mjhjmtu

I'm not sure if I've understood your question but I will attempt to rephrase this below:

"I'm an ambitious individual which wants to achieve solid results. My boss has indicated that I should perhaps slow down and not jump around so much. Is this advice valid or am I reacting too strongly to being told to slow down?"

I think a loss of respect in this case isn't necessarily warranted. Firstly, let's consider where your boss may be coming from.

You mentioned the manager is advanced in age - around 50's or early 60's.
The job climate then was very different as to how it is now. Back then, companies such as big blue (IBM), was very family oriented; It wasn't uncommon for companies to genuinely look after the employees. This was before companies were largely focused on Stock Holder Returns. As such, employees tended to stay put and not move around as much. Your boss was likely part of this era.

At that point in time, if you were constantly jumping around (year after year or so), it indicated more towards management that you either:

A) You don't know what you want in your career beyond a pay rise so you consistently jump around

B) You are not good at your job.

Those were the two main reasons why people changed jobs back then.

Fast Forward to 2018, this is not how things are done now.
Companies are far more mercenary in nature, and likewise, employees are the same. Company loyalty is a dead thing for most part.

So your immediate manager gave you advice from that era. This isn't to say it isn't applicable now, but more at a different level. This advice is more useful for leadership positions. In the context of what your boss has indicated, his advice is valid for future long term leadership. With Leadership Positions, results are not quickly created - they take lengthy duration's to be realised (usually).

Now with respect to your question; As an individual which hires technical staff, I can tell you the first thing I look at isn't career duration. What I look for are the result(s) that he/she has achieved. It's a red flag to me if I see they have moved around a lot, but not accomplished much.

So, in short, yes, the advice your boss is applicable at the leadership level, but as you are focused on developing your career, don't interpret it as putting the hand brakes to your career. Rather, think about it from another perspective; My boss is giving me advice that he wants me to take into account, to further steer my career. If I consistently jump around without having achieved solid work results, this has the prospect of reflecting worse on me as I continue in my career. I will take this into account, but continue to work hard and develop myself for both current and future opportunities.

I hope this helps.

I wouldn't be offended and it's always good to get someones viewpoint on things. But it is your career, you make the choices. What works for some doesn't work for others.

So rather than getting your back up, it's much more constructive to actually ponder the points and see how they fit into or affect your own plans for your future. You're only 25, absolutely no reason to get tied down with anything if you can help it But there are very valid reasons for taking advice seriously and seeing if you can put a shine on it to your advantage.

Basically your manager could have an agenda to benefit himself, and ALSO have valid advice.

Being offended or losing respect for your boss feels like a massive overreaction to me. Other than the reference to "Millennials" there's nothing to be offended by in the slightest.

Yes you could say that your boss has a vested interest in you staying but that doesn't preclude him giving you genuine advice - the two aren't mutually exclusive.

On the secondary question of whether frequent moves are an issue for hiring managers, the answer isn't black and white and for me at least depends hugely on the nature of the work you're hiring for and what you consider a short stint in a role - generally for a developer for example I'd consider anything less than 18 months to be notably on the short side 18-24 months to be pretty normal and anything longer than that to be an indicator that the person was likely to be a safe long term bet.

The fact that your job-hopping has happened within the same organisation lessens the impact of it slightly IMO, but not by much if I'm honest.

I've hired for roles where the project life-cycle was on the order of a few weeks to a few months with projects that lasted more than a year being exception rather than the norm then someone who was changing jobs/roles every year or so wouldn't put me off. Although it's worth noting that these tend to be on the junior side and come with commensurately lower pay. If I need someone with higher-tier skills for a shorter period I'll hire a contractor nine times out of ten.

Conversely when I'm looking for someone for projects that measure their life in years or there's a complex codebase (in some companies I've worked it's not unusual for it to take ~3 months for someone to be fully productive) it'd be a hard pass. The disruption and lost productivity of getting new people up to speed just isn't worth it, and that's even before considering the recruitment costs. Similarly if I'm looking to take on someone in a position with more management-type responsibilities, frequent turnover in leadership can be exceptionally disruptive and unsettling to team members and that can have a significant adverse affect on productivity.

Also (and I realize this might be potentially controversial) but I find that it's the aggressive ladder-climbers are far more likely to be the sort of person who works exceptionally hard when it's something that will look good on their CV (like working with the latest shiny technologies) but grumble and drag their feet when it's not. It's still a minority to be sure but still it's enough to be noticeable. It's not that I expect any employee to put the company's needs over their own, I don't do that so I'm not going to expect anyone else to, it's when they expect the company to put the business' needs below the employee's.

Your manager made a mistake by starting his advice with a little speech about how differently aged people all behave in defined groups. This isn't true, and it's distracting everyone (including a lot of us here) from the advice given.

At its core it's not bad advice - it might not work for you, but it's something to consider. If future employers (or potential employers) think this way, you'll be at a disadvantage unless you can show that you understand the position - just as someone who couldn't see the value of changing jobs when it made sense would be at a disadvantage with future employers who valued rapid change of roles.

I don't think it's self serving - at worst it serves the company and the department, which is what managers are supposed to do.

You want to grow in his career and his advice (at least in his mind) serves exactly that (i.e your own ambitions). All he is doing is warning you that your resume may be set aside because you are changing too often and as a result your growth potential is compromised. He is not saying your ambition of growth is misplaced and you should not grow or not provide for your family. He is just proposing a way to achieve your goals (or more specifically a way to NOT miss them).

Also, your struggle growing up and your ambitions may not be evident on your resume but the fact that you changed jobs several times will be very evident. Your resume will be judged on what is evident. Considering this, his advice deserves some consideration and certainly not "loss of respect" for him. Whether he is right or wrong or whether you should follow it or not, is your call to take. That is how advices work!

This is an internal position. As such, there is extreme politics involved.

1) Does your boss have a good rapport with the potential new manager who you will be under?

2) Does your new boss have a vendetta against your current boss?

3) You have "applied" for an internal position? You sent a resume to HR board vs you have spoken with the new manager and team you will be working with?

None of "jumping around" matters for internal positions. However, it would be best to look at this from your manager's position. How would your move be good for your manager? Any way that you could bring him to your view would be best. Allies and friends are a requirement in internal politics, have you been building your network?

Be wary of jumping around to another role as soon as your company policy allows it. You don’t want a manager to toss your resume aside because they see you’ve jumped around so much as fast as possible.

That sounds like solid advice from your boss. Lateral moves are generally okay depending on the industry so long as you're consistent. For example, you might like to join a startup as a developer but as soon as you built the product up, you might not like to be in maintenance mode and instead feel like learning new skills within the same role by moving to a new startup.

You should have a career goal in mind so that when you are interviewed, you can explain it and the company knows it. Otherwise just having constant lateral moves might mean you're frustrated at your job and just want to quit when it doesn't work for you.

As someone in the IT industry where 'job hopping' is a very common occurrence:

There is a strong element of truth to what your boss has said. Excessive job-hopping does indeed make you look extremely skittish, and that's never a great thing for productivity. The end result is that with a lot of short term hops under your belt, you become a jack of all trades and master of none, which isn't a great deal of use to the company.

With that said, the job-for-life thing rarely happens here and there are benefits to jumping ship every couple of years, most notably pay but also experiences too; working in an internal security team can be very different depending on what kind of organisation it is you work for and all of them are different to working for a dedicated security company. The same can be true of many IT fields, and quite possibly many other fields outside of IT.

If this is a reason that you consider job-hopping, have a good think about the experiences that you want and whether the move you have in mind is likely to help with that.