"Never spend more than 5-7 years in any job" 21

[lookintomyeyes]

I work for a large, publicly owned company. At a recent event for "young professionals", a speaker recommended that we "never spend mroe than 5-7 years in any job". The speaker was once an engineer, but has now moved "up" in the company through design, project management, etc to a full time management position.

Do you agree with his recommendation?
In our company, the average employee, for whatever reason, only spends 2-3 years in each position they take. From what I've seen, this has been leaving several engineering departments without experienced, knowledgeable staff. Additionally, there is the "expectation" that all engineers will move into management positions. The company has just created "engineering expert" positions to entice people to stay in design-type engineering roles, but the management stream still appears to be winning. Add to that the flux of retirees exiting the company, and it's easy to see why more and more work is going to consultants. (Personally I get nervous when I see someone outside the company design somethign, while we just maintain it, but thats another discussion.)

I'll admit that I'm young and therefore perhaps naive/foolish, but I look forward to spending as many years as it takes to become an expert in my field. If I get bored I may move, but I do not wish to move just to sample various areas of engineering. I've also had my taste of management and find it too stressful for my liking. There will be others for whom it is a perfect fit, but for others...I think they are being pushed into a role because of said "get out after 5-7 years!" rule.


Comments? Is anyone else (company-wise or personally) experiencing the same thing?

(Lastly, please forgive me if this has been posted/discussed before)

 

[IRstuff]

Hah, I can beat that. I started my 2nd job out of college on a Monday. Wednesday, there was a picnic lunch welcoming the 10 new hires, including myself. The following Monday, I was the only one of the 10 still employed at that company. All told, about 30% of the division got axed that Friday.

3 yrs later, we show up one morning and see a notice for a mandatory meeting in another building. We get there and there are 3 meeting rooms. One was for the people packing up that day. A second was for people who had projects to finish before they got laid off. The 3rd was for people that were staying.

However, it's pretty hard to take ownership if you've got the short-timer mentality. Sometimes, it's pretty obvious to your managers that you've got that one foot out the door. That said, the bottomline has to be that if you hate your job you need to get a new one, but, if you don't hate your job, why leave?

I've been at the current company for 10 yrs and there are still TONS of new stuff to learn. Part of what keeps a job interesting is doing new stuff and epxanding your horizons. You don't necessarily have to leave the company or even you department to achieve that, but, sometimes there's just too much inertia in the company to give you that opportunity.


TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[toiap]

I can relate to both sides of the argument. I am in my late 30's, so it is somewhere in the middle. I have moved around quite a bit (I am on my 6th employer). I never started a job thinking I would only stay a short time. In fact, most times I honestly believed that I would stay for the remainder of my career.

Growing up I always said I wanted to do something I love and that was exciting. I saw my father as staying in a job that he may not have enjoyed because it was the right thing to do for the family. I suspect many in his generation had similar feelings as expressed here.

What I have learned in my 17 years of working is that for the most part working for someone else is pretty much the same no matter where you go. Yes, some places of employment are better and some bosses are better. However, in the end the politics, bureaucracy, mundaneness, etc. are in every job. After 5 or 6 years at one place you start to feel the same, unfortunately. However, why change jobs for the sake of change. I agree that family, etc. are my priority. Therefore, why would I give up two weeks of vacation and better benefits to switch companies and end up feeling the same in a few years.

Since my last change (6 years ago), I have decided that I will stay where I am and only leave to start my own company. I am starting to work towards that and hopefully will make it happen. Right now I agree with ZDAS, the grass is not always greener on the other side when you look at all of the issues.

 

[swertel]

toiap,

Your father's experience was the same as my father's, and one that I agree with your is probably a generational thing. That being said, I learned from my father's "mistake." Why do I think it was a mistake? Because he stayed at that job that he hated, went on strike, and everything else just because the risk outwayed the potential reward for switching jobs while my brother and I were in school. Once we graduated and moved out, my parents' expenses drastically decreased and he changed jobs. My father is no longer the cranky irritable man he once was. He needed to change much sooner because that would have been better for the family - in hindsight.

So why have I changed jobs as often as I have? To make sure I learn as much as I can early on, experience the differences in industries and company perspectives, so I can find the one job to settle into for the long haul and become an expert engineer at it while achieving a reasonable work-life balance.

God, family, friends, self, work - that's the priority in life. I need work to support family, so it may appear that I put work first; but in the end, I do it based on the above. Just like sometimes self comes first. That doesn't mean selfish, it just means you need to make yourself a better person first in order to benefit the rest.

--Scott

http://wertel.eng.pro

 

[Twoballcane]

“Perhaps my concern stems from the lack of engineers standing and saying, "I'm proud to have become an expert in my field"?”

I think we had this discussion before in eng-tips, being a generalist or an expert. There are pros and cons to both choices. Many will argue that being a generalist will give you better job security, but the salary will not be that high. However, being an expert will get you a higher salary, but less job security.

For my self, I am proud to be a rising expert (still lots to learn) in analysis and test on electronic equipment. Analysis and test are my focus. I have been doing it for the past 8 years in two different companies. I enjoy a high salary, however, when downsizing comes around, we are usually the first to go. Currently I’m in a big company with dozens of programs with engineering problems, so I’m not worried.

You can still be an expert in your field and change companies; you just have to find skills that are transferable from one company to another. That is why I like analysis and test, because no mater the product, the physics and test method are still the same. In a way I feel like a consultant in my company. People seek me out only when they have a big engineering problem.

I guess I have this mentality because of the phrase “being a jack of all trades, but master of none”. What will make you stand out from everybody else at job interviews and performance reviews?

In any case, if you want to be an expert in something, you should start as a generalist. The foundation of a good expert is that he knows something of other fields. Do not be narrow minded. You should be “Mater of one, but knowledgeable of many” (I should coin this!)




Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[toiap]

Swertel,

I think we agree on this issue, just that you have not reached the same point I have.

I understand what you are saying. I once felt the same way and still occasionally have those feelings. I share the same priorities. My point is that every time I have changed jobs the novelty and excitement eventually wear off. In fact, my wife knows about how long I have been at any place of employment by my attitude.

At this point in my life I have come to the conclusion that these feelings probably will occur at every job as long as I am working for someone else. I might as well stay at my current job where I have good people working for me and share similar values with. As I said, my plan is for the next move to be when I leave to work for myself. I do not see any value in changing jobs, starting at the bottom with respect to benefits, so I can experience the same BS at another employer.

 

[aj12000]

I am on my second engineering job - I didn't get into the field until I was 30. I stayed at my first job for 10 years, but *should* have left after about 7. I was bored and too many people were minding my business. Unfortunately I had to stay because of my kid and family situation. I did finally leave after that stabilized and have been at my new job 7 months. My salary did increase 20% and some benefits are better, but I did have to start over on 401k, profit sharing, etc. All in all I am glad I changed jobs, but after 10 years I think I got too comfortable and it makes it hard to move. I think I was also losing my confidence that anyone else would want me or that I could get a comparable or higher salary. At 5-7 years you have gotten the experience but aren't so mired in the culture and it is easier to leave. On the other hand, if you are happy where you are, not bored, count your blessings.

I have also heard 10 years, 15 years max for a job. That is from several different head hunters.

 

[zdas04]

Head hunters don't get paid if people don't move. Taking their advice is the same as taking the advice of a used car salesman on how long to keep a car or a stock broker on how long to keep a stock--all of them get paid based on transactions, not customer satisfaction.

David

 

[lookintomyeyes]

Good point on the head hunters, zdas04. And not to sideline the original discussion, but as my professional association likes to say

"the simple passage of time does not make a good engineer". Therefore, a headhunter would still find someone useful and desireable after even 20 years of service if those last few years of service were full of innovation and improvement.

 

[HgTX]

The last two paragraphs of zdas04's post are independent of issues such as loyalty (in either direction):

When kids ask me the question the OP asked I say "start every job with the attitude that you are going to stay there for the rest of your life". If it works out that you stay, then your early work is a lifelong credit to your future. If if doesn't work out, then at least you've learned everything that you could and contributed to the company the most that you were able.

Starting a job with the attitude that "you'll only be there 5-7 years" never lets you stop being a "temp" in your own mind and if you should happen to stay for 8 years then you see yourself as a failure.

Leaving just because it's been X years, when otherwise everything is going very well, strikes me as foolish. It's probably a good idea, though, to look around every so many years just to see if better opportunities (better enough to be worth the upheaval of changing jobs) seem to be out there.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[IRstuff]

Just to expand on the HgTX's comment. Many of you treat the annual salary review with considerable derision. Whatever the issues there are with that process as implemented by most companies, the basic concept is sound.

Most companies have programs or projects that run on schedules, and they do monthly assessments on progress and try to determine if there are issues, risks, successes, etc. Likewise, every person should have a plan for their goals. Their progress against their goals and objectives need to be assessed. A "better" job for the most part, is meaningless; it's just like asking for the "best" metal. Asking whether you're on the path to achieving your goals is a valid and important question, and it's something that should be done yearly. Christmas season is a time of reflection and so this might be a good time to find out if you actually have goals and whether review your progress toward those goals.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[zdas04]

IRstuff,
Your comment

A "better" job for the most part, is meaningless; it's just like asking for the "best" metal.

is just too good not to highlight. It is the essence of what I've been trying to say. As you say, a person has to manage their own career through some objective measure, and "progress towards goals" is among the best measure.


David

 

[KENAT]

Head hunters don't get paid if people don't move. Taking their advice is the same as taking the advice of a used car salesman on how long to keep a car or a stock broker on how long to keep a stock--all of them get paid based on transactions, not customer satisfaction.

zdas, I'd give you a star if you weren't maxed out already!

Now the OP was given the recomendation by a manager but it was my Technical Director who gave me my first job that he liked to see at least 4-5 years!

When all the managers, head hunters, experts... agree then maybe we should consider making decisions based on such rules of thumb. However, till then ;-) I suggest everyone look at their own situation (as zdas says) and make the decision for them selves. You may not always get it right but it's got to be better most of the time than relying on some arbitrary rule of thumb.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[MedicineEng]

My experience (already reported in other similar threads):
1st job: 3 years and 8 months;
2nd job: 5 years and 5 months;
3rd job: Currently 2 months.

In the first time, I moved because I was looking for a job to be nearer my future wife that was 200 Kms away.I ended up in the other part of the world 13000 Kms away from my country (together with my wife). I moved because of the opportunity to move abroad, increase responsibility, join a bigger company and increase my salary (by this order).
The second move happened because I was finishing my contract and it was agreed that I would leave. I left exactly in the day that I agreed with my boss with the contract for my current job already signed. I found a job in another engineering field, with different responsibilities. In fact, as I usually say, up to now I had the luck that in over 9 years of professional experience I was only 1 week unemployed because I wanted to make a week vacation between my 2nd and 3rd job.
I don't follow any rule, I just grab the opportunities that I feel appropriate.

 

[mechengdude]

I agree with the statement "Never spend more than 5-7 years in any job" in part. If you remain at one company doing the same job for more than that, you are severely impacting your pay. I'm not sure why anyone would want to do the same job as the guy down the street for 20% less which is pretty much exactly what happens in corporate America today if you remain at one company.

That said, I do agree with the general sentiment that everyone has to make their own decision based on their career goals and age.

 

[stanweld]

mechengdude,
Your statement "...you are severely impacting your pay" is not always correct. Some companies take great pains in recruiting and hiring new graduates to promote in the future. I know and have known a number of these "golden ones"; normally they were easy to spot. These individuals are often promoted rapidly and I know a number who were promoted to vice president levels before turning 40. If you happen to be one of the "chosen", you may wish to reconsider moving to "greener pastures" too soon.

 

[Twoballcane]

Found this:

Six Myths about work

http://www.boston.com/jobs/news/articles/2007/06/10/6_myths_about_work/

#1. Job hopping ruins your resume.
Job hopping is one of the best ways to sustain passion and personal growth in your career. It also helps you build a network quickly and allows you to build your skill set faster than if you worked in the same job year after year. The learning curve is always highest at the beginning.

And here's some good news for hoppers: Most people will have eight jobs between ages 18 and 32. This means most young workers are job hopping. So hiring managers have no choice but to hire job hoppers. Ride this wave and try a lot of jobs out yourself.

Check out the rest of the list. It seems the future will be custom made for the Mullinium generation.

Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[mechengdude]

stanweld -
We all have our opinions and unique experiences. I do not disagree that some companies will promote from within and will give great raises. My experience and the experience of many is that a majority of companies will not.

In my case, moving to another job has always netted a 15% salary increase and has been the primary factor that has kept my salary above the norm. for my experience and location.

 

[whyun]

You really gotta be at the right company at a right time for advancing into ownership or management quickly. As a new engineer, if there are many mid-level engineers (in their 30s and 40s) in the firm, it will be a while until you see any advancement. If the firm has many senior level engineers/managers about to retire and the mid-level is thin, you can expect faster advancement.

 

[stanweld]

mechengdude,
You misunderstood my comments. I too have had experiences highly similar to yours and for the most part agree with you and recommend moving to secure greater pay and greater experiences. I simply stated that if you are one of the "chosen ones" and know that you are; you may be passing up a lucrative and hopefully satisfying career. These individuals, and they exist in my current company as well, leap frog their comtemporaries and middle managers. Of course they must perform; at least those individuals that I know did and are.

 

[Noway2]

I have been reading this dialog for the past week and decided to put my own $.02 worth.

I am currently in the final week of my 3rd job since graduating from engineering school in Dec 1995. I will be starting my 4th job on January 2nd.

In each job change I have received a significant pay increase , typically ranging from 15% to as much as 50%, though the 50% increase was early on in my career and I was underpaid.

I stayed with the first company for about 4 years, the second company ~1.5 years and this last company for just over 6 years.

In each instance, I took the job with the attitude that I might be there for the long haul rather than thinking that I will leave in X years. In each case there were signs that told me that it was time to move on. These signs ranged from the company getting bought out and all but shut down to just realizing that I am not happy being here any more.

In each job I also enhanced and developed my skill set in such a way that I was capable and ready to take on a bigger and better challenge. In retrospect, I realize that had I not learned what I did on the previous job I would not be able to perform the next one. I also found that when it was time to move on, that the opportunities seem to find me.

Overall, I would say that if you are happy where you are at and what you are earning to stay. If not, then leave. In either case, I don't believe that it hurts to look and see what is available periodically. Even if you decide to stay, you will at least be doing so because you considered your alternatives and decided that it is the correct decision.