|
LochNessMonster posted:I wish I could give you some advice but you already know what the deal is. Unless you’re willing to walk (which you, understandably, are not) you have no real leverage. I wouldn’t ‘threathen’ them with scenarios which may or may not happen if you decide to leave, unless you are prepared to walk. Well, yes and no. Yes, I have no negative leverage, but no I wouldn't say I have "no real leverage." There are two other ways to slice the ham. There are three kinds of leverage. The first kind of leverage is negative, "if you don't do x, bad thing y will happen." That's the kind that we think and talk about most often here in this thread, for sure. There are other kinds of leverage though. I am arranging this meeting to try and see whether there are any opportunities for me to acquire the second kind of leverage, positive leverage. Positive leverage says "if you want x, I will be happy to provide it if you provide me with good thing y." This leverage is more collaborative, and while I'm not sure I can drive it here today, it's how I got my last raise and promotion. Finally the third kind of leverage is normative leverage. Normative says "hey, the standards and rules we play by dictate that the right and fair thing to do here is z." I have some normative leverage, and I can acquire some positive leverage, so it's a question of how to frame negative leverage so they're not just capable of running over me.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:Well, yes and no. Yes, I have no negative leverage, but no I wouldn't say I have "no real leverage." There are two other ways to slice the ham. There are three kinds of leverage. The first kind of leverage is negative, "if you don't do x, bad thing y will happen." That's the kind that we think and talk about most often here in this thread, for sure. There are other kinds of leverage though. I am arranging this meeting to try and see whether there are any opportunities for me to acquire the second kind of leverage, positive leverage. Positive leverage says "if you want x, I will be happy to provide it if you provide me with good thing y." This leverage is more collaborative, and while I'm not sure I can drive it here today, it's how I got my last raise and promotion. Finally the third kind of leverage is normative leverage. Normative says "hey, the standards and rules we play by dictate that the right and fair thing to do here is z." I have some normative leverage, and I can acquire some positive leverage, so it's a question of how to frame negative leverage so they're not just capable of running over me. There is no leverage but "negative" leverage. You tried to exert positive leverage: "If you want a me with an MBA, I will provide you a me with an MBA, in exchange for a 5% raise when I become a me with an MBA." How's that working out for you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:There is no leverage but "negative" leverage. I mean fine in the sense that it got a handshake agreement to do that, except not fine in that I didn't get it in writing. Positive leverage got me a raise to direct this project, for example. The division wanted me to do x, I wanted y dollars, congratulations a successful negotiation, contract signed, raise agreed to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:I mean fine in the sense that it got a handshake agreement to do that, except not fine in that I didn't get it in writing. Positive leverage got me a raise to direct this project, for example. The division wanted me to do x, I wanted y dollars, congratulations a successful negotiation, contract signed, raise agreed to. That’s not leverage, that is asking for a favor and getting it because the company feels like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
LochNessMonster posted:That’s not leverage, that is asking for a favor and getting it because the company feels like it. The additional responsibilities of that role were 100% not specified in my hiring contract, so I was asked (and therefore given an incentive) to take on the assignment. That's positive leverage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:The additional responsibilities of that role were 100% not specified in my hiring contract, so I was asked (and therefore given an incentive) to take on the assignment. That's positive leverage. Yet you are underpaid working for a company which doesn’t honor your agreement with your previous boss. They are giving you the least amount of money which makes you stay. And it’s working. Don’t kid yourself, you’re getting played.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
I guess we'll see where I stand after this round of contract negotiations. As I said in my first post, the numbers I used for my comps are for people 2-4 years ahead of me, so provided I can get on par in that time frame, I won't have been treated unfairly. As far as the agreement with my former boss, I haven't brought it up besides asking "does this still hold?" "Well no, we hadn't anticipated this" isn't the same as "you will strictly not get this" so I'm going to see where this round of negotiation takes me. As always, I appreciate the insight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
I hope it works out for you and the company keeps your best interests in mind too. Perhaps I’m too cynical about this subject.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
The thing is, had you asked your former boss for the agreement in writing he would have said no. Or more fully, he would have said "I'd love to do that but HR won't let me." Which means no. Dwight is right. You can dress it up with whatever adjective you like; leverage is your BATNA versus theirs, that's all. One more thing to add to that: anytime you go to your boss and say "I want a raise/promotion" almost anyone will correctly perceive the implicit, unstated thread "...or I will find a different company to work for." So if they say no, that means they're fine with letting you walk and you should indeed be looking to secure a better job and walk ASAP. I've never once in my life heard of this conversation:  You and I both know we're underpaid, I'd like a significant raise right now please. Sorry but there's no budget for that, we'll talk about it at your next review, etc.be followed by this conversation: Hey, y'know what, I really want that raise or I'm going elsewhere. OK, let me see what I can do.and end in any way other than the eventual  . Sometimes sooner, sometimes a few months down the line after initially agreeing to your demands to buy time to line up your replacement. If you're underpaid but the company is actually interested in keeping you, then as soon as you make it known that you're aware you're underpaid, they will pay you. If you're underpaid and the company is only interested in filling your role as cheaply as possible, then as soon as you make it known that you're aware you're underpaid, they will immediately start preparing for your departure, stall until they're prepared, and then fire you when they're ready to, if you haven't left on your own by then. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:
I hope it's this one, and I guess we'll see whether they agree. I could be mistaken, and my "comps" could be inaccurate, but maybe we'll have a difference of opinion about what I'm worth. If other offers come back I guess that will help me know also.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
What you're worth is whatever the market is willing to pay you. (Your own definition of "the market" depends on your willingness to relocate.) When you brought up wanting a raise before and didn't get a raise, that should clue you in: they're in category B. Sorry dude. Your energy would be far better placed finding your next job than trying to enhance your current one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
The point that "negative" leverage is the only leverage is because it's the only thing that provides movement. It's a REALLY good term because in the mechanical sense leverage creates a linkage between some bodies such that they all react in unison. Oftentimes one of those bodies has a mechanical advantage in the leverage relationship. If you say "I want a raise" with an implied "or else I'm leaving" that creates leverage because a) your future compensation moves up OR b) your future value to the company moves down (in that you get up and leave and provide them 0 future value) "positive leverage" and "normative leverage" aren't, because as soon as one party to the relationship decides it doens't apply, it magically doesn't apply! If it were an actual leverage relationship then the outcomes would be constrained to the domain: a) EAT FASTER gets an MBA and gets a 5% raise OR b) EAT FASTER does not get an MBA and does not get a 5% raise However, it's not leverage at all because, as your employer has shown, there's a magical (for them) third option: EAT FASTER gets an MBA and does not get a 5% raise. Of course, you can TRY to enforce that those are the only two outcomes, but your only real mechanism for enforcing that is "Give me the raise for the performance goal we agreed upon at my hiring, or I will go somewhere else". In which case, you're using negative leverage. It's the same with your conception of "normative leverage", it doesn't have any teeth, and thus doesn't disincentivize selfish behavior, without a negative consequence for violating the norm. Even if your peers 2-4 years more experienced than you are held to one set of norms, administrators can change what norms they will hold to over time, and without some negative consequence, make those norms more advantageous for themselves and less advantageous for you. The only way to mitigate that is, again, by resorting to actual "negative" leverage. That's not to say that the concepts of "do these things because they are normative" or "let's agree to mutually beneficial arrangements" are useless concepts, or that you shouldn't use them in your negotiating, or that they aren't excellent ways to frame your conversations. It's absolutely valuable to draw these factors into a negotiation discussion, and you should absolutely do so. The problem is that you should NOT confuse them for leverage, because they aren't. They are certainly things that you can reinforce with some leverage, but without it you've got a contract with no consequences for failure to perform. And that isn't worth the paper it's written on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:However, it's not leverage at all because, as your employer has shown, there's a magical (for them) third option: EAT FASTER gets an MBA and does not get a 5% raise. Of course, you can TRY to enforce that those are the only two outcomes, but your only real mechanism for enforcing that is "Give me the raise for the performance goal we agreed upon at my hiring, or I will go somewhere else". In which case, you're using negative leverage. I follow your logic, I was just confused because I'm working through "Bargaining for Advantage" right now and Shell discusses leverage as being all 3. I understand why you disagree, but to say "there's no such thing as positive leverage" was uncomfortable. Anyway, I'm going to try to frame the request (which again, hasn't happened yet, it's not like I put in for a raise and was declined) in all three terms: normative - "I was promised this, we keep our promises, treat me fairly, I am on pace to lag average pay if not given a raise" / while negotiating against their normative - "not policy to get a raise at this time, pay based on seniority, you'll get there, etc." positive - I'm already solving this problem for you, what do you need going forward to keep convincing yourself and your bosses this money you're paying me makes good sense, how can I continue to help you above and beyond so I can justify this extra money and finally (and least desirably for me because I really like this job) - I have this attractive other offer for N+20%.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
More update: i recieved an offer in writing yesterday for 95k. Speaking with ex ex boss, he said i could try to Push it up to 99, as thatd still likely be under a budgetary number, and shows that i dont shy away from negotiation. Ill take the 95, and would be happy with it, but as he said this is my last chance to negotiate potentially for the rest of my career if i stay with them until i retire. Thoughts/advice welcome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
ask for 99 and if they don't budge take 95 if you're willing to take 95
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 16:18
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:I follow your logic, I was just confused because I'm working through "Bargaining for Advantage" right now and Shell discusses leverage as being all 3. I understand why you disagree, but to say "there's no such thing as positive leverage" was uncomfortable. I'm glad I got my point across, and I think you can present a compelling case with that kind of framing, and as much as we perseverate about other offer leverage, it's good to talk about other ways to persuade people to give you what you want (which is all negotiating is). I disagree with all three being leverage; I can see why Shell presents them as such, but I think it's net harmful. If one starts to lump all useful negotiating tools together as "leverage" it then starts to devalue "negative leverage" which is the one with some power behind it. If you conceive of normative appeals or win/win agreements as being leverage, and then they fail, you may also mistake no deal as having the potential to fail. It never fails; sometimes your counterparty might decide it's the most appealing option, but you never have to rely on their positive action for it to retain its structural qualities. You DO have to rely on yourself to actually make good on your no deal promise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
Yeah. Persuasion is powerful, and leverage is powerful, and put together they can be really powerful. But they definitely are not the same thing. Persuasion is a skill you can (and must) develop. Leverage is just the factual reality of their BATNA versus yours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:ask for 99 and if they don't budge take 95 if you're willing to take 95 Thanks, thats the plan. First real negotiation, so i hope it goes ok.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Are you a very old man, why would you stay there until retirement?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:Are you a very old man, why would you stay there until retirement? If i found a job someplace that was awesome, why not stay there until retirement? Also im not “that” old, just saying with dramatic emphasis that opportunities to negotiate are infrequent. Also i have a job now! I successfully negotiated for a other couple thousand bucks that would have been left on the table! Thanks thread, always (usually) negotiate
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Tnuctip posted:Also i have a job now! I successfully negotiated for a other couple thousand bucks that would have been left on the table! Thanks thread, always (usually) negotiate What you negotiated for, over the course of a career, is a $3k annuity paid over the next 30 years with a present value $39,000.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:What you negotiated for, over the course of a career, is a $3k annuity paid over the next 30 years with a present value $39,000. not bad for 45 seconds' work
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:What you negotiated for, over the course of a career, is a $3k annuity paid over the next 30 years with a present value $39,000. This is a really underappreciated aspect of salary negotiation. Doubly so if you have additional benefits like 401k matching or performance bonuses that are based on a percentage of your salary rate. And future raises, adjustments, and promotions, too. Do always negotiate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
After I lost my job in the oil business ($47,200), I temped at a government research institute for four months then temped for the citys IT department($46,800). The government temp job opened up again, and since I had experience and the option to continue in the city job, I negotiated them up to $48,570. Everyone who was good with computers quit for reasons, and I got offered a permanent government job with government benefits at $49,960. Even though I had no BATNA since I was just a temp and they could pick any candidate they wanted, I countered with $58,550, and got a revised offer for $53,770 which I accepted. Numbers aren't real US dollars because I live in Foreignstan and the exchange rate fluctuates, but it gives a good picture of my last two years. My actual pay in USD is something like 70k. I have no degree, but make within $1000 of what an engineer with a masters degree and 6-9 years of experience make on average in my field. Do never not negotiate!
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 09:29
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:I found out on Thursday that the company I work for is getting bought out. I wasn't super concerned right away, because one of the stated reasons they decided to buy us was our technology/software (we're a construction-related company, not primarily software), and I'm the person on staff with the longest history working on it. The merger closes 5/1. They offered me a job if I'd move down to FL (from MN) for my current salary plus a pretty generous relocation package and a small signing bonus. I turned them down. Moving across the country to Florida (loving lol), away from my family and friends (which I've done before and I ended up being pretty depressed) and my contracting contacts, to work for a company I know nothing about is a no-brainer. Anyway, that original retention bonus was from my current company. I guess they wanted to keep a few of us from bolting so we could wrap up a few things before the merger or something. I was unable to negotiate them any higher, with the given reason that the terms and amounts were pre-approved by the board of directors. But we've got another round of retention/severance stuff coming up from the purchasing company. My question is: What levers do I have to pull to try to get more out of them, and what do I need to look out for? The CEO of the new place verbally committed to keeping everyone at the HQ here employed through the end of the year. But I'm not sure I necessarily want to be sitting around on my rear end for 8 months, especially if there's an uptick in required travel. There's a 0% chance they'll let us into any of their systems, so my responsibilities will probably just involve some documentation and keeping the lights on until they can get our branches switched to their system. And I have two other devs to try to keep busy as well (or not, I guess we could all bring our Switches to the office or work on some OSS or something if there's nothing to do). Currently I'd like to ask for: -Prorated retention/severance so that 50%(?) of it is paid when the last branch is switched to their system, remainder to be paid at the end of the year -30 days notice for layoff -Obviously as much money as I can get -Get reasonable travel requirements in writing A few people here are under the impression that the commitment from the CEO was a verbal contract and plan to ask for pay through the end of the year even if laid off. Does that have any basis in reality? He stood in our meeting room and told the whole HQ that's what they were going to do. My plan is to argue that as long as they have everything they need from me, it's in their best interest that I walk away on my own so they can stop paying my salary. I've put out feelers for other gigs, and I've got some good leads, but no interviews lined up yet. Though I do have a tentative offer from a guy I used to work with if I'm willing to go independent. But it's going to be tough to walk away from this as long as I can stay sane because the way it's looking after the dust settles this could pretty easily put us over the top for a 20% house down payment for next spring's home buying season. Sorry for the long post, and thanks again for all the help so far.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Has anyone worked with Lancesoft before? I guess they’re recruiting for a “big pharma” senior role and they contacted me. I’ve been talking to some corporate recruiters for a senior level job, but they all work for the company I’m interviewing with. This seems like it’s a headhunter/outside recruiter. Is there anything I should know about them to negotiate effectively? Once recruited by one of these firms, do you work for the recruiter (like an agency job), or would they be placing me in a job with the “big pharma” co? I’m awaiting confirmation of an interview with another company as well, do I tell them this? Sorry about the dumb questions, I’ve not worked with an actual recruiting company before and want to know what to expect before I put my foot in my mouth. e: I’ve found if I google the job posting, there are several recruiters/consulting firms looking for this same job description and I’ve located the name of the pharma co that has the job offered. Would I lose out by applying to that company’s job posting instead of going through a recruiter? Cacafuego fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Apr 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:Has anyone worked with Lancesoft before? I guess they’re recruiting for a “big pharma” senior role and they contacted me. I’ve been talking to some corporate recruiters for a senior level job, but they all work for the company I’m interviewing with. It depends on the job. Some jobs are full-time and the recruiter's role is to provide a candidate in exchange for a fee, while others are contracting jobs where the recruiter's firm functions as an agency. You'd have to ask the recruiter whether it's full-time or contract. I don't think there's any need to tell them about your interviews with other companies, other than a general "I'm currently interviewing at other companies" if they ask. In my experience, third-party recruiters are pushier about trying to worm salary expectations out of you than in-house recruiters. Provided you haven't started to work with the recruiter, no, there's no way that you'd lose out by applying to the company's job posting directly instead of going through the recruiter. The company might prefer that, in fact, because if you go through the recruiter then the company has to pay them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
So I'm in sort of an odd situation: I applied for a job, and on the application it had a desired salary section which, in hindsight, I should have left blank, but I threw in 60k. During the phone interview (also the only interview), the interviewer asked me about it and mentioned that 'it seemed a bit low for your state'. I concurred, and we laughed, but it didn't go much further than that before moving on. I just received an offer in my email today and the salary listed was 60k, which in all honesty isn't bad considering I'm moving into a completely different career field. The email also said for questions directly relating to salary / compensation, to contact the director of operations and included that person's email address. I'm wondering if it's still appropriate for me to negotiate a higher salary at this point? I'm honestly super new to this and it's been over a decade since I've applied for a job or position, so any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
Well, Balls^3, you kinda screwed up showing your hand. You can try to negotiate, seeing as the worst that can happen is that you're stuck at the 60k, or you can use some more or less bullshit excuse as to why you want more (does the figure include pension, for example.) It all boils down to how ready you would be to walk. But if my career has taught me anything, it is that salary bumps during hiring are much, much easier than salary increases during tenure. I'm right around of 250% of starting salary, and I can attribute two thirds of the increase to job changes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 11:10
|
|
|
You’re not going to get them a dime higher than $60K (now they know your current/last salary was significantly less than that) so probably the best plays are: 1. Getting a better offer from another company 2. Saying “the question only asked about salary” and asking for the sun moon and stars when it comes to nonsalary comp: PTO, WFH, flex time, 401k match, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 12:34
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:You’re not going to get them a dime higher than $60K (now they know your current/last salary was significantly less than that) so probably the best plays are: Can you negotiate that? I've never heard of variable matching rates per employee before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 14:27
|
|
|
Chaotic Flame posted:Can you negotiate that? I've never heard of variable matching rates per employee before. I just got more base salary when I negotiated because the match at my company now is bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
Chaotic Flame posted:Can you negotiate that? I've never heard of variable matching rates per employee before. Of course you can! Everything is always negotiable. Seriously though, you are of course correct that the percentage is pretty much always carved into diamond, but at many companies the matching doesn’t start until you’ve been there six months or a year or whatever, and that can definitely be negotiated to Right Away. And yeah if the retirement benefits are bad that’s definitely excellent cause to say “yeah, your 401k match sucks so I’m definitely going to need more salary to make up for it.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:1. Saying “the question only asked about salary” and asking for the sun moon and stars when it comes to nonsalary comp: PTO, WFH, flex time, 401k match, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
bamhand posted:I just got more base salary when I negotiated because the match at my company now is bad. I did the same thing but because of their health benefits. My previous employer had really good, cheap options. Eric the Mauve posted:Of course you can! Everything is always negotiable. Ok, yeah that makes sense. I've never had a delayed match and forgot that was a thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
Chaotic Flame posted:Can you negotiate that? I've never heard of variable matching rates per employee before. But it never hurts to ask.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 02:21
|
|
|
Success story for the thread: Last summer I was solicited by another group in my company to gauge my interest in a position which would be equivalent to a one step promotion on my current group's tech ladder. I expressed interest but they didn't get around to arranging an interview until early this year. I finally got an offer in mid April which included the promotion to a higher corporate grade and a 6% raise. I said thanks but I was hoping for 10% and here's why: "yadda yadda yadda I've been kicking rear end and taking names since I got here 2 years ago, high annual ratings, pertinent experience, btw I turned down another internal opportunity (which would have included a two-level corporatel promo), etc". They wrote down my number and said we'll get back to you. 2 weeks later they came back with 8.4% and I accepted on the spot. I would have taken the 6% but I'm obviously happy with more money. Thanks thread for giving me the confidence to ask for more. This thread really is a goldmine for how to incrementally improve your life via increasing your pay when the opportunities arise. Do always negotiate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
I'm aware this is an extremely company/industry/position specific question, but just for a sanity check: What's a typical pay adjustment for a level promotion (in my case Software Quality Control Engineer to Senior Software QA Eng). I was thinking in the 5%-10% range (don't worry, I've read the thread enough to not ask for a range), and it seems the prior poster had similar expectations, but I got a ~3.5% raise instead. I intend to negotiate this (the person who announces promotions is not the person who announces the salary bumps in my very dysfunctional company), but I wanted to make sure my ask is reasonable.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
At my last job in finance it was 20%. Now I'm in modeling/consulting and it's also about 20%. Maybe tech is lower, but 3.5% sounds waaay too low. Leverage your new title for a new job imo.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
bamhand posted:At my last job in finance it was 20%. Now I'm in modeling/consulting and it's also about 20%. Maybe tech is lower, but 3.5% sounds waaay too low. Leverage your new title for a new job imo. Yeah do this. I have gotten 10%, 25%, and 15% for promotions in tech (though not QA). On the other hand I managed 50% when switching companies. 3% is the bump I get when I don't ask and they say they have no money for raises. Get a new job. As an aside I'm not convinced that giving a range is always a bad thing. I achieved the 25% raise by anchoring the discussion at x-y where x was my outright win number and y was unachievable but also what the top people in my field, locally, reportedly make. I got offered a little over x and took it.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 14:37
|
|
