You’re crazy. Do not tell a trusted coworker about your intentions. It’s a risk. Shut up and interview. What’s the benefit of telling anyone at your current gig?
Sometimes someone up and quits without saying anything (and that’s their right), but I think it’s more productive if we can have a real conversation about the situation and maybe we can change something or maybe we can’t.
The very worst that I’ve done knowing someone was looking was not putting them onto a long project that would require substantial personal commitment to accomplish if I knew they were looking. Otherwise, no impact (and even there it made their departure easier on both sides).
I think at most I would be extremely vague about declining a project like that.
But I see this as very context specific. I was confident that this would work out well in this case, but can easily imagine situations where it would not. I don't mean this as universal advice at all.
People change positions fast in this industry, so keeping on good terms with coworkers you respect can be good later when they have moved on and are looking to hire.
Those conversations should have started way before the person even started looking.
Really depends on the employer and on how much they want to keep you and how willing you are to stay there.
I’ve been through too many layoffs as participant and spectator to have any concern for the difficulty of transitions. Here we are encouraging employees to plan out their departure months in advance, but my employer has no problem sending out “if you got this email you aren’t fired” bulk emails. My two week notice is generous in comparison, and I can guarantee that the transition sure won’t be difficult on my end.
And while our EMs are surely nice people, they have no power to enact real change in the majority of organizations. They have no say over budget, headcount, and often their cries about misguided priorities are ignored.
In other words, if your VP and Director are the wrong people there’s no amount of planing or negotiating that’s going to save the situation. On to the next one.
Also keep in mind people are unlikely to just blurt out that you are out interviewing, especially if they are a trusted person. They might want to tell management that there's a number of people looking to leave and they should do something about it if they want to keep people.
Of course try to weigh the pros and the cons. But don't keep it private unconditionally.
Coworkers? Maybe not. But my manager? Certainly.
Makes his life easier, allows him to plan accordingly and (in at least one case) throw some juicy new project at me that makes me rethink a 20% raise.
Also, there's no need to burn bridges on your way out[1].
[1] My last place, my manager knew about my first interview at a FAANG, he knew about my second interview, and then he knew about the offer they sent.
All-in-all, he knew for about 2 months that there was a possibility of me leaving. We're still good terms right now.
You never know what kind of obligations your manager has to deal with that situation. They might be required to send that info up the chain.
I’m also strongly against the slightest implication that the standard two week notice is burning a bridge. It absolutely isn’t. All it takes is one layoff life experience to see why two weeks notice is more than enough courtesy.
>
> You never know what kind of obligations your manager has to deal with that situation. They might be required to send that info up the chain.
What you're saying is that it might have a negative result. You're ignoring that it might also have a positive result.
It's a trade-off, with the risk that your manager will take an opportunity to sacrifice you to the organisational gods for his own benefit.
You gotta ask yourself, if your manager is willing to throw you to the wolves, why are you still working there? After all, if they are willing to hurt you for simply job-hunting, there's a lot more they would have done to you over the period of your employment.
OTOH, if they've never done you in before, why are you so sure they'll start now? If they have broke your trust before, then sure, you have evidence to support a secretive approach. But if they have never done it before, then all your evidence points to them not doing it now.
To get to be a manager, they must have demonstrated more networking skills than average. I doubt that they are going to pollute their network just for kicks; all the ones I've worked with mostly attempt to expand their network of contacts, not shrink them!
> You never know what kind of obligations your manager has to deal with that situation.
True, I don't. But my managers in the past, when told that I am looking, never sent the info up the chain, even when I knew that they were obligated to.
I've been working now for 24 years; only once in my career did it come as something of a shock to my manager that I had found a new job.
More importantly, I can’t really put my finger on any kind of potential positive result for the employee.
In my mind if you “do the math” on that situation, there’s no reason to ever reveal your intentions except in extraordinary scenarios. There’s only downside and slim to no upside.
I think what you describe is kind of like betting on red and black at the roulette table. Sure, you’ll get your money back most of the time, but if you ever hit 0 or 00 you’ve gone bust, and you can never do anything besides get your money back. There’s essentially no reason to bet at all.
Also, keep in mind that so many people work for actively terrible management and can’t just instantly rectify that. Not all management comes into power off of merit like you suggest, many are members of the family business or friends of the director/VP. In that scenario, to answer your “why are you still working there?” question, the answer is “to put food on the table.”
If they're your friends, you celebrate getting the job with them. Don't tell them the plans beforehand because that is just opening yourself up for problems. And you do end up looking a bit worse if you keep trying to find new places but not getting anywhere.
(Not to say to distrust your friends; it's just that people chat naturally. secrets never remain secret for long.)
I actually found my new job on stack overflow while i was searching for something while at work. I applied, had a month long interview, and I only told my friends when I was up to the final stages of the interview. but we were a cynical bunch and we were all lamenting to leave, so they enjoyed the idea of the place falling apart after I left.
I also told them a few of my failures earlier in the year, so they knew what i was up to, but they often didn't have specifics that someone else in the company could try and pin me by.
It's not like you're cheating on a partner. You are expected to maximize revenue.
Yes the ideal state is having employers who can take attrition on the chin and root for their people on the way out the door, and yes those kinds of employers exist.
The opposite is also real, and acknowledging the former doesn't preclude the latter: I and judging from comments, others have also been in the kinds of shops that will cut someone loose for interviewing even for a second job when the first isn't providing the hours or income they need, and I and I presume others have also given whatever amount of quit-notice and then immediately been walked out the door even after expressing a willingness to stay aboard, finish up $project and help the team transition well once we leave+.
So I can respect the ideal state while acknowledging some people have completely rational trepidation about who they share this kind of status information with.
----
[+]even though I personally think quit-notice more often than not, but certainly not always-often is a disservice to the person quitting
1. You lucked your way into a role that you're completely unqualified for
2. Your employer will use this information to expedite the process of termination (that began prior)
Unless you're in big tech, your employer will beg you to stay if you mention interviewing elsewhere. And if do have a name brand on your resume it will magically float to the top of the list.
If you really have noone outside of work to talk to && need to then get a therapist, or a dog, or COD warzone buddies
Everyone who is in business should be interviewing (on some side of the table) all of the time.
Unless your contract specifies duration, you are entirely within bounds to interview at any time, even after your first week at a new job. Anyone who finds fault with it is viewing you as property, not a vendor.
This is our one life we have, and we’re supposed to just throw away our time on this earth for companies that are a bad fit, at least a year.
And yet my former employer had no problem laying me off with zero notice.
I’m going to preach against overlooking short tenure candidates as strongly as I can wherever I go. Quality, well-managed companies with top benefits packages don’t have issues with employee turnover.
Only the mismanaged dumpster fires have those issues. In my experience they’re the ones who make the biggest stink about resume tenure during the interview process since their daily reality revolves around that cycle of employees joining, finding out the place is shit, and leaving.
It just doesn't quite sit right with me because the company has really been quite good and I like the people I work with. The extra money also wouldn't really enrich my life all that much. But I feel like I'm doing something wrong by not interviewing every week and trying to squeeze the last drop of wealth out.
Sure, you don't want to chain together a whole bunch of those. But I see so many resumes that are a string of 1 year + 1 month, and I know they only stayed because of cliff vesting. It's not 1993 anymore.