I first wrote about the topic of job hopping back in 2007 and I feel the advice I gave then is still relevant in 2013, although the perceptions and attitudes of most hiring managers have evolved significantly. The post in 2007 was partly inspired by a past client (financial trading firm) that would only accept résumés of software engineers that were employed at their current company for a minimum of seven years. Today, it seems more likely that my clients would discourage me from submitting candidates that have had too long a tenure. Times have changed.
As a refresher, the term job hopping is used to describe a history of somewhat frequent moves from one employer to another after spending little time working for a company. Some use the one year mark as the measure of a hop, but multiple moves before a second or third anniversary should also earn you the label with most traditionally-minded recruiters and managers. However, being tagged a job hopper in the tech industry is not nearly as troublesome as many would want you to believe.
A survey of 1500 recruiters and hiring managers last year had the following results:
“According to 39% of recruiters, the single biggest obstacle for an unemployed candidate in regaining employment is having a history of ‘hopping jobs’, or leaving a company before one year of tenure. 31% consider being out of work for more than a year as the greatest challenge in regaining employment, followed by having gaps in your employment history (28%).” – Bullhorn survey
Unfortunately, this result was misinterpreted by an article on job hopping that appeared in Forbes earlier this year. Let’s see if you can spot the subtle difference.
“Nearly 40% of recruiters and hiring managers say that a history of hopping is the single biggest obstacle for job-seekers, according to a recent survey conducted by recruiting software company Bullhorn.” – Forbes.com
Did you catch the difference? The Forbes article calls job hopping the biggest obstacle for job seekers, while the Bullhorn survey clarifies that job hopping is the biggest obstacle for unemployed candidates. One could agree that having a job hopper reputation while being unemployed is a tough combination, but anecdotally I’ve found that employed job hoppers have a much easier time. After all, job hoppers are clearly skilled at getting hired.
Why is it necessary to make this distinction between job seekers and unemployed job seekers? Because unemployment acts as a sort of multiplier or catalyst towards the “unemployability” of the job hopper, which explains why almost 40% of managers and recruiters would essentially call unemployed job hoppers the least attractive group. It is also useful to point out that in high-demand labor markets with relatively low unemployment rates such as the market for software engineering, the job hoppers almost always have a job.
The data also seems flawed for another reason. 39% cite job hopping as the biggest issue, while 31% point to lengthy unemployment. One would think that the gap between these two numbers should be much greater. In my experience, a candidate that has been unable to get a job for over a year probably has more serious marketability issues than someone who was able to get hired twice in a year. There could be countless extenuating circumstances to either situation, of course.
A few thoughts on job hopping and the alternative.
Extreme longevity at one company can be viewed as a detriment in a job search (worse than job hopping)
20th century hiring managers viewed your 15 years at COMPANY as a sign of employee loyalty, while 21st century managers feel that if you were any good another company would have hired you away by now. I typically consider extended stays (>10 years perhaps) with one employer as a potential challenge to overcome for a job seeker in today’s tech market. Making a series of moves that allowed you to progress your career and skills will often be viewed more positively than stagnating in one role for an extended period.
Don’t get fired
Job hoppers that lost jobs due to a documented and significant reduction in force or company closing shouldn’t have too many problems, as they aren’t viewed as true job hoppers (rather victims of circumstance). Those that made multiple moves to pursue better opportunities will only be negatively impacted if they are not staying in jobs long enough to improve their skills and to accomplish something valuable. Having a pattern of being fired, even only twice, is where the major employability problem lies for job hoppers.
If your performance is a known issue and you resemble a job hopper, find a new job before they have a chance to fire you.
Have at least one or two stints worthy of highlighting
One of the problems with making quick moves is that you often don’t have enough time to do anything worth putting on a résumé. As an exercise for writing this post, I looked back at the résumés of the candidates I’ve placed in the past two years. The results were telling.
Only about 5% of the candidates I placed had been in their current job for more than three years at the time of placement, and most had been in their past two jobs for less than two years each. Almost all of them, however, had an impressive stint of three to six years at a company within the last decade with obvious accomplishments. The sample size isn’t significant enough to call this a study, and my client base tends to be small companies that are probably less likely to exclude candidates solely based on some jobs per year metric.
It appears that candidates who have had two or three jobs over a short period of time will be forgiven for job hopping if they had at least one stable stretch in the recent past. Just as a former league MVP should be able to find a spot on a team’s roster even after a couple sub-par seasons, candidates that have somewhat recent success stories will overcome the stigma of job hopping.
Job Tips For GEEKS: The Job Search DRM free ebook is available for
$9.99 (reduced to $6.99US in December 2013) on most platforms. See the book’s page for details and a free sample.
A recent Hacker News post by a man named Andrew was voted to the front page and received over 50 comments (as of my post). The post was called Ask HN: Would you hire me?, and Andrew specified that he was talking about a junior level position.
He provided the following details about himself:
- 28 years old with a Finance Degree from a non-Ivy league school
- Spent the last two years living overseas teaching English and learning to code
He also included links to his:
- GitHub – handful of repos, 7 months as a member, pretty active over the last quarter
- Stack Overflow profile – 521 reputation, top 37% this quarter, 16 badges
- Blog – Attractive UI, 7 overall posts (a few with some code), with the highlight being details of a Chrome extension he built and demonstrates in a video
Andrew received a fair amount of positive feedback, and not one single poster gave a ‘you are not hirable‘ response. No CS degree, no professional experience, yet a highly technical audience were either mostly positive and at worst neutral on hiring (considering is more accurate) this potential applicant. Only a couple responders mentioned looking at the one project he listed, and none referenced the quality of his code samples on his blog or GitHub, so we might assume that no one even bothered to look at his code. Interesting.
Part of the explanation for the positive response is undoubtedly the makeup of the Hacker News crowd, which does not include a large contingent of HR reps from large companies who control a great deal of the hiring decisions. Place this resume and story on Monster or Dice, and I expect that Andrew would receive responses from less than a quarter of his viewers. Possibly less than a tenth.
I admit, if I were to see this candidate’s resume (assuming it reflected the details he put on HN), I would absolutely want to speak to him. The clients I represent, which are mostly startup and early stage software companies, are more representative of the HN crowd (at least in terms of evaluating engineers) than most larger companies. And even if I did not have a great opportunity for him today, I would think that a few years down the road he will be someone that I’d want to represent.
What is it about this candidate with no experience and no highly relevant education that gets our attention? Of the details we have about Andrew, how many could have impacted my decision to speak to him?
When evaluating talent and the decision whether or not to interview a candidate for a software job, I must rely on several attributes that have historically been attached to quality talent that were successful in receiving job offers from my clients.
Let’s break it down.
28 years old with a Finance Degree from a non-Ivy league school – Most readers, including myself, probably didn’t give this any thought. His degree in finance should indicate some math background, and if he had listed his specific school that would have had an impact. Although most might be reluctant to mention it, the age demographic is probably a positive based on the industry, as he obviously has some life experience and maturity but will not fall prey to any old dog/new tricks bias.
Spent the last two years living overseas teaching English and learning to code – Teaching any subject to any students is valuable experience for almost any profession, and should indicate some level of communication skills. The international aspect adds a bit more interesting background than if he were teaching domestically. Some who chose to speak to Andrew may have been strongly influenced by the oversas aspect, as this could also show some willingness to face risk and change.
GitHub, Stack Overflow, and Blog – For those that make decisions about technical talent, the fact that Andrew has both a GitHub and Stack Overflow account is probably more of an indicator of possible talent than what is actually in the accounts. Most candidates in my experience don’t have a GitHub/Bitbucket or SO account, but those who do have accounts are historically more successful with my clients than those who don’t. The attractive blog and few technical posts are yet another indicator, showing some passion as well as the ability to articulate his ideas in writing.
What other details may have led to the decision of HN readers or people like me who would at least want to speak to Andrew?
He reads Hacker News – Even if he isn’t a senior developer, he at least appears to have spent some time in one community where they frequent.
He comes across as modest and doesn’t appear to feel entitled – You don’t see anywhere in Andrew’s post a reference to how awesome he is or how he is ‘kicking CSS’s ass on a daily basis’. His responses to feedback are very positive, grateful, and polite. The choice of ‘well versed’ over some other terms that may be linked to overconfidence was wise. Andrew also will not be accused of sounding entitled to a great dev job, and on the contrary he comes across as someone who knows he has to earn it. Perhaps that is a function of his lack of a CS degree, but either way he appears to be taking the right approach.
He’s already creating product – Although he is only early on in his tech studies, Andrew has a product on the market that you can find in the Chrome Web Store that you can download. There are developers with 20 years of experience that haven’t built any of their own tools or products yet, but this guy is two years in and has that mindset. Some may question how great (or even good) a product someone at this level of experience could build, but the desire to produce and distribute a tool is something that perhaps can’t be taught.
Note: Other indicators I use regularly include:
- Past employers – Some companies frankly have a higher standard of hiring
- Technical hobbies – Arduino, build robots, or create things at home
- Speaking or writing – Presentations and publications are usually strong indicators
- Tool choice – What blogging platform or operating system you run at home
- User group and meetup – Shows interest and passion
Conclusion: Hiring managers and recruiters are making quick decisions to interview and consider candidates, and as demonstrated by this HN post it seems that there are several recognized indicators of possible talent. For job seekers, you may want to display links to your accounts prominently, and highlight details such as independent product development.
Of course, these indicators are not perfect. I, too, have a GitHub and Stack Overflow account and a blog that covers technology (and I even run one of the best Java Users’ Groups in the world) – but I don’t write code. Readers of HN should not hire me.
Discuss here or on Hacker News.
There seem to be a rash of “Am I Unemployable?” posts and comments lately on sites that I frequent, and after reading details the answer in my head is usually “Not quite, but sounds like you are getting there“. In other words, someone will hire you for something, but many who assess themselves as unemployable are going to feel both underpaid and undervalued when they finally find work.
How does a technology professional go from being consistently and happily employed for a number of years, only to find himself/herself suddenly unemployable? Better yet, what are the key differences between someone who spends months on a job search and someone who can unexpectedly lose a job Friday and start a new one the following Monday?
How do certain people get job offers without having to even interview?
It isn’t simply about skill, although that is obviously a factor. Even pros that are highly productive and well-regarded in some circles can encounter challenges in today’s hiring environment. It’s about creating relationships and developing your reputation/visibility.
In my experience, pros that are always in demand and rarely (if ever) unemployed seem to share certain sets of habits, and while some of the material below is Career 101 there are some that you probably never considered. As a longtime user group leader and recruiter of software engineers for the past 15 years, I see this first hand on a daily basis. Let’s start with the habits that are the least obvious and progress to some that are more widely practiced.
Interview – How often do you interview when you are not actively looking for a job? For most the answer is never, and I’d encourage you to take at least a couple interviews a year. Going on the occasional interview can serve two purposes. First, they are a way to make new contacts and keep your name in the minds of potential employers, with the added benefit that these same interviewers may be working at new companies in a year or two. One interview could lead to an ‘in’ with four or five companies down the road. Second, it is the only way to keep interview skills sharp. Interview practice is best done live without a net, and failing the audition for a job you truly wanted is often attributed to rusty interview chops. Even a simple informational interview request (made by you) is an effective and creative way to make first contact with a potential employer.
Know when to leave your job – Without question, the group having the toughest time finding work are unemployed with say ten+ years at the same company, and a close second would be employed workers with that same ten year tenure. For anyone about to scream ‘ageism‘ please hold that thought, as older technologists that have made smart moves do not typically have this issue. I would add that older engineers who possess the habits outlined here are the group being hired without interviews. There are always exceptions, but tech pros can stagnate quicker than those in other industries due to the speed of change in technology.
The definition of job hopping has morphed over the past fifteen years, and it is now understood that semi-regular movement is expected and accepted. Where other industries may interpret multiple employers as a symptom of disloyalty, in the software world a pattern of positive (moving to something better) job changes is often more indicative of a highly desirable candidate. Conversely, someone who has remained at a company for many years may be viewed by employers as loyal to a fault and potentially unambitious. If this person has solid skills, why has no company picked him/her up yet? Changing jobs before stagnating is critical to overall employability, and how quickly you stagnate will vary based primarily on your employer’s choices, your own ability to recognize that stagnation is happening, and your desire to not let it happen.
Make ‘future marketability’ a primary criterion when choosing jobs or projects – Carefully consider how a new position will impact your ability to find work later in your career and use that as one of your key incentives when evaluating opportunities. Details about your roles and responsibilities as well as the company’s technology choices and reputation in the industry are all potential factors. Does the company tend to use proprietary languages and frameworks that will not be useful later in your career? How will this look on my résumé? Many candidates today are choosing jobs or projects based on an opportunity to learn a new skill, and for this they are usually willing to sacrifice some other criteria.
Reach out to others in the community (not coworkers) – How many times have you sent an unsolicited email to someone in your field that you don’t know? “Congrats on your new release, product looks great!” or “Saw that you open sourced, look forward to checking it out” as an email or a tweet is an effective way to create a positive impression with a person or organization. Twitter is great as a public acknowledgment tool, and the character limit can actually be advantageous (no babbling). If you stumble on an article about a local company doing something interesting, there is much to be gained by a 140 character pat on the back. This is essentially networking without the investment of time.
Lunch with others (again, not coworkers) – You have to eat lunch anyway, so how about inviting someone you don’t know that well to lunch? Perhaps include a few people that share some common technology interest and turn it into a small roundtable discussion. Meeting with other tech pros outside an interview or meetup environment enables everyone to let their guard down, which leads to honest discussions about the experience of working at a company that you may consider in the future. It’s also an opportunity to learn about what technologies and tools are being used by other local shops.
Public speaking – This is an effective way to get attention as an authority in a subject matter, even on a local level. Preparing a presentation can be time consuming, but generally a wise investment. Even speaking to a somewhat small group once a year can help build your reputation.
Attend a conference or group meeting – This isn’t to be confused with going to every single meeting for every group in your area. Even getting to an event quarterly keeps you on the radar of others. Make an appearance just to show your face and say hi to a few people.
Reading and writing about technology – One could debate whether reading or writing has more value, but some combination of the two is likely the best formula. If you don’t know what to read, follow some peers and a few respected pros from your field on Twitter, LinkedIn or Google+, and make a point to read at least a few hours a week. As for writing, even just making comments and discussing articles has some value, with perhaps more value (for job hunting purposes) in places like Stack Overflow or Hacker News where your comments are scored and can be quantified. Creating your own body of written work should improve your understanding of a topic, demonstrate your ability to articulate that topic, and heighten your standing within the community.
Build a personal code repo – Many in the industry balk at this due to the time required, but having some code portfolio seems to be on the rise as an expectation hiring firms have for many senior level candidates. If the code you wrote at work is not available for demonstration during interviews, working on a personal project is more critical.
At first glance, this list may appear overwhelming, and I’m certain some readers will point to time constraints and the fact that they are working 60 hour weeks already. Some of these recommendations take considerable time, but at least a few require very little commitment. Employ a few of these tactics and hopefully you will never suffer through a prolonged job search again.