Live data from Hacker News

Hopping too many startups in a row?

news.ycombinator.com

31–33 of 33 posts

Re: Hopping too many startups in a row?

#31
post #27

2 years is actually fairly long in the startup world imo, most startups (by %) don't even last that long. The average across the SWE industry (not just startups) was hopping every ~2.5 years a few years ago, and I believe it's worse now. I only start to scrutinize if I see a pattern of several in a row of If anything, I tend to judge people a little bit who stay in the same place more than 3-4 years in this industry.…

>> If anything, I tend to judge people a little bit who stay in the same place more than 3-4 years in this industry.

While I completely understand this point of view, I wonder if you are speaking as an employer or employee? If, as an employer, how do you cope with your 25% of your staff leaving every year? How do you build that institutional deep knowledge if your longest serving person has I can really only view it from the view-point of an employer (so my comment comes from there.) Personally I've been in the same job for 33 years now (was my first job out of uni) but I've seen the company grow from 2 people to 50. Most of our staff have > 10 years with us, and a bunch > 20. They are highly skilled, and have a depth of knowledge about our products and customers that are unmatched. They earn salaries well higher than other companies would pay them.

50 people is of course very modest success - I'm not saying we're a unicorn, or even especially valuable. But from our view-point we're also not looking to hire folk who have short-term goals and are already looking for the next gig down the line. Obviously lots of job-hopping is a red flag for our recruitment process.

And that's the thing I guess. Another company would have a very different perspective, and be looking for a very different kind of person. And ultimately that's ok. We don't all need to fit the same mould.

Re: Hopping too many startups in a row?

#32
post #5

The recruiter perspective has some relevance too. A question in their minds is whether candidates have the tenacity to stick through ups and downs of a company. This happens very frequently and I guess the employers are trying to gauge whether people will up and leave the moment things get difficult. it may merit some nuanced explanation when such a question comes up.

"the moment things get difficult"

What does that mean? The company on freefall? The company reversing WFH policies that are in your contract?

You have generalised a huge number of situations into one phrase and implied that employees should suffer it through. Would companies suffer it through "the moment things get difficult" with an employee if they had the chance of not suffering it through? No, they would just fire the employee.

You can only expect reciprocity in a business transaction. And that is what employment is.

Re: Hopping too many startups in a row?

#33
post #5

The recruiter perspective has some relevance too. A question in their minds is whether candidates have the tenacity to stick through ups and downs of a company. This happens very frequently and I guess the employers are trying to gauge whether people will up and leave the moment things get difficult. it may merit some nuanced explanation when such a question comes up.

I disagree. How many interviews do you think it takes for someone to realize lying yields better results? When "things get difficult" is a catch-all of subjective nonsense and to paint it in a more charitable light is intellectually dishonest. Whenever "things get difficult"—whatever that means—you can count on the recruiter not being around and is why their opinion does not count for much. Often companies will let r…

I never said theres a catch all meaning to difficult situations. Every one has to draw their own lines about it. I understand its in fashion to talk about RTO as a difficult situation and it certainly is for a large segment of employees but would it also be a difficult situation for a developer if they are asked to follow a coding style at work that does not conform to their own personal style?

Some might say yes, thats a difficult situation while others might say how stupid that is to make a situation out of that.

The point was, the difficulty levels can vary and employers would like to know where an employee stands so as to gauge fit with the ups-and-downs of a particular context of that particular organization.

Post reply on HN