in this sentence: &quot; You’re in it more for yourself than your company.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;s someone better, or you are no longer useful to them, you are gone.  Loyalty is a two way street and you shouldn&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just have to disagree with the theme of this article summed up in this sentence: &#8221; You’re in it more for yourself than your company.&#8221;</p>
<p>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&#39;s someone better, or you are no longer useful to them, you are gone.  Loyalty is a two way street and you shouldn&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ned</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-8484</link>
		<dc:creator>Ned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 23:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-8484</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s also revealing when candidates haven&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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&#39;s also revealing when candidates haven&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ned</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-6752</link>
		<dc:creator>Ned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 23:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-6752</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s also revealing when candidates haven&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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&#39;s also revealing when candidates haven&#39;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Hudson</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-8485</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Hudson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:58:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-8485</guid>
		<description>This was a really thought-provoking post and I agree with most of it. I&#039;m guessing a more accurate title would be &quot;if you&#039;re going to hire a job hopper, buyer beware - you&#039;ll probably getting someone who&#039;ll be gone in 24 months or less&quot; - that wouldn&#039;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.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I would probably fit your definition of a job hopper. I&#039;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&#039;re likely to keep moving. It&#039;s up to the employer as to whether he or she wants to investigate the reason for all of the mobility. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;ve worked and stayed)? It&#039;s pretty simple - it really comes down to people. Look, most startups don&#039;t work out. On average, if you leave and you think the company is doomed, you&#039;re probably right - you&#039;re staying probably won&#039;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&#039;s not just a startup thing, that&#039;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&#039;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&#039;t end well. I think you need to have an experience or two like that to shake the urge to bolt.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;One more tip for my job hopping friends. Every now and then, just commit to staying. Even if you know things won&#039;t work, stick around. If you have options to jump today, you&#039;ll have options to jump in 6 months as well unless the company you&#039;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&#039;d want to work with in your next startup when the chips are down. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;For what it&#039;s worth, if you know the startup isn&#039;t going to work and you don&#039;t love the people, you won&#039;t stay. If you&#039;re on the fence, stay every now and then - you&#039;ll learn a lot about yourself and the startup process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was a really thought-provoking post and I agree with most of it. I&#39;m guessing a more accurate title would be &#8220;if you&#39;re going to hire a job hopper, buyer beware &#8211; you&#39;ll probably getting someone who&#39;ll be gone in 24 months or less&#8221; &#8211; that wouldn&#39;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.</p>
<p>I would probably fit your definition of a job hopper. I&#39;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 &#8211; if someone moves around a lot, they&#39;re likely to keep moving. It&#39;s up to the employer as to whether he or she wants to investigate the reason for all of the mobility. </p>
<p>I just left a company that was sold &#8211; 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&#39;ve worked and stayed)? It&#39;s pretty simple &#8211; it really comes down to people. Look, most startups don&#39;t work out. On average, if you leave and you think the company is doomed, you&#39;re probably right &#8211; you&#39;re staying probably won&#39;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&#39;s not just a startup thing, that&#39;s a work thing &#8211; good culture and good co-workers can make even a mediocre job feel like a place you want to be. You can&#39;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&#39;t end well. I think you need to have an experience or two like that to shake the urge to bolt.</p>
<p>One more tip for my job hopping friends. Every now and then, just commit to staying. Even if you know things won&#39;t work, stick around. If you have options to jump today, you&#39;ll have options to jump in 6 months as well unless the company you&#39;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&#39;d want to work with in your next startup when the chips are down. </p>
<p>For what it&#39;s worth, if you know the startup isn&#39;t going to work and you don&#39;t love the people, you won&#39;t stay. If you&#39;re on the fence, stay every now and then &#8211; you&#39;ll learn a lot about yourself and the startup process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Hudson</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-6750</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Hudson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:58:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-6750</guid>
		<description>This was a really thought-provoking post and I agree with most of it. I&#039;m guessing a more accurate title would be &quot;if you&#039;re going to hire a job hopper, buyer beware - you&#039;ll probably getting someone who&#039;ll be gone in 24 months or less&quot; - that wouldn&#039;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.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I would probably fit your definition of a job hopper. I&#039;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&#039;re likely to keep moving. It&#039;s up to the employer as to whether he or she wants to investigate the reason for all of the mobility. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;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&#039;ve worked and stayed)? It&#039;s pretty simple - it really comes down to people. Look, most startups don&#039;t work out. On average, if you leave and you think the company is doomed, you&#039;re probably right - you&#039;re staying probably won&#039;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&#039;s not just a startup thing, that&#039;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&#039;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&#039;t end well. I think you need to have an experience or two like that to shake the urge to bolt.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;One more tip for my job hopping friends. Every now and then, just commit to staying. Even if you know things won&#039;t work, stick around. If you have options to jump today, you&#039;ll have options to jump in 6 months as well unless the company you&#039;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&#039;d want to work with in your next startup when the chips are down. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;For what it&#039;s worth, if you know the startup isn&#039;t going to work and you don&#039;t love the people, you won&#039;t stay. If you&#039;re on the fence, stay every now and then - you&#039;ll learn a lot about yourself and the startup process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was a really thought-provoking post and I agree with most of it. I&#39;m guessing a more accurate title would be &#8220;if you&#39;re going to hire a job hopper, buyer beware &#8211; you&#39;ll probably getting someone who&#39;ll be gone in 24 months or less&#8221; &#8211; that wouldn&#39;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.</p>
<p>I would probably fit your definition of a job hopper. I&#39;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 &#8211; if someone moves around a lot, they&#39;re likely to keep moving. It&#39;s up to the employer as to whether he or she wants to investigate the reason for all of the mobility. </p>
<p>I just left a company that was sold &#8211; 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&#39;ve worked and stayed)? It&#39;s pretty simple &#8211; it really comes down to people. Look, most startups don&#39;t work out. On average, if you leave and you think the company is doomed, you&#39;re probably right &#8211; you&#39;re staying probably won&#39;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&#39;s not just a startup thing, that&#39;s a work thing &#8211; good culture and good co-workers can make even a mediocre job feel like a place you want to be. You can&#39;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&#39;t end well. I think you need to have an experience or two like that to shake the urge to bolt.</p>
<p>One more tip for my job hopping friends. Every now and then, just commit to staying. Even if you know things won&#39;t work, stick around. If you have options to jump today, you&#39;ll have options to jump in 6 months as well unless the company you&#39;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&#39;d want to work with in your next startup when the chips are down. </p>
<p>For what it&#39;s worth, if you know the startup isn&#39;t going to work and you don&#39;t love the people, you won&#39;t stay. If you&#39;re on the fence, stay every now and then &#8211; you&#39;ll learn a lot about yourself and the startup process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-8486</link>
		<dc:creator>George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-8486</guid>
		<description>If you want loyalty, buy a dog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want loyalty, buy a dog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George</title>
		<link>http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/04/22/never-hire-job-hoppers-never-they-make-terrible-employees/comment-page-10/#comment-6749</link>
		<dc:creator>George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2522#comment-6749</guid>
		<description>If you want loyalty, buy a dog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want loyalty, buy a dog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

