
Ask HN: How do you decide on when to leave/switch job? - palerdot
Please elaborate on your reasons rather than one liners like boredom, pay hike, own business&#x2F;consultancy, co-worker problem
======
Insanity
Not learning anymore. The previous job I was at was a rather boring one after
a few months.

The company had already encountered most of the customizations clients
requested and most of the new projects ended up being solely copy-paste work
from older projects. This meant writing no new code but just applying older
patch files and tweaking some config like the header and footer of the
website.

Since I was not learning anything new anymore at this job it felt like a drag
going to work.

I started interviewing for some other companies and one thing I wanted to be
sure of was to have a job where I would actually write code instead of
tweaking some config files all day long.

I have enjoyed every day at work since I decided to leave that company.

~~~
gargravarr
Agreed. A job needs to be mutually beneficial or you'll wind up hating every
day of it.

I'm at a stage where I have learned a lot, but I find a lot of resistance to
implementing my ideas for political reasons - e.g. in replacing our ticketing
system, I drew up a proposal for something we already had licenses for, would
integrate with our systems and provided features our developers would want. An
unrelated team in America had been trialling some expensive software in
isolation. I learned the software I was proposing, taught colleagues how to
use the prototype, got positive feedback, got licensing sorted (free)... and
my idea was swept aside because it wasn't the expensive software the guy in
charge (who had approved my prototype) had already decided to go with.

Figured then there was little point in me learning stuff that would benefit
this company because decisions have already been made, so I'm moving on.

------
gregoriol
Best thing I have on this is a quote from Steve Jobs : "When I was 17, I read
a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your
last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me,
and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every
morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want
to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for
too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.""

~~~
stult
On a related note, I hate how that Aurelius quote is always cut off. The full
quotation is, "Live every day as if it were your last: without frenzy, without
apathy, without pretense." The point isn't that you should go party and have
fun and not plan for the future, which the additional "without" clauses
clarify. Aurelius meant that you should adopt an emotional state of peace and
firm dedication. Because most people really would not party on their last day,
if they knew. They would go about their business calmly, taking care of the
most important priorities, making amends and sharing time with loved ones,
ensuring that their affairs were in order and their conscience clean, and
appreciating every detail of every moment as if it were infinitely precious.
Nothing would upset them unduly because they would know nothing will affect
them anymore soon.

Similarly, you probably wouldn't want to wake up and go to an awful job. If
doing your job makes the world a better place, you can justify going because
you know you are building a legacy, even with your final moments. If you're
passionate about it, you can justify it. If the job allows you to provide for
your loved ones, you would go even on your last day.

So Jobs like many others misunderstood the quote out of context but reached
the conclusion Aurelius intended anyway. And that conclusion is good advice!
If you're just doing the minimum to skate by, not really thriving, you're
probably selling yourself short. Unless you have some other reason for working
that gives meaning to your life (e.g. kids, funding a passion project/hobby,
religion), it's just not worth going to a shitty job just for the paycheck.

~~~
mxuribe
These are some great comments; thanks for these!

------
gargravarr
What I call the Dilbert-o-meter.

When you start noticing too many Dilbert comics acted out in real life, it's
time to leave.

~~~
mrweasel
That's a pretty good rule. I worked at a telco and a co-worker pointed out
that the seemed very likely that Scott Adams had hidden cameras and
microphones in our offices.

When Dilbert-like rules and decisions start showing up to frequently, it's
time to leave.

Generally speaking I don't think you should go work for companies with more
that 50 - 100 employees. After that stupidity start showing up way too
frequently.

~~~
gargravarr
Before I started my first job, the summer I left uni, I read the entire
archive from 1989 to 2012 and laughed at it.

When my job started a few months later, I was absolutely floored when some of
the stuff I saw there played out exactly as the comic.

I quit after 3 months. I could not get a single thing done in less than 3
weeks there.

------
smkellat
When your co-workers start getting routinely carted out by emergency workers
for cardiac distress, seizures, and other problems developed since they
started the job. A job can grind you down and I'm watching my current one eat
some co-workers alive. There are limits to how much stress you can put a
person through routinely.

------
alkonaut
Just switch often until you are sufficiently paid and found one that doesn't
suffer from dysfunctions like employee/manager churn. Then use the capital you
built up to work less, focusing on other things in life than work. Every time
you switch you have to prove yourself again, you'll have to prove you are
worthy the perks (working from home etc).

My recipe was switching around and then _back_ to my first employer later in
my career. A place I knew had good climate where I could stay 5-10 years with
ease.

------
ulfw
When a company starts focusing the majority of its energy inwards: politics,
favoritism, infighting, thinking of how to look good internally, bullshit
stats and presentations, you name it - but very little time spend on the
customer or the product.

~~~
gargravarr
One of my reasons for leaving is that I'm watching our internal systems
dissolve - some of the stuff I have responsibility for is hosted on rickety
old systems that are long due for replacement, but management refuses to spend
any money (or allocate time to rebuild them) because they're not customer-
facing. Painful underinvestment for political reasons will be the death of
this company. The IT team are fighting fires on a daily basis, and a major
outage would probably have the 4 of them walking out (yes, 4 people supporting
a global company). I've wisely decided to move on before it all melts.

------
polote
When I feel like I can't bring as much to the company as I would like, and
either coworkers, managers, company's culture prevents me to so or that I
don't feel rewarded for my skills

------
bb88
I have a simple rule. If you're already seriously contemplating leaving, then
it's time to leave. Because typically, it's only going to get worse from
there.

Chris Dixon once posted something along the lines of this: "If you think
you're going to fire someone six months from now, you should fire them now."

I believe that if you think things will get worse 6 months from now, then
leave now.

~~~
cardosof
+1. My father always says "when you're thinking about getting out of the boat,
you're already out". Meaning, if you were 'in the boat', you would be thinking
of fixing it.

------
mattchamb
I am currently in this situation. The company ran out of money and cant afford
to pay us. That is a good indicator to find something else.

~~~
charsifood
This is equivalent to looking for the exit when the ceiling has already
collapsed.

------
neversorry
For me these have been the reasons in the past:

\- New job offers me a significant improvement in my standard of living.
Twice, it's been the offer to move to a different country. It gives me a
chance to experience different places and have better living conditions.

\- I stop learning or feel like I am not adding any more value to my role. I
start feeling stagnant and worry about future.

------
zavulon
If on a Sunday afternoon you get a sinking feeling of despair about having to
go to work tomorrow, it's time to leave.

------
mattbgates
I've written a few articles on it.. one included a tyrant boss I had to escape
and the other was simply outgrowing your company.

Check those articles out here:

[http://www.confessionsoftheprofessions.com/the-
opportunity/](http://www.confessionsoftheprofessions.com/the-opportunity/)

[http://www.confessionsoftheprofessions.com/outgrowing-
compan...](http://www.confessionsoftheprofessions.com/outgrowing-company/)

------
menckenjr
When the calendar becomes more important than the quality.

------
sunasra
1) When I dont allowed to contribute in innovation or my inputs are being
ignore by Manager/Leaders.

2) People leave managers not companies

------
eru
You always keep looking, and when something sufficiently better comes up, you
switch.

Get offers in time, so you have some on hand in need.

------
dano
If you find yourself doing maintenance work, move on.

There is nothing wrong with maintenance work, it is valuable and gives the
company the ability to service its clients. However, if you are no longer able
to improve the process and that is what you were doing before, move along.

Maintenance work is a big signal, don't ignore it.

------
gbajson
When I see that smarter guys are leaving.

~~~
lllr_finger
As long as you're aware that this may not happen if your org is experiencing
Dead Sea Effect. Having just gone through this situation, it can be
challenging to understand when you're bitter and when you really are
surrounded by less-than-ideal developers. Imposter Syndrome complicates this,
as well.

------
pjc50
I'm reminded of a former co-worker that said he could write down the reasons
why he'd eventually leave a job after two months, even if he stayed for years
longer. Not always true and sometimes change is forced on us, but a useful
insight.

Moving has a cost, in time and effort, and a risk. You can look at the
benefits of the new job (and likely downsides!), and weigh them against the
current one plus the cost of searching and moving.

------
quitteraway
I just encountered this 2 days ago.

When the company decides to adopt a new (to them) technology stack that is not
part of where I see my future self.

~~~
maze-le
New tech stacks can be learned. If it fits the development and product, why
not? Even if you have a personal dislike for it, you could still learn from
it. I find in-fighting, interpersonal quibbles and ridiculing of co-workers
far more insufferable.

~~~
pier25
What about moving to old stacks like... PHP?

~~~
thehardsphere
PHP's problem isn't its age, but that it was intended to do a very specific
task in a very specific context, and people who came to it later lack a
fundamental understanding of this. If, somehow through magic, PHP was invented
today, it would still have this problem, which is the root of most of the
other problems with PHP.

I only mention this because some "old stacks" are good, in the sense that they
are heavily battle tested, and people still use them because they've been
successful over a number of years. You have to be able to use your judgement
as a professional to determine whether the move to the "old stack" stems from
a good reason or not before deciding to jump.

(I personally would jump if I someone said "let's use PHP instead," but I
don't think I would be in a job where PHP could be considered an alternative
in the first place. Your situation could be different.)

------
thehardsphere
If you're having bourbon for breakfast to cope with the current death march,
you should have left months ago.

------
ainiriand
When I am bored with what I do. Let me explain a bit more. Currently I work in
php but I feel that what I do is not a challenge anymore. I've been doing php
for 8 years now and I get the same problems over and over. I want to switch to
something that challenges me.

------
Nursie
When there's not a "project" in sight and I have little control over the
direction of my work.

But then I'm a contractor, and I change up to every few months. Or weeks.

------
richardknop
You have listed the most common reasons in your question (pay hike being the
number one reason why people switch jobs and it's a correct reason).

I would add another possible reason. If you get an option to go work to a
different country and the company will take care of your visa and offer you
attractive relocation package. I think it can often be worth it to gain some
international experience. You can always come back in few years.

------
uberdru
There's one simple rule. When all the executives start reading the same book,
and try to get everyone in the company to read that book, run! If they
announce the construction of a new HQ, you've already been there way too long.

~~~
eru
Never work for a Christian (or Muslim etc) company?

------
34090doood9
What I'd like to know is how to decide when to leave/switch careers.

------
lmilcin
When either of these is true, I quit my job:

\- I can't benefit the company I work for anymore,

\- I feel I have stopped learning/advancing in my current position,

\- I have stopped feeling satisfaction from my accomplishments.

------
simplysh
It's when I feel like I'm standing still. If I don't see how I can progress or
improve myself then I have nothing left to gain there.

------
nstart
Life stability.

Happiness.

In that order. The balance between these two is something I need to maintain
in order for me to say whether or not it's time to switch the job.

Happiness is a lot of things. This is a personal compass. For me it's a
combination of doing work that's interesting, working with a company whose
mission I believe in personally, while having a good life balance. If I say
I'm signing out and saying bye at a particular reasonable time on any
regular(!) day, and that's respected, that's good enough for me.

Life stability means do I have the means to support myself and those around me
reasonably well. This is actually the primary point Sometimes the jobs that
make me happy might not pay me all that great, but if I'm at a point in life
where maybe other investments are paying off well, or I just don't need to
have that much money, I can take the job. On the other hand I can have a job
that pays me lots of money but I'm really really not happy with it. But
sometimes it's necessary to suck it up until another opportunity comes to me.
I can't just flip the bird to life's responsibilities and quit because I'm not
happy. Sure maybe I readjust my needs to make stability to look cheaper, but
the point is that all basics MUST be covered at all times.

Real world examples:

Second job of mine. The company vision had changed considerably since I joined
it. After a merger it became less about innovation and while I don't say it's
bad, I definitely didn't agree with it. At the time it was just my wife and I
living in a not so expensive apartment and we had very few other
responsibilities. So I quit. Admittedly to a slightly better paying job but
the priority at that time was happiness since I had achieves baseline life
stability (and a bit more too).

Didn't like the new job at all. Burnt me out and after 6 months I left to a
new job. This was paying me less than my second job so quite a dip in earnings
at the time. But it was exciting, and I loved so much of it. Again I was just
about fine with stability since my wife was also working so the primary
balancing factor was happiness.

6 months later though, my wife and I were expecting our son. This flipped the
equation completely. My wife really was hoping she could exit the workplace so
she could spend time with our baby when he was born and this meant a big
change in stability requirements for me. I actually went back to the same
business I had my third job with. It was a new product they were building so I
expected it to be different this time around. That turned out to be wrong. I
won't lie. I hated it. But I sucked it up to the point of near depression.
Since the balance was starting to fall out of place, I hunted another job and
I hope I've found my perfect place at Buffer. Right now it's everything I
could ask for and has all my guiding principles in place.

Hope that lengthy exposition of my career helped out :D

Side note - Leaving the company I worked at twice was a hard one and led to a
lot of tension. I felt horrible about bits of it, but I couldn't let my
personal mental health deteriorate any further. I regret that I had to put the
company through that as it almost felt exploitative (that was never my
intention though). We parted on lukewarm terms but now have better
relationships which mended slowly (not fully) over time.

~~~
kevindqc
Buffer seems really nice! I like how transparent they are with salaries and
that it's fully remote. What technologies are you guys using?

~~~
nstart
It's a wonderful place really. The people are also really nice and my only
wish is that we could meet each other more in real life :D.

As for tech that we are using,

The main app uses php. But lately we've been breaking apart the app into micro
services which are a combination of node js, golang, and Python/flask apps. We
run it all on kubernetes. Meanwhile the front end has been transitioning
towards being more react based :)

~~~
kevindqc
Nice. I need to find a job like that. I moved out to a new province and
accepted the first job I got offered and I didn't like it.

Then I got offered and accepted a new job which seemed nice but it's just so
boring.

I need to be more picky seeing how companies like Buffer exist. I always just
take the first offer I get because I don't like interviews and I've been lucky
enough to get a job offer after the first interview I do when looking, but
it's pretty stupid in retrospect. It's a gamble that has long lasting effects.

------
borplk
If we collect all the reasons in this thread together it rules out a
significant majority of companies. Just saying.

------
nunez
TL;DR:

The first few job changes I've made were, in large part, due to two things:

1\. me trying to find a job in NYC that would allow for a seamless transition
to TX while preserving my compensation and job responsibilities, and

2\. Finding a job that will accelerate my transition into a senior management
or technical sales role.

It took me a few years to find a job that met goal (1) (I'm actually making
more now than I did in NYC by a healthy margin), and I have a strong feeling
that my current job will really put the gas on goal (2).

Longer:

There were also minor reasons behind me switching roles:

* Job 1 -> Job 2: Lots of micromanaging and process that made it difficult to do real engineering. Job 2 was much more fun and provided free food and a wear-what-you-want policy. Also, $20k pay increase, which was a deciding factor.

* Job 2 -> Job 3: Potential of moving to Houston at Job 3. Job 2 was amazing but I felt like there was no way of growing my career vertically _unless_ I wanted to become a Linux admin (which I, ironically, became anyway, at least of sorts) or quant (a very high bar to hit, at least at the time). $5k pay increase was not a factor.

* Job 3 -> Job 4: No opportunities in Houston outside of tech support with Job 3. Also, Google was Job 4; no way I was turning that down. They also had an office in Austin. $30k salary cut front loaded by a sign-on bonus and RSUs; opportunity to work at Google outweighed this.

* Job 4 -> Job 5: No relo opportunities available on the short-term (and very unlikely long term). The $35,000 pay cut also hurt over time despite sign-on and peer bonuses. I didn't stay long enough to vest my RSUs, which would have made up for most of the loss. Also didn't feel like I fit with the team well. Very different working/communication style that wasn't for me (it felt very isolated). I kind-of like being in a party atmosphere; open space, lots of noise, events all of the time, etc. My team didn't have any of that; very nice, but quiet, bunch of folks. Also didn't like how far I was from the money and how arguably meaningless the work felt, despite the work being really good engineering overall. (Google makes its money on Ads. I was in Corp Eng maintaining non-prod app servers.) I also ALSO didn't like how you effectively HAD to move to Mountain View or stay in NYC to advance (most of the senior folks are in MTV) and how it took many many years to make it into management at a salary that's slightly below market (even though RSU reloads effectively offset that). Also, Job 5 restored most of my lost salary ($30k pay increase, was a deciding factor).

* Job 5 -> Job 6: LOVED that place, but it was time to move to TX (couldn't take NYC anymore) and Job 5 wouldn't allow it despite having a sales office in Austin. (My boss and I tried to make an extended eng team there; CTO wasn't having it. She was nice, though.) ($10k pay cut but slightly over $10k gained from not having to pay income or state/city taxes. It was a minor factor. I would've seen more of that had I not fucked up my withholding that year!)

* Job 6 -> Job 7 (current): Really enjoyed working there too. Learned that I LOVE LOVE LOVE to travel. Wanted more of a sales-like position. Tried really hard to get myself plugged into sales pursuits; I networked with damn nearly every sales person in the US org and offered to effectively be their PowerPoint person lol. Did a lot of blogging and solo pursuits alongside my engineering work. Was VERY vocal about work that me and my teams have accomplished. Getting to where I wanted wasn't happening quickly enough; also, company outlook was shaky. Also turns out that I was dramatically underpaid (despite it being a lateral salary move). $25k pay increase was a factor.

------
Pica_soO
When office politics become more important then the product and the customer.

If somebody comes in, lifts his leg to mark territory, you know the territory
has just become worthless and its time to move on.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
It's very hard to avoid in anything but the smallest companies.

~~~
Pica_soO
Its the signal of a dying creature. Once office politics are waged and won,
hierarchy's are established- suddenly, communicating ideas openly for people
only interested in the product and the customer - and by doing that jumping
over hierarchy's is a criminal offense - the last terminal stage is reached.

The duration of the process may vary- the outcome does not.

~~~
lostcolony
The vast majority of corporate america is a dying creature then.

The problem is that the vast majority of the upstarts who will eat them will
also die, -and- even the winners may not usurp anything for 20+ years. At
which point they, too, will likely start 'dying'.

I think you exaggerate the diagnosis. As with a patient with a disease, you
have to modify treatment. The reality is that learning to deal with office
politics is an important skill to have.

It's really easy to say "politics" with a look of scorn on your face...and
then turn around and read about 'influencers' and 'how to win friends and
influence people' and '7 habits of highly effective people' and etc, and think
"oh, hey, figuring out how to learn what people are thinking and appeal to
people's needs is super important". They're the same thing.

'Jumping over hierarchy is a criminal offense' \- sometimes yes, sometimes no.
The point you miss is that with enough people, hierarchy can be necessary. If
you've ever been in a position where you have to make strategic decisions, you
-have- to delegate. In fact, many of the things that make me feel good as a
developer, such as being empowered to make decisions (beyond just the code,
but in terms of features and things), require someone else to trust me to make
those decisions (i.e., delegation).

"Well, our whole team makes the decisions"; fine, are there other teams
working on other things? Do you all make your own decisions? Because if so,
you have delegated responsibilities to those other teams, just as they have
with you. If not, then people who are less informed than you are getting a
voice, and that's just unnecessary noise.

As soon as delegation occurs, I don't -want- people crossing over unless it's
incredibly important. Same situation, of multiple teams; do you want someone
on another team coming to you to complain about issues on their team? Of
course not; that's for their team to fix. Unless the issue is something so bad
it threatens you and your team, you don't want to hear about it.

In a hierarchy, the same thing happens. I delegate to someone and entrust them
with seeing it to its success; I do not WANT someone re-burdening me with that
problem, -unless- it's vital I be informed, and that person knows I am not
being informed.

Yes, this can break. People can start valuing the hierarchy more than what
it's attempting to achieve, I grant you. But as often as not what I've seen
are people jumping up the hierarchy to complain about things that are not
sufficiently urgent. And part of that is perspective; what is going to bother
someone higher in the hierarchy is not necessarily what bothers someone lower
down. And yes, understanding that, and knowing what to do about it, is
"politics", but also, alternatively, it's "empathy and influence".

Or, put another way, what's the difference between 'manipulating' and
'influencing'? That's the difference between 'politics' and 'organizational
intellect'. It's trying to achieve one's goals dealing with a single person,
vs trying to achieve one's goals while dealing with multiple. Because when
dealing with multiple people, there are always politics, and you can't merely
throw up your hands and decide to never deal with it. I wish you could, I'm
not always good enough to win the battles I need to win...but I recognize that
it's not something I can just avoid.

~~~
Pica_soO
Im sure if you are higher up in this Ponzi Scheme you have all the time for a
sophisticated justification.

But where i am, we need our attention on problem solving, attention on
important (often cross-department) details - we do not have the time and
resources for procedure-obsessed bureaucrats, leeching initiative and
resources into there little Japanese gardens of power, while the project as a
whole suffers- and all that ever returns from your proposed silod departments
is excuses, blame-shifting and informal orders to not reveal information to
other departments working on the same project.

I understand that this is human nature and it must run its course, because
those who could actually fight it - are actually fighting for it. Still, if
you are in a company to innovate and push the boundaries of tech (which
usually needs short com-paths, teamwork and the ability to bounce ideas
informal), this is the end of your path in this company.

Oh, and before you try to wriggle out by pointing at the "innovation"
initiatives started by CEOs noticing the absence of exactly this- which
becomes just another shiny hot powerpoint potato being pin balled from
department to department. No, that is not it.

Finally something positive- sometimes.. power aggregates, and some control
freak snatches too much of it, merging departments, and this one guy, running
hierarchical amok, breaks the spell for a time. He basically destroys the
attempts of the hierarchy to sabotage communication, by directly sampling data
and pushing worthwhile endeavors against the resistance of the apparatus.

You should hear middle-management hiss at the employees, after the manager-
type (lets call him the boar), just casually talks to the people involved and
gets Information and Ideas, that where "NOT-SUPPOSED-TO-BE-COMMUNICATED",
enabling work to be done and problems to be solved. Subversion saves the day
and nobody admits it.

So here is, though i detest the personality type when in personal contact, a
toast to the likes of Steve - who at least get things done after the
calcification sets in.

~~~
lostcolony
I have 5 years as a dev, and two as a lead dev/architect. I am only recently
taking on management tasks. My comment is not biased because I am "higher up
in this ponzi scheme", it is predicated on -what I have seen-.

You are living in the happy little world I got to live in before my current
job (when I was simply a senior dev), where there was enough protection of the
dev team that I didn't need to concern myself about the business (beyond the
occasional clarification of a story), didn't need to concern myself with
departmental and organizational 'politics', and when I saw it I rolled my eyes
at it, hated it, decided I'd never deal with that sort of thing, etc.

But even at the dev team level there were 'politics'; technical decisions
would oftentimes be made based on who had the most clout. Now, that clout was
usually due to, de facto, speaking to what the rest of the team cared about,
understood, etc (i.e., technical language and priorities). But once you go
inter-disciplinary, that stops being true.

Fundamentally, most people want to succeed, and they recognize that the way to
do that is delivering results. Sometimes there are leeches, who learn to abuse
the system and take credit while not helping deliver. It's abuses like this
that deserve our condemnation. But the fact is that in an organization there
are multiple roles, with differing priorities, and differing definitions of
'success', and fundamentally the way you deal with that -requires- a level of
empathy and influence. You can decry it all you like, but that's reality, and
something you'd benefit from adapting to rather than objecting to. I'd love it
if everyone was technical, even those whose roles are solely focused on
business direction and strategy. I'd love it if everyone thought like me,
prioritized like me, and was completely objective in making decisions. But
that's simply not the world we live in, and, I suspect, that would actually
lead to a worse outcome (I'm not good at sales, for instance, and I don't have
the insight into how best to sell something, even if it's technically superior
and the UX is better than any competitors). You don't have to like it (and
again, I -don't- like it), but that's the truth.

Please note, I'm not saying that every org is healthy. But I -am- saying that
regardless of the health, understanding what people's motivations are, and how
best to disseminate, discuss, debate, and prioritize information given the
context you're in will help you tremendously.

