Thanks for the clarification Chris. I just find it a little annoying, based on my experience, that a candidate who has been at the same job for 10 years gets priority over a candidate who has an equivalent 10 years of experience, but with different companies. I understand that employers don't like to see "job-hopping"; however, there are a lot of factors beyond a candidate's control that can affect his/her resume:
Personally I would probably think highly of a candidate with 10 years of employment at two companies over that period. After all, he/she has:
Not to knock anyone who was lucky enough to hold onto the same job for 10 years, but all of that (to me at least) adds up to a better "quality" of experience.
Overall, excellent article. Thanks!
Great article, very informative
I think it is easy to confuse length of employment with the number of jobs and job titles and experience, they are not the same.
Length of service shows loyalty. I have know some associates that gave very good plausible reasons for regular changes in employment but quietly admitted (but never to the boss) that they 'never stay in a job for more than 2-3 years'
The number of jobs. What is a job? Is it the actual employment, the different work or 'jobs' that you do that encompasses your employment. Which is worse, a person that sticks at one 'job', or someone who regularly changes because they can't make up their mind or find the work difficult (known these), or vice versa.
Job titles, what's in a title anyway. I've more of those that you can throw a stick at, not all were meaningful or even described my 'job'
Experience, which I consider as very important. It does not matter whether you had single or multiple employments, it is your experience (and knowledge) at doing the 'job' that matters.
A DBA, a whole DBA and nothing but a DBA, if that is what you are interviewing for then if that is all the interviewee has done, it does not matter as long as they have the experience you require for the post.
My job title is 'Software Engineer', but my 'jobs' are varied, analyst, programmer, developer, webmaster, DBA (of sorts) 'Jack of all Trades' (but never a master) and therefore consider myself to have a varied wide level of experience in a span of 23 years of employment. I wonder where would I be in that pile.
Far away is close at hand in the images of elsewhere.
"Length of service shows loyalty."
I agree, but it's not necessarily an indicator of the employee's loyalty to the company. A job change on my (or your) resume might very well be an indicator of our employer's loyalty (or lack of) to us, or management's inability to run a fiscally sound business. My point is that I wouldn't want to hold a job change against a candidate because of factors far out of his/her control.
"I have know some associates that gave very good plausible reasons for regular changes in employment but quietly admitted (but never to the boss) that they 'never stay in a job for more than 2-3 years'"
There are plenty of folks like that - and to them I say quit your day job and go into consulting With consulting you get to switch up jobs regularly, which keeps the nomadic DBAs, programmers and cable splicers from getting bored. Some might argue that consultants don't have as much "job security" as full-time employees, but personally I don't see a lot of companies touting job security as one of their prime benefits.
I totally disagreed with this. What year is this ? You spent 10 years with a company, first of all, all you had was the experience in that company, you did not expose to the outside world. Your company's technology may not be the most recent. Second, over the 10 years in the company, what had this person done ? The same thing - backup, restore, install SQL Server, implement developement to production. I met a DBA working in a company for 10 years, he could not even write a decent DTS package and stored procedure. That's the resume you wanted to put on the top of the pile. Besides these days people changes job every 2 to 3 years is a norm. Actually those people I found had more business and technical experience. Especially if you are a contractor, you work in a company for six months and then another one for six months, it does not mean that person is not good.
Certification - maybe you think is important. I did it once. All I did was reading the book in and out and I passed the exam and got the cert. Did it mean I knew more? I don't think so. I used to work at Xerox, all their repair engineers required to get a MCSE, all of them got it. Half of them did not even know how to turn on the computer.
The company I used to work with and the company I work right now both said it is very hard to find a good SQL server DBA and SQL Server developer.
My last company after months of search they hired a bimbo for DBA. The first day of I contacted her, I found out I knew SQL server more than she did. Nothing what, it was the impression the manager had on that person, some people can spot a good candidate, some can always find loser. I remembered years ago, my manager hired four people, none of them could do anything, six months later, they all got fired, including my manager. Ha Ha!!!
Another important thing is making sure that person can fit into the department and the company culture. Otherwise you may have to go thru the interview in a few months.
Not to sound rude but... what planet you on. I have plenty of experience with many different companies in the outside world. Just because I have worked at the same company for a long time does not mean I have tunnel vision and I have found on occasion I know more about how other companies work than their own employees do!
Oh! please, plenty and varied, a job and job title does not restrict your knowledge and experience only you do.
That is a lack of knowledge and experience, nothing to do with loyalty.
My experience is the opposite.
Does not mean they are good either. I have met many, many contractors who knew less about databases than me and even when I knew nothing. And even now I know of contractors who have no breadth of knowledge due to specific restrictive contracts.
I am not saying that frequent movers are better or worse than long serving employees, only that you need to know the circumstances.
I am just talking about my experience. What I said definitely applied all the people. I did not mean to offend people.
I did met some people working for the same company for 10 years doing exactly the same thing and they refused to learn anything new. As a matter of fact, my company just fired one.
Every person has his own perspective. One VP of a company said I never worked for a job more than 5 years, it meant I had no loyality and did not hire me. Another company said I could hold on a job for 5 years, it was excellent.
Everyone is different. I went to many interviews and I also interviewed many people. It also depends on your own experiences.
You have good experiences with people working for a company for a long time and have bad experiences with people working for 2 to 3 years and my experiences was just opposite.
Please don't get angry. It is just my 2 cents.
No offence here
Yep know a few of them Even had some bleating about no opportunities to learn other things and when you offer to help them and suggest they learn in their own time I got some funny looks
Very true. One man’s chalice is another one’s poison. Loyalty can be very subjective at times and can work both ways, would you want to work for a company that would sack you after 2-3 years. May suit some people but not all.
Again, very true.
Not angry at all sorry if I gave that impression Just my pennies worth.
great article. i have a question though. you say
Length of service shows loyalty."
I am not long out of college, and have been 18 months in a SQL server Admin role with a small bit of dev. I definately dont want to spend my career in this company but i plan to have a minimium duration of 2 years. I came up with this figure by talking with recruitment agents. they say the same thing, loyalty to a company counts very well in your favour when going for a job, and here in Ireland 2 years is respectable for a young person not long out of college. But 2 years is a big step from 10 years. and i really want to stretch my legs, as after 2 years, I dont feel my current company will have much more to offer me. I will have learned most of what I can learn in this role and would like to gain more expirience while I am still young.
In your interview process, would moving from a company after 2 years due to not being challenged or wanting more expirience count against me?