The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
One of the best bits of employment advice I ever received was from the engineering manager at my first company. He recommended that it was best to change roles and companies frequently (every 2-3 years or so) in the early stages of your career.
He explained that that was the best way to get a broad range of experience and not to become institutionalised, and would ultimately make you more employable in the future. The implication was that depth of experience could come later in your career once you have at least an understanding of all the core fundamentals.
I have to say that this has definitely been the case for me - it enabled me to have the confidence to leave a job I'd only been in for 5 months because I hated its slow-moving culture and got a job a few weeks later with a much better company. This was only possible though because I had an engineering background, combined with an IT role early in my career and experience of managing both small teams and large projects in a variety of industries.
My sister has the opposite experience. She is currently earning more than me but doing a job she hates at a company where she has worked since leaving school 24 years ago. She has applied for jobs elsewhere but finds that despite her ability and results she finds she gets rejected because she only knows the 'Company X' way of doing things.
I agree with the other comments here. But, there is a danger that if you change jobs too often any potential employer may reject you on the basis that you don't stay anywhere very long and are thus not reliable. Remember, an employer is making an investment in you and expects to get a return on that investment. Having said all that I wish you luck in your new job.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
In my opinion it depends on what are you looking for; in the company in which I'm working help-desk people need quite a long training before being comfortable, since the product could be quite complicated. Looking at the youngsters' CVs, usually I don't like to see a long list under work experience: that means they are only trying to gain experience and soon they will leave without being useful.
Other 2 cents, but from the company point of view and with different cultural background (in Italy the work market is very paralyzed, and once you find the perm job you will be fine).
I've never been at a place for more than three years. I move when I need to get on in my career - more money or a higher position usually. If my current employer can't do that for me then I have to take responsibility for it and do it myself. If I'd simply stayed at one of my first couple of jobs I'd still be knocking out low quality "as quickly as possible" ASP.net websites for a pittance.
Most companies in the U.S. in today's market will tell you they value dedicated individuals that are loyal to the company. The fact is many of them don't really value you and will let you go at a moments notice no matter how long you have been there. If times get tough no matter how loyal or dedicated you have been you could find yourself without a job.
A friend who has been a consultant for close to a decade gave me these two bits of advice that I have found to be very true.
"Do what is best for you! If you are not happy at a position, you are going to torpedo your own career because subconciously you will not being your best work."
"If you interview well and fit their position companies will hire you. Especially if they think they can make money off you no matter what your tenure was at previous jobs."
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
Well in my experiance, programmers have a pretty stressful life. Its is essenstial to give them adequet freedom in their workplace (not too much). Most sufable content should be monitored this is done with interest on the employees behalf and the companies behalf.
The employee, because restricting access to social networking sites will definitly show a boost in effeciency and performance in the work they do. The company aspect is that its preferable that employess dont missuse company bandwidth for personal tasks.
When it comes to worklife balance, flexi work hours should be naturally considered as this is a key aspect many employees look for in a software company. It would help them gain the work life balance they need. (Dont restrict listening to music while working) most programmers work better while blasting some tunes in their ears !!!!
Okay that explains it, HR are a bunch of anally retentive, brain dead, vacuous idiots who are a complete PITA, and no I'm not prejudiced, that is fair and balanced assessment of HR, and their managers are the worst of the lot!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity