I received this article: “Job-hopping is Rampant” from VentureFizz‘s Weekly Digest, written by Allison Levitsky, a Protocol Reporter. It discusses hiring managers’ increased tolerance for candidate job hopping.
I personally still seek candidates with a two+ year average per employer for enterprise scale Sales, Sales Engineering, and CSM professionals because of the subject matter learning curve and required relationships (with prospects, customers, internal associates, and partners) to truly develop any meaningful achievements and value for their employers.
Of course – to the article’s point – within the start-up world, we can’t arbitrarily punish the candidate who has a couple of mulligans because they were willing to incur the risks associated with a less proven company, technology, department, CEO, new manager, or role.
Without such risk taking by the associate or employer, start-ups would not grow or they would experience turnover among the shell-shocked hires coming out of a 5+ year run at IBM, Oracle, Symantec, etc..
To only consider candidates with three+ year average tenure per employer would reduce an employer’s target population and result in weak hiring results from a timeliness and quality perspective.
On the contrary, hiring managers often scoff at the prospect of hiring a professional who has been with the same large technology company for the past ten years, and yet they will also not consider a “job hopper”.
This tight rope is almost comical and clearly requires thoughtful discussion and documentation when introducing candidates who are somewhere in the middle, hence the value of a recruiter. Otherwise, it would require one heck of an algorithm to sort through all that 🙂