It seems it would depend on your learning curve, the projects that you accomplish or don't accomplish, the impact or impression you made on each company, and the reason for the transitions.
Without knowing anything more: yes! But it depends on the reasons for leaving the jobs. If you explain it in your cv understandable it won't be a show stopper for your next application.
If you are working as a consultant, I really do not see it as an issue. There are always other "circumstances" that could lead to multiple jobs in three years.
Yes and no.
On first look, three job changes would suggest a job hopper. But in today's economy that is not the rule.
You have to take into consideration layoffs, company buyouts and a slowing economy.
In the last two years I have changed jobs three times in my industry and it has not been a problem.
By the way, I was laid off twice.
In general I think this is too many changes in a short time. But it does depend on why the moves were made. If there is a clear track of upward mobility then it may not be too bad. If these are largely lateral or just incremental changes then this is a little too much.
I believe yes, especially in Middle East area where I belong too. New careers been created/generated recently due booming business in ME. The main challenge is you need like a machine.
I think this largely depends on the job that you are changing from and to. For instance, moving from a Barista at Starbucks, to a clerical worker in an investment bank, and then from clerical work into a more specialized field of work, would be sensible.
Business requires a unique combination specialization and generalization. I think it is beneficial to address larger meta issues for a business after acquiring specific expertise. It takes a great deal of time and regular exposure to a large number of business specific issues to become an expert. As such, it does not seem probable that one could become an expert in three different areas of business, in three years.
Yes, to me that speaks to issues with culture, performance or authority. I like to see no less than every 2 years. In that range it speaks of opportunity and progression.
It depends on the industry and the discipline. If you're an IT project manager and you're involved in rapid deployment projects, this is not unreasonable. However, if you're an interior designer looking to build a reputation and clientele, you had probably better stay put somewhere for awhile, perhaps even the entire 3 years.
I would say so -- three jobs in three years seems a little unstable. I'd be hesitant to hire someone with that track record. Then again, it might depend on the age of the person and where they are in their career.....
It depends on what you are planning to do now. If you are at your 3rd job and plan to stay for several years, then you don't have any reason to be concerned. I would definitely say that beyond 3 job changes, you run the risk of looking like you are either discontent everywhere you go, or people are discontent with your performance. In my opinion, that quest for the perfect job is made harder with each job that you don't stick out for longer periods of time. Of course, if you are advancing and taking better opportunities with each advancement then the job changes are a no-brainer to some extent.
Maybe in the remote past. More than 15 years ago I bought a book called "If you want guarantees, buy a toaster", that already said work stability was going the way of the dinosaurs. Another guy that has preached a lot about how important is to be always ready to move on is Harvey Mackay, highly recommended.
Yes. not because change so fast it's bad, but because it demostrates that there's no career planned. I believe that everyones need to search for the "job of his life, but this must be with a clear idea of "what, who and how" you want to be in the future.
Follow your dreams, but don't let your body drives you mind. It must to be the inverse of this. Or minimum an equlibrium.
We are living in a time where job changing frequency matters less, unless of course you are looking for a reason to discount yourself or another, then I supposed job hopping is as good a limitation as any.
It depends. Was the person fired or let go from each or any job? Do the job changes show some kind of development path or direction? Were the earlier jobs taken as learning stepping stones to get to the later job?
Without knowing some specifics this question cannot be answered intellegently. The classic thinking would generate a yes answer. In our world there are layoffs, bankrupt companies, health issues, relocation, new family responsibilities etc. which cause people to change jobs frequently.
I personally have done something close to that. Had to move on as I have been employed with some level of commitment from the employer and after I am on board everything changes. Hence sometimes the employee has no other option but to ...
It depends on the individual and his/her personal development. if the job change is in the same industry for e.g "Training" but moving betwee different roles then I would say no it's not. However the individual needs to settle down at some point.
However if the person is changing between different roles and fields then three job changes in three years is a bit much. At some point you need to specialise in a particular field.
On a personal level if you're advancing your career and increasing your happiness then no. On a professional level, it definitely doesn't look good to employers if you are a random job hopper.
I agree with Jacob. Early in your career, changing jobs every year, is OK. We all have to find the right fit. As you get older, changing jobs annually can make you appear to be someone who doesn't know what he or she wants, or is a malcontent.
The best way to avoid the annual job change syndrome is to do your homework on propsective employers. Don't jump at the first thing that comes along -- make sure you and the company are a good fit.
Good Luck!
Bud Bilanich,
The Common Sense Guy
Coming from the perspective of someone who is a recent College grad in their very first job, I'd have to agree that I don't think it's a bad thing to do when you're young and just starting out...you have to find your niche and what suites you but as you get older and narrow down your field, you should be in a place that is right for you and that you can be at for a long time.
It's up to the industry and the employee how to say. To most recruiters - yes. But if he/she is in IT field or in some special terms, maybe not.
e.g. If he/she always had bad luck - when he/she entered into them,and the company went bankrupt. He/She have to change. - When I was a hiring manager, I really met a man who always met bankrupt or laying off employees in his first 3 months.
Yes, very bad . . . and that's coming from an executive recruiter who lives in this space all day, every day. Think about it from the hiring company's standpoint: Most corp cultures and/or jobs aren't designed in such a way that you can plug in (or pull out) talent on a whim and still maintain the same level of performance . . . save for perhaps a call center or a highly commoditized role in which the deviation in performance is slim to begin with. There's also (in most cases) a turnover component built into performance appraisals for mid-level managers . . . even if you'd be a great short-term hire, the risk is too great in terms of compromising their own personal brand. When turnover in one group, team, or business unit is higher than the mean, poor leadership is always the first suspect.
There is an exception to the 3 jobs in 3 yrs rule, and that's if you are an independent contractor in the IT world (sorry, but 'Sologig.com' doesn't look great on a resume if you're non-IT). That being said, there will still be a stigma associated, and you're going to handle the implicit objection, "This person is a lifetime contractor and can't dedicate themselves to anything for more than a short period of time." Yes, HR will psycho-analyze you and put you in a nice litte box . . .
37 Total
February 12, 2008 at 10:37am by Noah Hatzung
It seems it would depend on your learning curve, the projects that you accomplish or don't accomplish, the impact or impression you made on each company, and the reason for the transitions.
February 12, 2008 at 10:39am by niels12345
Without knowing anything more: yes! But it depends on the reasons for leaving the jobs. If you explain it in your cv understandable it won't be a show stopper for your next application.
February 12, 2008 at 10:45am by
I would think so but usually when this happens there is some other reasons that can shed some light on this.
February 12, 2008 at 11:28am by morris hoover
If you are working as a consultant, I really do not see it as an issue. There are always other "circumstances" that could lead to multiple jobs in three years.
February 12, 2008 at 12:42pm by YLL Catino
It depends a lot on what field/industry you are in, whether they were consulting gigs, and much more.
February 12, 2008 at 1:02pm by Manny Otiko
Yes and no.
On first look, three job changes would suggest a job hopper. But in today's economy that is not the rule.
You have to take into consideration layoffs, company buyouts and a slowing economy.
In the last two years I have changed jobs three times in my industry and it has not been a problem.
By the way, I was laid off twice.
February 12, 2008 at 1:19pm by Martin Hall
In general I think this is too many changes in a short time. But it does depend on why the moves were made. If there is a clear track of upward mobility then it may not be too bad. If these are largely lateral or just incremental changes then this is a little too much.
February 12, 2008 at 1:26pm by Iibrahim Alkendy
I believe yes, especially in Middle East area where I belong too. New careers been created/generated recently due booming business in ME. The main challenge is you need like a machine.
February 12, 2008 at 3:25pm by Mark Dalton
I think this largely depends on the job that you are changing from and to. For instance, moving from a Barista at Starbucks, to a clerical worker in an investment bank, and then from clerical work into a more specialized field of work, would be sensible.
Business requires a unique combination specialization and generalization. I think it is beneficial to address larger meta issues for a business after acquiring specific expertise. It takes a great deal of time and regular exposure to a large number of business specific issues to become an expert. As such, it does not seem probable that one could become an expert in three different areas of business, in three years.
February 12, 2008 at 3:44pm by Haewon Kye
Palm changed its logo three times in three years. So three job changes? I think not. Not anymore.
February 12, 2008 at 4:07pm by Kim Kleeman
Yes, to me that speaks to issues with culture, performance or authority. I like to see no less than every 2 years. In that range it speaks of opportunity and progression.
February 12, 2008 at 5:04pm by Tim Tymchyshyn
if you have it and others are willing to pay for it do it
February 12, 2008 at 5:05pm by Brent Iverson
It depends on the industry and the discipline. If you're an IT project manager and you're involved in rapid deployment projects, this is not unreasonable. However, if you're an interior designer looking to build a reputation and clientele, you had probably better stay put somewhere for awhile, perhaps even the entire 3 years.
February 12, 2008 at 5:15pm by Mark Dalton
"Palm changed its logo three times in three years. So three job changes? I think not. Not anymore."
I think there is a difference between marketing a company's brand, and creating sufficient knowledge to sustain a career.
February 12, 2008 at 5:29pm by Kristin Park
I would say so -- three jobs in three years seems a little unstable. I'd be hesitant to hire someone with that track record. Then again, it might depend on the age of the person and where they are in their career.....
February 12, 2008 at 8:08pm by Jason Lankow
It depends on what you are planning to do now. If you are at your 3rd job and plan to stay for several years, then you don't have any reason to be concerned. I would definitely say that beyond 3 job changes, you run the risk of looking like you are either discontent everywhere you go, or people are discontent with your performance. In my opinion, that quest for the perfect job is made harder with each job that you don't stick out for longer periods of time. Of course, if you are advancing and taking better opportunities with each advancement then the job changes are a no-brainer to some extent.
February 12, 2008 at 8:57pm by Horacio Salazar
Maybe in the remote past. More than 15 years ago I bought a book called "If you want guarantees, buy a toaster", that already said work stability was going the way of the dinosaurs. Another guy that has preached a lot about how important is to be always ready to move on is Harvey Mackay, highly recommended.
February 12, 2008 at 9:39pm by Nick Burton
Arguably 3 jobs in 3 years shows a lack of focus &/or loyality. BUT, I did exactly this during my transition from employee to entrepreneur.
February 12, 2008 at 10:14pm by Antonio Carlosners.com Vargas
Yes. not because change so fast it's bad, but because it demostrates that there's no career planned. I believe that everyones need to search for the "job of his life, but this must be with a clear idea of "what, who and how" you want to be in the future.
Follow your dreams, but don't let your body drives you mind. It must to be the inverse of this. Or minimum an equlibrium.
February 12, 2008 at 11:13pm by m e
In a "normal" economy....yes
February 12, 2008 at 11:15pm by Dawn Mular
We are living in a time where job changing frequency matters less, unless of course you are looking for a reason to discount yourself or another, then I supposed job hopping is as good a limitation as any.
February 12, 2008 at 11:25pm by Heath Row
It depends. Was the person fired or let go from each or any job? Do the job changes show some kind of development path or direction? Were the earlier jobs taken as learning stepping stones to get to the later job?
February 12, 2008 at 11:56pm by Nicholas DeFrancesco
Without knowing some specifics this question cannot be answered intellegently. The classic thinking would generate a yes answer. In our world there are layoffs, bankrupt companies, health issues, relocation, new family responsibilities etc. which cause people to change jobs frequently.
February 13, 2008 at 12:02am by jacob starkey
not really, if your 19. if you're 39, maybe.
but look at it this way, you could have no job at all, or worse (in my opinion) be stuck in job that is neither productive nor enjoyable.
so, maybe 3 jobs in 3 years is perfect, for you.
February 13, 2008 at 12:14am by Ankana Chakraborty
I personally have done something close to that. Had to move on as I have been employed with some level of commitment from the employer and after I am on board everything changes. Hence sometimes the employee has no other option but to ...
February 13, 2008 at 1:32am by David Sherwin
Depends on your industry. In the marketing world, that's not unheard of.
February 13, 2008 at 2:25am by Anthony Richardson
(answer) I don't think so, no.
February 13, 2008 at 2:45am by rosanne maritz
It depends on the individual and his/her personal development. if the job change is in the same industry for e.g "Training" but moving betwee different roles then I would say no it's not. However the individual needs to settle down at some point.
However if the person is changing between different roles and fields then three job changes in three years is a bit much. At some point you need to specialise in a particular field.
February 14, 2008 at 3:27am by Kevin Milden
Yes.
February 14, 2008 at 8:25am by Yosef Friedman
It's great that you change jobs - it means you are alive searching for something you love
February 14, 2008 at 9:49am by James Burns
On a personal level if you're advancing your career and increasing your happiness then no. On a professional level, it definitely doesn't look good to employers if you are a random job hopper.
February 14, 2008 at 11:55am by Quinn Kuiken
From a recruiter - yes.
February 17, 2008 at 12:49pm by Srini Lokula
Answer would be Yes or No. It all depends on what type of work you do. For example, people in IT keeps changing jobs almost every 6 months.
February 21, 2008 at 10:49am by Bud Bilanich
I agree with Jacob. Early in your career, changing jobs every year, is OK. We all have to find the right fit. As you get older, changing jobs annually can make you appear to be someone who doesn't know what he or she wants, or is a malcontent.
The best way to avoid the annual job change syndrome is to do your homework on propsective employers. Don't jump at the first thing that comes along -- make sure you and the company are a good fit.
Good Luck!
Bud Bilanich,
The Common Sense Guy
February 21, 2008 at 6:26pm by Kathryn Collins
Coming from the perspective of someone who is a recent College grad in their very first job, I'd have to agree that I don't think it's a bad thing to do when you're young and just starting out...you have to find your niche and what suites you but as you get older and narrow down your field, you should be in a place that is right for you and that you can be at for a long time.
February 21, 2008 at 7:33pm by Sally Feng
It's up to the industry and the employee how to say. To most recruiters - yes. But if he/she is in IT field or in some special terms, maybe not.
e.g. If he/she always had bad luck - when he/she entered into them,and the company went bankrupt. He/She have to change. - When I was a hiring manager, I really met a man who always met bankrupt or laying off employees in his first 3 months.
March 24, 2008 at 8:08pm by Joshua Letourneau
Yes, very bad . . . and that's coming from an executive recruiter who lives in this space all day, every day. Think about it from the hiring company's standpoint: Most corp cultures and/or jobs aren't designed in such a way that you can plug in (or pull out) talent on a whim and still maintain the same level of performance . . . save for perhaps a call center or a highly commoditized role in which the deviation in performance is slim to begin with. There's also (in most cases) a turnover component built into performance appraisals for mid-level managers . . . even if you'd be a great short-term hire, the risk is too great in terms of compromising their own personal brand. When turnover in one group, team, or business unit is higher than the mean, poor leadership is always the first suspect.
There is an exception to the 3 jobs in 3 yrs rule, and that's if you are an independent contractor in the IT world (sorry, but 'Sologig.com' doesn't look great on a resume if you're non-IT). That being said, there will still be a stigma associated, and you're going to handle the implicit objection, "This person is a lifetime contractor and can't dedicate themselves to anything for more than a short period of time." Yes, HR will psycho-analyze you and put you in a nice litte box . . .