1. My tenure lengths used to be longer (3.X years), and then became shorter recently, so this signal is not that strong. It looks like: uni - 3.X - 1.X - 3.X (my startup) - 3.X - 1.X (FAANG) - 1.X (current). There are 2 positions that I leave off my CV: during my startup I did some parallel work in Academia, and there was a failed aqui-hire at the end of my startup, where technically I was an employee at a big NASDAQ company for 3 months, but then the deal exploded. Both are 6-10 years in the past and were during my rollercoaster startup years, so I just compress it into the startup entry, it's not worth detailing (not to mention NDAs). In my experience, both as a hiring manager and when interviewing, things more than 5 years in the past don't matter anyway.
2. My shorter gigs were in different countries, and people understand you're only going to stay in a foreign place if everything is really awesome (city AND company is a good fit).
3. I have FAANG on there, which esp. outside the US moves you past issues like this.
I think it's worth pointing out, I'm not saying you should job-hop for the money. That's why I put money as #4. I'm just saying you should maximize your learning (good for you) your mental well-being (good for you and your team, nobody likes to work with burnt out ppl) and your impact (good for the company). If you can find a place where this is possible for 5-10 years, jackpot, don't leave!
People evaluate others based on their own experiences and ideas of success. If they feel that staying at one job for a long time is the utmost important factor above all else, what does that tell me about the kind of person they are and the kind of company they’re running? It tells me it’s probably a run of the mill mediocrity-factory full of people mostly just punching the clock every day. I’ve ignored these signs in the past and learned the hard way.
IMO places that have strong engineering cultures that are run by smart and driven people understand that your technical skill is what matters and aren’t going to hold it against you if you’ve hopped jobs to maintain your career growth, because they’ve most likely done the same thing themselves. Ambition recognizes ambition, and ambitious people HATE to stagnate.
Be careful not to burn any bridges thought. Even in suboptimal situations take the high road and cultivate relationships with the people there that you want to work with again. In the long run this is going to pay dividends.
My own work history so far has been similar - 3 jobs lasting between 1.5 and 2.5 years, and I'm now currently on my 4th. It's never been brought up as an issue in interviews.
1. Learning. I find that I learn 80-90% of what I will learn at a company in the first 12-18 months. Staying at a job for too long is risky because I will miss out on new things happening in my area. In the long term this is the most important, because this is what will get me more money, and make me competitive/valuable. Example: it's hard for people in traditional data roles to do ML/DL without switching jobs.
2. I prefer dynamic equilibrium over static equilibrium. I very strongly prefer being able to go out and get a good job at any time over having a "cozy job". The only way to be good at getting a job is having practice at it.
3. Impact. I find that I deliver most of my impact on the job in the first 2 years, after that it levels off and I tend to do more maintenance stuff of all the things I've built (both systems and teams).
4. More money. This is almost a side-effect of 1-3. But also in itself: if I want to get more money in my current job, it's partially up to me, but it's also up to my manager and the company/culture. If I get unlucky with my manager/company, I'm not going to get it. Also, sometimes I hit a glass ceiling, and there's simply nowhere to go (eg. I'm already the Head/Director whatever, but the company isn't that successful and/or/but pay levels aren't that high). On the other hand, switching jobs is entirely up to me: if I am good at what I do and have a good track record to prove it, practice interviewing to be good at it, and play the numbers game (apply to lots of companies), I will succeed at finding a higher paying job.
Overall:
1. I have to be ruthless and watch out for my own interests. Nobody else will. The world doesn't owe me anything, I have to go out, work for it, make smart decisions and then pluck the rewards myself.
2. I don't think this is unfair towards companies. If a company/org is badly run, people leaving is valuable feedback. Assuming a company can hire good new people, those will deliver new impact, bring new knowledge, etc.
Having said that, there are companies where you can work and make more and more money (usually stock options play a big role here), and keep learn more and more (because the company is growing like crazy). These are the startups that are run well and are rocket ships (the FAANGs were like this).