Hacker News Reader

Comment by Dirlewanger | Hacker News Reader

I hate to be nitpicky, but the part about always looking for a better job is horrible advice in terms of marketing yourself. It's pretty well-known that bouncing around from job to job turns pretty much every employer off.

But then again, the type of person Adams is describing is more of an entrepreneur type and not the typical desk jockey.

View on HN

He didn't say to always be 'taking' new jobs, he said to always be 'looking'. And I'm guessing he's not exactly referring to "sending out resumes" or "going to every interview you possibly can."

Exactly. Always be looking around, networking, keeping up with trends in local companies and salaries. Be proactive and don't assume your current job will be there tomorrow.

It's pretty well-known that bouncing around from job to job turns pretty much every employer off.

I beg to differ. That might have been the case before, but nowadays this kind of "mobility" is almost expected.

As someone that subscribes to this view, I don't think he's advising bouncing from job to job. Often, I think this mentality is more a matter of being mindful about how the work you're doing is impacting your marketability and future prospects. Also, I find this mentality to be a good way of motivating myself when I'm getting organized and grinding through projects - I take note of anything new I'm doing that might be relevant to other employers and note the value of being the kind of employee that can run through these things quickly.

Admittedly, it would be harder to have this mentality if you're set on staying with a company for 5+ years, but even then, shouldn't you be looking at other employers for salary negotiations? Shouldn't you be looking at potential advancement opportunities within your department/company?

I don't understand how people would stay at a low-paying or (what I see as) non-fulfulling job for very long. Don't these people want to grow? Aren't the curious as to what else is out there? Forget the chances for more pay, benefits, etc.

> I don't understand how people would stay at a low-paying or (what I see as) non-fulfulling job for very long. Don't these people want to grow?

A lot of people see work as a necessary evil to support their real life, away from work. They want to grow, too, but perhaps they prefer a mountain hike or going to soccer training with their daughter instead of reading the release notes for the next OS X.

You should try it.

I don't know where you're coming from but you're missing the point.

Why stay at SuperBurger forever when MegaBurger opens up or you could even move up to making burgers at the fancy sit-down place down the road? You're not affecting father-daughter time since you're not at home working on burgers with all your free time or going to burger conferences instead of having daddy-daughter time.

Point is, the more fulfilling job often requires much longer hours which certainly do cut into parent-child time. Remember, when highly successful people are asked "if you had it to do over, what would you do differently?" one of the most frequent answers is "spend more time with my children."

And then there's the reverse: unsuccessful people, who spent mountains of time with their children, friends, and family, say "I wish I'd taken more risks."

Statistically-speaking, that is by far the most common response, because most people are not "highly successful people".

> Don't these people want to grow? Aren't the curious as to what else is out there?

In the world of work? Not in the slightest.

I'd love to be a mathematician, or cryptographer, or pilot. But I don't have the mindset or qualifications and never will have. In that case, best to just slog away during the day and 'grow' outside work.

I would have to disagree. I think for personal finances and experience you will always get a better deal by moving to another job every 1-3 years. 3 years might be the maximum if you're just doing the regular salary type of job. I have no experience with the start-up scene and I'm talking just about regular corporate jobs that offer no equity or valuable stock options.

I think that probably depends a lot on where you work, and your seniority - in Spain a senior developer or project manager that changed jobs yearly would have a harder time finding work than one who showed more loyalty to his/her company.

I'm speaking from a perspective of working in the US which I should have clarified. Over here loyalty doesn't seem to matter much anymore. It's all about making money.

Everything in moderation. This has been my modus operandi for nearly a decade now. Looking does not mean taking. Once I take a new job, after the first 30 days, I know I've got a window of about 12 months that I should stick around or it's going to look like I'm flakey/don't play well with others, etc... But I'm always looking.

It doesn't if the experience gained makes you worth it, despite the implied risk of flight. If anything, it makes you unhirable for positions where employer values above all predictable mediocrity (ie. most corporate grind jobs), which is not a bad thing.

I hate to even interview people that stayed in one job too long. They tend to be weak candidates.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com