In a recent study released by Evolv, over 100,000 call center employees were asked about their employment history and their current tenure. The results could change how recruiters look at your rocky employment past.
Recruiters try to screen out “job hoppers;” that is, employees who seem to perpetually change jobs. For companies, this type of employee is very expensive, given the recruiting costs, training and opportunity costs. Some say a job hopper who leaves before six months can cost an organization one and a half times the employee’s annual salary.
The assumption is that if your resume shows a long list of companies, with some jobs lasting six months or less, then you are a job hopper and will, therefore, leave all of your future jobs at the same frequency. Evolv’s study completely invalidates this fallacy.
Respondents were put into one of five categories when asked how many jobs they’d had for less than six months — job hopper behavior. Options were zero jobs held for less than six months, one job held for less than six month, all the way up to more than six jobs held for less than six months. In the graph, red are total job hoppers, while black are not job hoppers at all.
Next, the study looked at the number of jobs each of these categories of employee had held in the last five years. Will the job hopper hold more jobs during the same time period than the non-job hopper? In other words, will job hopping behavior predict how long someone stays at a job? Most recruiters make this very assumption. However, the results show that non-job hoppers and job hoppers have held about the same number of jobs over the last five years, and therefore job hopping is not an accurate predictor of future job stability.
In the following chart, notice how each color category of employee follows the same curve. This curve shows there is almost no difference in employment outcome among employees who have held short-term jobs in the past. In fact, the study found that there is just eleven days’ difference between those who have never left a job before six months and those who have.
So recruiters who see a steady resume and assume the candidate will stay for a predictable length of time are statistically incorrect. Likewise, if you have had to leave a job before six months, or have held many jobs in the last five years, don’t feel too bad. Your future jobs may fare much better for you.
The challenge for you, if you’ve been a job hopper, is convincing your interviewer that hiring you involves little risk. Perhaps you can impress them with your cleverness by referencing this study when asked, “So tell me, why have you changed jobs so frequently?”
Yes, you definitely have to look at each situation uniquely. No doubt there are "job hoppers" but unfortunately there are those who just have a run of bad luck.
What a surprising and fascinating article. I have always believed that just because someone has had a few (approximately 2-4 times) short-term jobs over the last 5 years did not mean they would be a risk to hire. When reviewing potential candidates’ resumes, I would note the length of each job, but would also note whether or not there was career progression (job promotions), change in fields, or a change in geography.
Then when I’d interview the candidate, I’d ask them to tell me about the length of those jobs in question. It may be something as simple as their spouse was transferred, they just graduated and moved into a job within their degreed field, or that they had to move to be nearer an elderly parent. It’s only when, during the interview, I find there is no real explanation as to why they moved around so often that I would red flag their resume.
@Kay Riley I'm glad you found some value here. Yes, it makes sense whey people "feel" that someone with a turbulent job history will do so. But I guess the past doesn't predict the future. I hope you'll see short term jobs as an opportunity, not a red flag, from now on.