In an interview, the HM called me a job hopper and asked me to explain why I changed each job. FYI my avg tenure is 2.5 yrs. Do people still care about this this day and age? Obviously if I had 10 jobs the last 10 years, it could be strange but I’ve had 4. #tech #interview
Why wouldn’t someone care about it if someone is trying to build a team with some long term stability.
If companies want to maintain long term stability maybe they should pay to maintain that talent.
Why would they even interview someone with my profile then if they want someone who’s been at the same company for at least 4-5 years
It is common to ask why you change job. If I was a hm, I want to know why.
It is a legitimate concern. HMs and the team invest a significant amount of time and energy to onboard new employees. I would simply reply.. “I can understand why you might think that without any additional context. I’m actually very committed and unfortunately my short tenure at a few positions was due to layoffs. I’m here because I think this company is in a strong position and will provide the opportunity for both stability and exciting work. Do you want to talk more about an individual role I’ve had or are we good to move on?” This addresses their concern gives them the opportunity to dive deeper if they need to, but ultimately it lets them know you’d like to move forward. This puts them at a decision for their chips. Their response here will tell you if they are able to get past this bias or not so that you can proceed with the interview and understand if your experience and skills will be a good match for the position they have open.
This ^ But also I’d have formed an opinion about the HM for framing the question the way he did. It signals bluntness, jumping to conclusions and is a bit negative imo. I am particular about who I work for, and listen carefully to the smallest signals during interviews, since no one is giving their red flags away by saying something obviously bad.
I’d reply: I don’t think this is gonna work but thanks for the opportunity.
Some ppl say that. It’s an old antiquated way of thinking. These are the same ppl who have been with the same company for years and taken incremental TC gains. They’re the idiots for not “job hopping”
It’s more than just antiquated thinking. Companies and hiring managers want to create obstacles for job change, including drawn out excessive interviews and stigma around job hopping. It benefits them and it hurts us.
Any manager should ask to get a feel for the person. Will they talk negatively about previous companies? Or will they put a positive spin on their experience? If they seem genuinely interested and good natured then that's a good sign. If you can't figure out a way to answer this, you lack problem solving skills.
Have to agree with this. You’d be amazed how quickly people will put themselves as a problem responding to this question, or the “why are you looking for a new role” question.
If you think the intent is labeling, move on, first hints of a blame culture If the intent is to start a conversation, continue it The end.
That’s a good point, I got a bad vibe but it could be in my head and this person wanted to have a convo.
Here is how I answered when they asked me this: When I join a company, I hope to find rewarding work and opportunities to grow and develop my skills and career. I believe that this is the company's obligation to me, as much as it is my obligation to perform work duties to the company. Sometimes a company may shift priorities, or a project may reach a stable or complete state. If my company is not able to continuously provide me with those opportunities I expect, then it is in the interest of my career development that I sought out other opportunities. As long as a company remains competitive in providing me the resources and opportunities I seek, I have no reason to leave it. EDIT: since this is getting traction, I recently got laid off and I am actively interviewing. If your company is hiring, I would appreciate your referrals.
Good answer
Can’t this be misconstrued as being “overtly ambitious” and therefore a flight risk at the first instance of being assigned some “boring” work.
Fwiw startups are a lot more picky when it comes to tenure. It's weird. Focus on highlighting the value you can provide them.
This tracks. Spending time, money and effort on hiring is a bigger task for them. They don’t want to have to quickly do it again within 18 months.
Yep, super risky for them because people they hire can make or break the entire company, esp if they leave at the first sign of boring work
You should've ended the interview right there.
Sounds like someone you don’t want to work for
Very awk as 2 was also due to layoffs
I hope you mentioned that, because it should make a difference if they care about it.