wood burning stoves 2.0*
The moose likes Jobs Discussion and the fly likes many companies in less years Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Android Security Essentials Live Lessons this week in the Android forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Careers » Jobs Discussion
Bookmark "many companies in less years" Watch "many companies in less years" New topic
Author

many companies in less years

nazeer hussain
Greenhorn

Joined: Feb 06, 2006
Posts: 21
is it a drawback of working for many companies in less time say 3 companies in 3 years. will the employer perspective in recruitment differs with this?


and someone says that working in the same company for long time gives you more higher level roles while changing the company.


can u give me some ideas on this.

Sumit Chopra
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 26, 2006
Posts: 176
I think its okay in early phase of your career because you are looking for the 'right company' for you. People would be luck if they get in their 1st or 2nd job what they actually want. 3 companies in first 3 years is probably not that bad. But after that its time to go for a long innings atleast 2-3 years.
Kj Reddy
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 1704
There was discussion on same kind of context. One of the thread is:
http://www.coderanch.com/t/29922/Jobs/careers/frequent-job-changes-will-it
Ulf Dittmer
Marshal

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 41124
    
  45
3 companies in first 3 years is probably not that bad.

I would probably not even look at the candidate, considering it unlikely that he would stay with my company longer than a year. It's always possible to be unlucky in selecting a company, but 3 times in a row? That reflects badly on the candidates judgement. There would have to be unusual attenuating circumstances to hire that person.


Ping & DNS - my free Android networking tools app
NJ Joshi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 14, 2006
Posts: 82
I see differently Candidate is really talented ,getting hired ,working on different companies enhance his exp. He is professional who knows what he wants instead of simple "servant" who keep working for salary ,longer hours and thinks he is loyal .
Ulf Dittmer
Marshal

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 41124
    
  45
Well, it's got to fit both ways. Many hiring managers would agree that taking on someone with that kind of history is a risk. Hiring and training employees is an expense of time and money, and turnover is disruptive. If the chance of the employee leaving in the not too distant future seems real, he might not get a chance with a company.
Kj Reddy
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 1704
I agree with Ulf. For a new employee it will take 3 months to 6 months to get settled with working environment and the project. So if the person leaving within one year, he effectively productive to company for 6 months and the company need to recruit new person and train him again which is very expensive for any company.
Amitabh Reddy
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Posts: 59
Originally posted by NJ Joshi:
I see differently Candidate is really talented ,getting hired ,working on different companies enhance his exp. He is professional who knows what he wants instead of simple "servant" who keep working for salary ,longer hours and thinks he is loyal .


This is not always question of "being talented". This is simple supply-demand equation sometimes. In a desperate times, companies often overlook hip-hoping nature of a candidate and employ them. But the serious time companies, would not consider these candidates. Indian shops may be glad to employ these candidates for "projects-in-pipeline". In our domain(my company's), it takes a year(or even more) to build descent amount of domain knowledge.

I would not care to read more of his resume if I know about this unstable nature.

Amitabh.
Anand Prabhu
Ranch Hand

Joined: Dec 19, 2003
Posts: 299
I would look at the context. If you are in USA, then if I see that the candidate has changed jobs in those crazy years of layoffs, I would give the candidate the benefit of doubt. Else, I would need good reasons (early termination of projects, cultural/technical misfits etc). For India and from what I read about it, I guess job-hopping is natural considering the fact that the IT demand is far greater than supply. But if it is a professional and reputable firm (IBM, GE, TI etc), then it will be an uphill battle to get in.
Sumit Chopra
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 26, 2006
Posts: 176
I think changing 3 jobs in 3 years is very normal is India. I have 2 companies in 3.5 years. I have never had any problems with interviews. I think 1 year is considered as an unofficial cutoff in India. So if you change after 1 year, not a lot of people care atleast at an initial stage of your career. Also there is lot of shortage of realy talented people. So if you are really good, then you hardly seem to have problems if you can explain intelligently.
Abhijit Kumar
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 28, 2005
Posts: 225
Originally posted by Sumit Chopra:
I think changing 3 jobs in 3 years is very normal is India. I have 2 companies in 3.5 years. I have never had any problems with interviews. I think 1 year is considered as an unofficial cutoff in India. So if you change after 1 year, not a lot of people care atleast at an initial stage of your career. Also there is lot of shortage of realy talented people. So if you are really good, then you hardly seem to have problems if you can explain intelligently.


I agree with you. Also if the compensation difference is too great ( 50% +), then I think it's time to look at the offer seriously, because most probably you are underpaid.

AK
 
It is sorta covered in the JavaRanch Style Guide.
 
subject: many companies in less years
 
Similar Threads
Infosys Technologies - How much is salary for 2 years
Siebel CRM - Pune Job situation
Share your worse interview experience!
How many switches
Company for Pune & Mumbai