A resume filled with short stints at five different companies over the period of three years is rare, but not unheard of. This trend—the tendency to switch frequently switch between jobs—is famously labeled as job-hopping. As job-hopping becomes increasingly more common by the year, it is worth considering how it affects one’s career prospects and, more importantly, what goes on in an employer’s mind when they see a resume of a chronic job hopper.

Dr Bijay KC, dean at SAIM College, observes that job-hopping is steadily on the rise and that it is more common in younger employees.  The principal factors which drive job-hopping are, according to KC, technology, opportunity, globalisation, career diversity as well as personal and monetary issues.

Kumar Joshi, a Human Resource Manager at Everest Bank explains that, in his experience, job-hopping is something that employers consider in the later stages of the recruitment process. “People who frequently switch between jobs for no justifiable reason evoke fear and insecurity in employers,” he says “It is a mark of instability and unfaithfulness. We don’t want the employee to leave us too soon. All our recruitment efforts go to waste that way.”

“However, we do try to understand the reasons behind the switches. If one is reasonable and competent, and properly justifies each job change, we have no problem,” Joshi adds, “We are more tolerant of job-hopping in younger people than more experienced applicants.

Older professionals who frequently job-hop are put under closer scrutiny.”

Joshi confirms that frequently and inappropriately hopping jobs is decidedly bad in the eyes of recruiters. However, what of the other side of the spectrum? There are employees who stay with the same company for decades. It is, perhaps, intuitive to think that such loyalty is favourable and that it demonstrates stability, adaptability and maturity. However, Ashish Kafle, a corporate recruiter and HR generalist, digresses and provides a pressing example to highlight his point.

“One of my good friends was looking for a change after working for his only employer for 20 years. When I referred him for an active search to a top executive search firm, they refused to even accept his CV. I told the search firm to look at the merits of his profile—how he has grown from a fresher to a VP. That too, in a company which not only grew fast but also became a giant in its industry. But in the world of sticking to client briefs, the headhunter refused to budge, but he was not the only one, other employers gave him a tough time as well before he was finally recruited after job-hunting for a year,” Kafle writes on his blog online.

So, what gives?  Why did the employers show such reluctance? Kaphle claims that the employers felt that the loyal worker may have taken his faithfulness too far. After two decades at the same company, they felt that the worker may have been worn out, passive, and that he would lack vision, have little creativity and would not take calculated, potentially beneficial risks for the company. In the employers’ minds, his excessive adaptability might become an issue and he might struggle to bring change to a completely new atmosphere.

This, however, is not to say that being loyal to a single company over a long period of time is inherently bad. As Kumar Joshi explains “It all depends on what type of organization the long-term employee is leaving us for. If his skills and assets match those required for our company, it would not be a problem. However, it is difficult for us to consider someone who has been working in a vastly different field for a long time. The novelty might be a huge burden and the new environment might be… well, too new.”

So what really do employers look for? Is there a balance between extreme job-hopping and career stagnancy where the oasis of employee perfection is to be found? According to Ashish Kaphle there is. He suggests that if one doesn’t want to raise any eyebrows, sticking to a job for a minimum of 3-4 years is a good idea.

Kumar Joshi, however, argues that judging employees on the basis of a “job-hoppometer” is inappropriate. “We don’t look for people who look good on the resumes,” he remarks, matter-of-factly “We look for people who we think can bring growth and progress to our company.” Joshi went on to explain that if an employee displayed genuine competence, their job history would not matter, but since job history and competence are indeed, correlated, employers are forced to consider it.

Thus, if you are stagnant, worn out, and tired of working for the current company, it is possible to think about changing jobs. However, the intent with which you switch matters immensely. Think it’s time for a change? Think carefully. Your future might just depend on it.