First up this is about getting peoples opinions on what longevity is actually perceived as in someone employment history.
Having spent close to 15 years in recruitment, I have seen 1000’s of resumes come across my desk, across a variety of industries and it is obviously recruitment 101 to look at the length of employment of each candidate. I have to say some have had more starts than Phar Lap (for those that don’t know he dominated Australian horse racing 1926 – 1932) and very few seem to have longevity in their employment beyond 2 or 3 years.
There are some valid reasons for this that are related to some of the industries that I have worked in such as the resources sector where candidates are used on a project basis and when the next project does not flow from the last, they are moved on and they change employers. But this is not just related to one industry and it seems to be a common theme that people don’t stay in one role for more than 2 or 3 years.
I have spent my 11 years recruitment experience with one employer, now I do ask myself if that is a good or bad thing, I tell my MD its because I don’t like being interviewed but to tell the truth I have been very lucky and received a career path that in recruitment has been second to none. So for me it’s good but 11 years with one employee is not a common theme.
So I am keen to get peoples opinion on the following:
What is now perceived as longevity in employment? Is it still a critical point when shortlisting?
Why do people change roles so often, is it a generation thing?