Job hopping is a common phenomenon where employees frequently change jobs within a short span of time, typically one or two years or less.
While some talent structure job hopping strategically to increase their pay over a short period of time, others do it in search of a better work culture or more engaging challenges when their current roles become monotonous. In some cases, culture isn’t even a consideration—they’re just seeking new challenges to avoid boredom.
Research reveals that job hopping often results from economic reasons, the desire for career advancement, and increased self-awareness around what individuals want from a job.
Perceptions of job hopping vary depending on the perspective of those involved. Some see it as a red flag, while others consider it a natural evolution in the modern workplace. This has influenced its acceptability, with employers becoming more open-minded about hiring job hoppers, provided they fit a specific need.
But what do industry leaders think? Babajide Duroshola, Country Manager at M-KOPA, and Chidinma Ochiaka, Chief of Staff at Techpoint Africa share their experiences and perspectives about job hoppers in the workplace.
Mathematics of job-hopping
Job hopping is often seen as a fast track to higher earnings and better career opportunities. Reports and shared stories suggest that people who stayed at the same company for longer periods earned lower salaries than those who stayed.
A young Nigerian creative who 1000x his salary by job hopping twice in four years shared that, "If I had been at one place, my salary would probably be closer to half of what I'm earning now because that's what people who joined around the time I joined and are still there earn."
A survey of 18 million worker salaries by Yahoo! finance showed that those who moved jobs earned up to 12% more than those who stayed. This makes sense when the rate of promotion and salary increments, ideally at a company, happens on the average of one to two years; a person who job-hops twice within the same period could have access to a salary bump resulting from the competitive salary that's usually used to attract new hires.
Duroshola calls it finding a faster way to the top. But does the math really add up?
Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime. Privacy Policy.
Suck at managing people?
Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime. Privacy Policy.
"For example, if you worked in an organisation with 12 layers and promotion happens every two years because you are good, it will take you a minimum of 24 years to get to the top," he explains.
"Now what has happened is people have figured you don't need to spend 24 years to get to the top you can shorten it by moving around by reducing promotions and job changes to about 15-16 years."
Job hopping can be a clever move to bag senior roles quickly and achieve career milestones, but Ochiaka believes it can become self-sabotaging; such that when the individual wants to get into a company that values loyalty, trust, and longevity; this can affect their chances.
A Nigerian senior developer juggling multiple jobs and wouldn't think twice before leaving his current job supported his decision on the premise that no employer will put an employee over the company; and for that, it is better for individuals to focus on themselves and not the company.
Ochiaka, however, adds an argument that shares the responsibility between the talent and the employer.
"Is the person job-hopping because there are no opportunities for career advancement or salary increase where they are?" she quizzes.
She notes that the pitfalls of job hopping can be serious; from being seen as unstable and unreliable, to being perceived as lacking depth in terms of skill development.
She has, at a point, had to question the commitment of a candidate who has a resume that looks like a patchwork.
"I don't think the person has stayed in a company for more than one year; and naturally, I thought to myself. 'if I hire this person, will they stay for one year?' Especially since the role would require some time to get into.'" She recalls.
Duroshola begs to differ, saying job-hopping is probably not seen as a red flag anymore. He mentions how he also job-hopped at a point in his career for upward mobility, but it didn't become a lifestyle.
Job-hopping should be approached strategically to avoid dire implications on long-term career trajectory. Where Duroshola draws the line is when the job-hopper leaves disgruntled and starts to burn bridges while at it.
Mercenary vs loyal employee
Mercenary and loyalist are two archetypes describing the uniqueness of employees. While the former is driven by a desire to achieve results in the shortest possible time and are out of the door once they are done, the latter prioritises stability.
However, the choice of who to go for will depend on the company's immediate needs. As Duroshola pointed out, when something needs to be fixed quickly—maybe the loyal employees are becoming complacent—a mercenary can be hired irrespective of their flaws to bring in their dynamism and cause a change.
Also, a recruiter wouldn't mind hiring a job hopper to drive short-term projects.
But what if a serial job hopper did the job so well that the employer starts considering keeping them, that is, convert them to a loyalist?
Ochiaka believes this is possible if they can show the individual about their trajectory in the company—the frequency of promotions and salary raises—to convince them.
Duroshola gives a more detailed explanation.
"It's more about how to keep the employee engaged. Engagement is in four quadrants: the key talent (high job and organisational engagement), the top performer (high job engagement and low organisational engagement), the bored dinner guest (high organisational and low job engagement), and vampires (low job and organisational engagement).
"For high performers, the goal is to move them to key talent where they begin to have a high level of engagement with the organisation. I was like this before and I found that level of engagement."
The right way to job-hop
As earlier noted, job-hopping can be risky, but the risk can be minimised using the right strategies. For one, Ochiaka calls for transparency by the candidate at the point of an interview, sharing why they've been at many jobs.
In fact, Duroshola hinted at the possibility of job-hoppers being seen as high-achieving individuals, and they can use this as a defence during interviews.
Based on the views of a successful serial job-hopper, this is how to job-hop while minimising the risks.
Have a clear plan
Having a defined purpose for every move will guide a talent's decision-making process and prevent them from appearing like someone who is always after the next shiny thing. Job hopping for the sake of it does not look good before prospects.
Having a clear goal—like pivoting into a new field or achieving a leadership position faster can be an easier way to justify the moves.
Choose a reasonable timing
Leaving a job too soon, like every six months or even yearly can make potential employers skeptical. Eighteen to 24 months is ideal to demonstrate impact and growth, and also have enough time to look for another job and negotiate for better pay.
Invest in your reputation
Because job hopping can easily project people as being shallow, it is important to focus on building a solid professional reputation while at it. Through learning, sharing thought leadership content and contributing to industry discussions. When seen as a performer, employers are more likely to overlook your frequent moves.
Know when to settle down
At some point in every talent's life, there would be the need to build a legacy, which can be done within a company or industry.
This doesn’t mean they will stop growing; it means that at a more senior level, it's important to make the shift from being an opportunist to pursuing purposeful impact.
Ochiaka concludes that job hopping isn't necessarily a sign of disloyalty, it could just be the right dose of selfishness people need to look out for their own progress before that of the company.