Job Hop 6

[rQuestionEngineering]

I am affected by younger colleagues who had been given more opportunities even though I am more qualified. Why the world is so unfair ?

 

[RVAmeche]

Talk to your boss? Ask why you're not getting better/bigger projects or whatever the issue is. Don't wait for your review or something but let it be known you want to do more (or something different, whatever the issue is).

 

[SWComposites]

The world is not fair. Get over it.

“Qualifications” are not the only important thing.

 

[MintJulep]

even though I am more qualified.

Your self-assessment doesn't matter. Your supervisors' assessments do matter, and the results are in.

We here on Eng-Tips can only form our own assessments based on your collective history of posting.

 

[rQuestionEngineering]

I am appalled by the decision of the hiring manager, who chose someone younger that had job hop periodically 1.5 years.
I applied for the similar post and was interviewed. I was on the current job for 10 yrs.
Both of us had the same background.

What are the hiring managers looking for ?

Now , their new young candidate submitted her resignation as expected ...
I tried to talk to the hiring manager again , but not really to embarrass him .

Why hiring managers kept being fooled again and again ?

 

[IRstuff]

Ask the hiring manager what factors resulted in choosing someone else over you; you'll never know unless you ask. You may be disappointed by how others don't share your high opinion of yourself.

I would say the world is eminently fair in this regard; it's a free market, and the market choose other competitors. Your assessment of your qualifications is incorrect, based on your performance in that market, or you are not looking at the right qualifications.

Note that just because you have put in 10 years does not make you "more qualified" it just means you're older, and maybe not even wiser. I've had one coworker with 20 years "more experience" than me, and they couldn't engineer their way out of a shift register.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[Jboggs]

IRstuff: In regard to your last comments, a very successful man once told me about a conversation he had with a guy who said, "I've got 25 years' experience at this!" He said, "No you don't. You have ONE year's experience twenty-five times." Never forgot that.

And rQuestionEngineering: Welcome to real life, not school. It ain't fair. Never has been. Never will be. Period. If anyone ever promised you fairness in life, they lied. You should decide right now if you're going to let life's unfairness tie you up in knots. Do you really want to spend life complaining? (I've got a brother-in-law you should meet for a good example of that.) You should also be aware that there will be times in your career when others look at you and claim YOU had an unfair advantage for whatever reason. Learn what you can from it and move on.

 

[IRstuff]

We only have the OP's perspective that it's somehow "unfair" but has only offered his supposed experience and "job hopping" has the evidence.

However, the OP's post implies that this is not the only time, so I have to seriously consider if there are obvious factors that make the OP unsuitable for these opportunities.

While 10 years is certainly "experience" it still might not be particularly memorable to, or considered productive by, the manager, and there certainly could be a "what have you done for me lately" syndrome.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[la belle vie]

When you get old like me you get used to being surpassed career-wise by others. Someone I worked with back in the 80s when we were junior engineers is now CEO of a multi-national engineering company. Why not me? It’s just not my skill set or my desire! People at your level should be able to run with assignments. The first step is to formulate and communicate your vision for successful completion. This involves asking good questions and listening, forming the vision, and communicating it in writing or graphically. Then, once you get buy-in from your stakeholders, you execute. Sometimes a less experienced person is just better at this than a more experienced person. They get promoted more quickly. Communication skills and relationship building are key. Are you working on these things?

 

[CWB1]

You have ONE year's experience twenty-five times.

Or worse yet, somebody's been doing things wrong for 25 years.

I would expect most "job hoppers" to be significantly better engineers than long-term employees. Job-hopping is necessary to some extent simply to gain the breadth of knowledge/experience to become a decent engineer, not only from a technical perspective but also from a process/people/business standpoint. The mega-corps various business units are usually diverse enough that theyre effectively different companies with different methods and cultures, so you can stay internally while continuously growing. At small-mid sized companies tho your growth is pretty limited so staying long-term is a fool's errand from a competency standpoint, nvm a financial one.

 

[weldstan]

In my early years, I changed jobe about every 3 years to gain different technical experiences and more money. If I became bored with a work exprience in a particular industry, it was also time to think about moving on. I spent nearly 20 yers in the last job and was rarely bored by the work as there was always something just around the corner to satisy my curiosity and learn something new.

 

[MotorCity]

I think its a balancing act to change jobs to expand the breadth and depth of your technical experience. I question whether one can become proficient in anything if they are job hopping too often. You have to stay long enough to become proficient and then be willing to jump ship for a new experience. Not sure what that number of years is, but I'd have to say 3 years minimum. And at that point, its debatable whether switching jobs every 3 years is really job hopping.

 

[wroggent]

Not sure what that number of years is

I think mentorship, culture, support systems, processes, nature of the work, and the talents of the individual are all variables that make figuring out that number impossible/useless.

 

[Aesur]

I'm going to throw out another possibility here, and sadly this is common. Maybe the OP is great at what they do and therefore they don't want them moving to a different position because it could hurt the company. Many good engineers are looked over simply because they fit great at what they do. I have seen this happen many times for the simple reason of why would a company want to give up a lucrative employee doing a critical job when they may not actually need the job offering filled as others are stepping in and probably doing it. This is just how many companies work and the larger they get the more likely this is to happen.

 

[CWB1]

Agreed that what is "job-hopping" vs normal is debatable. IME larger companies expect everybody including management to change roles about every three years, the churn keeps knowledge/skills sharp and makes it more difficult for useless employees to hide behind nepotism. Layoffs bc somebody challenged those policies arent uncommon in either private sector or govt.

My employers all expected full competency within a year. You might not have a new patent or paper published in that time but you were capable of either, able to handle solo projects, and able to speak publicly representing the company/team if needed. That said, its not uncommon to be uncomfortable in a role for 2-3 years or longer, nor bored within weeks.

 

[geotechguy1]

Both sides of the argument, from my own limited experience / perspective:

In favour of job hoppers: People who switch jobs every 2-3 years are generally more adaptable and resilient and have much more diverse experience. They are used to tackling new roles and challenges. At most places I've worked it's common that people do their hardest, most consistent work in the first 1-2 years at a company, and then gradually fall off / get lazier as they get comfortable in the role and develop internal political connections / understanding of the business that allows them to more easily sidestep challenging work or hospital pass challenging work to new hires. I once worked through a recession where probably ~60% of the engineering roles in my discipline disappeared; the people who were off work the longest were the people who stayed at one job 10+ years, the people who bounced back quickest either in a similar role or via retraining were people who switch jobs every 2-3 years, because they are always 'starting over' so to speak.

 

[milkshakelake]

I kind of equate this to getting projects. I'm new to the market, about 6 years in, and I'm getting projects over established players that have been here for decades. A lot of it has to do with qualifications/skills, reputation, communication, and delivery, not just number of years. The important thing is to innovate and improve.
/end preachiness and self-aggrandizing

 

[geesaman.d]

The real question I see is: what did you show about how you could perform the "more opportunities". Does the younger, "job-hopping" colleague show initiative, energy, and have a history of getting things done? How does the rest of the company view these opportunities vs you and how you do your job? Did the hiring manager have any regrets putting someone in that role and 'only' getting 1.5 years? What's the correct number - 10?

I guess most importantly, being around for a while does not and should not lead to promotions. So if just doing your job and waiting around is how you plan to ascend, change that plan. HR can see who is restless and who seems content at what they're doing. You've had ten years of annual reviews and goal planning - how have you leveraged that to create opportunities for yourself?

 

[geesaman.d]

Agreed that what is "job-hopping" vs normal is debatable. IME larger companies expect everybody including management to change roles about every three years, the churn keeps knowledge/skills sharp and makes it more difficult for useless employees to hide behind nepotism. Layoffs bc somebody challenged those policies arent uncommon in either private sector or govt.

My employers all expected full competency within a year. You might not have a new patent or paper published in that time but you were capable of either, able to handle solo projects, and able to speak publicly representing the company/team if needed. That said, its not uncommon to be uncomfortable in a role for 2-3 years or longer, nor bored within weeks.

The reality is that many jobs, engineering included, barely reach competence in one year. And many companies documentation, procedures, etc are so sparse and out-of-date that it's impossible to become competent in a year. Once they get into that cycle of moving people around regularly, the whole role dumbs-down and nobody realizes it because there is no longer a frame of reference for what 'good' looks like. Then this self-reinforces - the company continues to move and hire people into new roles where their output is barely adequate but it's normal because everyone is struggling, undertrained, and working without clear alignment or direction. But they don't know it or talk about it because they don't want to draw attention for the next round of layoffs. Department managers won't collaborate because they are barely holding their teams together in the first place. (This is my girlfriend's current work situation - she was hired to do one thing but at the moment she's being required to spend 80% of her time doing something entirely different in an horribly inefficient way).

My brief role in management showed me that it is essential to assess the time required / breadth of experiences required for a person to learn a particular role well. Some take six months, some take six years. It's vital that the candidate and hiring team both understand it. The senior and most productive employees in those long-haul roles should be broken out into levels, such as I, II, and III and people moving into those roles need to be carefully assessed as to where they fit in. As a manager, it's your job to ensure that where experience counts, it shows in the metrics so that keeping well-developed experience is valued and rewarded.

David