Believe it or not, job hopping has not changed a lot over the years. It’s still about 2-3 years of tenure before someone hops, very similar to when I was coming up. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, if you break it down by age, you find that young professionals jump about every 1.5 years. Around 25-35 years old, it’s every 2.7 years. Then it slows down. When you get to 55-64 it’s every 9.6 years.
In some ways this makes sense based on stage of life. We’re more mobile when young and like to be anchored down more when we’re older with more obligations (e.g., children). However, the question remains – how is hopping interpreted and is it a net positive or negative for the employee and the employer?
For employers, I don’t see a big upside. It’s a challenge in terms of maintaining and building culture, capturing institutional knowledge, dealing with learning curves, the costs of disruption associated with turnover, etc. The upside may include rapid access when needed to special talent and the disruption of groupthink or other unproductive cultural artifacts.
How about for the individual hopper? The upside is that jumping is a good path to maximizing compensation for the brave, talented, and mobile. It’s the fastest way to add new breadth or depth to your resume. It’s also an easy route for escape from a toxic environment. The downside might still include stigma (not invested in the team), limited depth of expertise, no deep ability to deal with conflict or failure, burnt bridges in your network, and the risk of being let go due to “last in, first out” policies when layoffs are needed.
So, to reiterate – it’s a valid choice and for the individual professional there are pros and cons. To make your move more strategic than opportunistic, most of the following should be true:
The compensation bump is at least 20%. Anything less is dangerous. You don’t truly know what life is like on the other side. If it’s not what you expected, you’ll at least be compensated adequately.
The role is the same, a promotion, or clearly a better fit. You might want a similar role in a new upgraded organization, a faster route up the ladder, or a place where you believe you will fit in with a lot less faking.
You’re not burning bridges. Burning bridges is about leaving on bad terms: big unresolved conflict you’re part of, unfinish work that puts them in a tough position, and many other forms. If you know you would never be asked to work at this organization again, you burnt a bridge. If it is possible in any way, never light that fire.
Escape is necessary. If the company is faltering competitively and it’s affecting budgets with no prospects of improving, consider your possibilities. If the workplace is some form of consistently toxic or people consistently behave in a manner inconsistent with your values, again, consider your options.
It’s the only path forward for a career pivot. If you are highly invested in making a career change that is not likely to be accommodated at your current organization, it might be necessary to look elsewhere.
Do yourself a favor, know the numbers noted here. Know how they might differ in your industry and your organization. Choose to be under the average – don’t be among the most frequent hoppers! Never burn a bridge. Also, if you’re managing talent that wants to jump and leave, help them. You don’t want to burn that bridge from the other direction either. In the end, for better or worse, talent is fluid and you never know when and how you’ll meet again. So, be sure that if you do, it’s pleasant for all involved.