How long is too long?
When I first started in recruitment, the number you looked for on someone’s resume was five. Five years in a role. A good tenure. You knew that they couldn’t have been THAT bad if they had stuck around for that long.
That benchmark number that recruiters, future employers and HR managers the country over look at, however, is on a drastic decline.
Within the JDP Melbourne office there has been much conversation recently on the topic, "How long should one stay in a role before starting to consider other options".
As is always the way, everyone had a different opinion. Some of the team thought that as fast as the digital industry is changing, employees are after more growth and often see a new role as the best way to get it. Some thought that a generational shift was mostly responsible for the change, mentioning that younger staff often don’t feel the need to show a ‘heads down and do your time’ approach to get where they want to be in their respective careers.
The truth is that people are now expected to have a plethora of jobs in a number of industries across their lifetimes, the days of working 30 years for a single company are very much gone.
I think it is obvious to also say that gone are the days that a simple pay check will keep an employee engaged with a business. With the ever increasing world of start-ups and improving technology making barriers to entry seemingly easier there will always be someone doing something better, faster, cooler and more fun than your company, which surely wont increase peoples tenures.
I guess what I am really curious to find out is what people now believe to be an acceptable tenure in 2017. I know there can be hundreds of variables such as, you do not like your boss (sorry team) or that you are no longer learning so require a new challenge, but outside of that - how long is long enough?
Have you ever stayed in a role longer than you now wished? Alternatively in hindsight do you feel that you left a role earlier than you should?
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
About me: I am the Co-Founder of one of Australia’s fastest organically grown digital recruitment companies called 'JDP' with offices in Melbourne, Sydney and Melbourne. I am also a huge sports fan....
Is it something along the lines of "challenges + outcomes + engagement * development development = tenure? I think it needs to be viewed as the complete picture. But definitely agree that the expectations of employees and employer is shifting when looking at tenure as we all strive to get a healthy rate of turnover to drive better outcomes and a challenge to the status quo. Megan Barry and Karen Broussard - something we've discussed!
Founder @ InsurTech360.com | FLMI | CSM | CSPO | Lean Six Sigma Green Belt | InsurTech Advisor & Mentor @ Lloyd's Lab | Global Insurance Accelerator | Gener8tor
7 å¹´6-18 months is fair game in the Silicon Valley/startup scene. I think diversity of experience and ability to adapt is key. That also coincides with an open willingness to fail, learn and move on to the next challenge. Employers are also changing in this regard and see tenacity as an important attribute.
Partner, Digital at u&u Recruitment Partners - Recruiting with knowledge, empathy and honesty across the Brisbane Digital space.
7 å¹´The amount of talent I speak to who have wanted to start exploring opportunities after 6months but feel hesitant to do so because of what you've just said is crazy!! In my view, if you are in a position that doesn't provide you job satisfaction, development & the challenge you are looking for then a proactive endeavour to add value to your career and strive towards your long-term goal is more impressive than staying in a stale position. An expectation of time shouldn't stand in your way of that!
Early Talent Development , Talent Acquisition, Technology Careers
7 å¹´Some say eight months is long enough, while others insist you should stay at least 18, 48 even 72 months to prove your worth.