Agree with AU7. The days of working for The Man for 30-40 years and getting the attaboy, gold watch and pension are over.

Today's graduates and older, ages 22 to about 35 +/-, have no problem staying at a job for a year, 18 months, and then leaving. Some do it because the job is sh*t and they - like many of us - took it to get any kind of money, get something on the resume-ledger and then move on. Some get jobs and find out they're not what they were advertised to be.

Many just move around because they can - in today's digital-tech world people move around. Managers know this and don't fret about it because they know someone else can and will come along. It's no big whoop. They adapt, adjust and move ahead.

Some jobs, of course, require training and IMO those are the ones where a longer commitment is more valuable, looks better on the resume and can be a plus. It would depend on what I was hiring for as to whether I'd be looking for someone with x-years at Jobs A and B or shorter times at multiple places but they had solid to above-average levels of success at most or all.

I'd rather hire a solid person who bounced around a little but had success, knowing he/she might move on, than to hire some schlub who sat on his or her ass for 8 or 10 years at Company A and was average.