|
The amount of people who counter with a range is amazing me. This is the third person I have tried to hire to do it. When you put you want 90-95k that means 90k (which means I counter lower). Hopefully none of you are doing this.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
spwrozek posted:The amount of people who counter with a range is amazing me. This is the third person I have tried to hire to do it. When you put you want 90-95k that means 90k (which means I counter lower). Hopefully none of you are doing this. See the thread title. I'm never giving a number, but especially never giving a range.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
Generally agree, but the reason to give a range in a negotiation is when the low number is your actual target and you want to anchor them higher. Bolstering ranges are effective in standard price negotiations. Yes, you may argue that means you should just ask the high number, but sometimes that’s not a realistic number. If I say 120-130, it means I want 120 but want you to think about 130. This is fine for both an ask if you’re forced into making one first, and a counter if you’re responding to an offer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Generally agree, but the reason to give a range in a negotiation is when the low number is your actual target and you want to anchor them higher. Bolstering ranges are effective in standard price negotiations. Maybe, but anyone with any experience negotiating is going to hear "120" when you say "120 to 130". Like the number 130 isn't even going to register in their brain. To set a proper anchor when your real target is 120 you need to just say 130. Just do your research first to make sure you're not being comically unrealistic. Knowing exactly how high you can set your anchor in your initial ask without going over the absurdity limit, Price Is Right style, is an important skill and is going to become even more important as it becomes near-ubiquitous everywhere below the executive level for companies to force candidates to name a number before engaging with them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Maybe, but anyone with any experience negotiating is going to hear "120" when you say "120 to 130". Like the number 130 isn't even going to register in their brain. To set a proper anchor when your real target is 120 you need to just say 130. Just do your research first to make sure you're not being comically unrealistic. I’m not sure about this. There’s at least one study to suggest that the bolstering range increases both the average value of the negotiated rate and the chance of a successful negotiated settlement. Important to remember that lots of people on both sides aren’t necessarily experienced negotiators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2019 23:26
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I’m not sure about this. There’s at least one study to suggest that the bolstering range increases both the average value of the negotiated rate and the chance of a successful negotiated settlement. Assuming the other party is a chump is a dangerous tactic that will probably land you on a team run by a chump. Normally I disagree with EtM for being too pessimistic, but I 100% agree with him in this case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I’m not sure about this. There’s at least one study to suggest that the bolstering range increases both the average value of the negotiated rate and the chance of a successful negotiated settlement. You should always assume that the person you're negotiating against is a) competent and b) acting in bad faith and will use any speck of leverage they can against you a) is sometimes untrue but you can almost always count on b)! If you simply must give a range, start with the absolute highest number you can say with a straight face on the low end and gently caress-you money on the top end
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
Nobody ever said you can't give a range where the min/max are the same value. "My range is $150,000 - $150,000." Checkmate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
A bolstering range starts by taking your single point that you would have said and adding a second, higher, number to the other end of the range. Like at some point you’re going to have a number. You can move it up, but you eventually get to a number. What do you lose with a range that starts there. What is the argument for not saying 150-200 instead of saying 150? That there is a chance they only hear 150?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
What is the argument for saying 150-200 instead of just saying 200?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
Letting them think they will get one over on you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:What is the argument for saying 150-200 instead of just saying 200? At some point you do pick a number though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:A bolstering range starts by taking your single point that you would have said and adding a second, higher, number to the other end of the range.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:What is the argument for saying 150-200 instead of just saying 200? That you were forced to choose a number and believe that 200 is ludicrous. The theory is that giving a range makes the lower number appear more reasonable so choose your point number and then make your range with that as the low point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 03:55
|
|
|
asur posted:That you were forced to choose a number and believe that 200 is ludicrous. The theory is that giving a range makes the lower number appear more reasonable so choose your point number and then make your range with that as the low point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
What downside is there to saying 200-300 if 200 is literally what you want? Most companies that want you will offer you the bottom of that range, that’s for sure. But there is certainly a minuscule chance that they’ll offer more because they love you so much and don’t want to pay you the absolute minimum. Ranges are usually a bad idea because people set the bottom number below what they actually want. But that’s not what’s being proposed here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
Then why not say 200-250. Again, you do pick a number at some point. You're not couching anything. There are two things behind the theory - one is that you will potentially be able to get more money out of them. The other is that you are potentially more likely to reach any kind of negotiated settlement. The fact you're stating a range is implying that you're open to negotiating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
Random thought, any ideas about giving a really low number for the bottom end, so low it can't be a real number? $1.00 to $200,000.00
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 10:03
|
|
|
taqueso posted:Random thought, any ideas about giving a really low number for the bottom end, so low it can't be a real number? $1.00 to $200,000.00 Cheeky and may turn some hiring managers against you. Perfectly valid, but probably viewed as unprofessional in stuffier circles. Jordan7hm posted:Then why not say 200-250. You can accomplish the same thing by just saying "$250k, negotiable" without anchoring yourself to that lower number. Ranges betray that you want the position and are willing to concede your negotiating position to strike a deal. You should always always always be acting like you don't need the job. You are HOT poo poo. You are the KING poo poo of gently caress MOUNTAIN in your industry, and anything you do to undermine that concept will work against you. An ongoing theme in this thread is that there is information asymmetry in this process that can help or hurt you. If the company has budgeted $230k for that position and you offer $200-250k, just because you're happy to take $200k doesn't mean you can't wind up with a better result by shooting high. If you overshoot your salary goals the company will feel like they're getting a good deal when you accept below your ask. If you undershoot your goals, the company will happily give it to you, and the savvier folks might even whittle you down further from there. That's why it's so important to delay talking numbers until later in the process, when you've dazzled them with your amazing skills and gotten them excited enough about you that they will go out on a limb to get you. Not a Children fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Apr 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Then why not say 200-250.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:20
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Then why not say 200-250. There's a reason the thread title is what it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Okay I'm potentially at offer stage. Had my first in person interview and they seem to really like me. I also have an in person interview with a different company later this week. They seem very intent on getting a number out of me, this is for a principal software engineer in the Boston suburbs (i.e. not in the city). I'm trying to decide what I should say. Given that this is my first interview, I don't have any specific knowledge of comparable salaries. I love the location and mission, and merely like those two things for the company I have later this week, and don't have any in person interviews scheduled otherwise. silvergoose fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Apr 16, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Okay I'm potentially at offer stage. Had my first in person interview and they seem to really like me. I also have an in person interview with a different company later this week. Go to glassdoor.com and search for senior or principal software engineer in Boston. Aim for substantially higher than average.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2019 07:14
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Okay I'm potentially at offer stage. Had my first in person interview and they seem to really like me. I also have an in person interview with a different company later this week. Push until you are at the offer stage. Say you want to focus on fit first and if you all agree on that then the numbers shouldn't be a problem. If they say they want a number to make sure you're not wasting everyone's time then ask them what the salary range for the position is, since they clearly have an idea already of what they're willing to pay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
pokie posted:Go to glassdoor.com and search for senior or principal software engineer in Boston. Aim for substantially higher than average. Does Glassdoor skew low or is this for anchoring? I'm not the op of that question but I checked on Glassdoor and his 185 looked a good deal higher than the Glassdoor average.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
Any tips for negotiating with a company that seriously underpays its employees? Other than leave the negotiating table? I've been working as a temp staff accountant at a small law firm for the past several weeks. But I've been functioning as their accounting manager, AR/AP manager, billing manager, IT guy etc since the beginning, and I'm unofficially managing two people. They want to hire me permanently because they trust me now, but also out of desperation and not wanting to pay the recruiting agency rate anymore. And that's great- they will officially give me the title of accounting manager and establish clear lines of authority, but the rate of pay in preliminary discussions? Ridiculous. Right now I'm getting just over the median for a staff accountant from the recruiter, who is charging the law firm double that. The number floated in the conversation about going perm was actually going backwards -- less than the recruiter is paying me. No benefits, no other perks. I was hoping to get something like 66% of what the recruiter was charging, as I stepped up above and beyond what they were looking for, but they really want to keep payroll down. They have a couple attorneys on staff that make 40k, and this is Boston. They really do need me, but then again I kind of need this as well because I lucked my way in to "management" when all I could get before was AR and AP jobs. I'm hoping to springboard to something much better after this. Anything I can request in the way of perks that can push the needle a bit? Or instead of as big a raise, cut down my work week to four days or something? This is the first time I've had to tell a company that they can't afford me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 03:27
|
|
|
I have a potentially odd question stemming from some admittedly naive idealism: how do I negotiate a pay raise across the board for the employees working with/under me? I manage a small board game retail store/event space with an average of 12 employees, including the owner. Five-to-seven part-time clerks, four salaried managers, one full-time hourly shipping/receiving clerk, one full-time general/HR manager, and the owner. I am one of the four managers, working closest with the shipping/receiving clerk, and we sort of do our own thing partially separate from the rest of the store. Technically the clerks work under all of the managers and ultimately they come to us for final decisions, but without us collaborating with them and their volunteering for extra projects outside of typical daily tasks, we'd never get anything done properly or grow the business and store culture. There is a significant pay disparity that inexorably plays into power dynamics, which is something I acknowledge and am keenly aware of, but I still consider them my equal; I would never ask them to do anything that I would not be willing to do myself. Back in October we convinced the owner that a starting pay of $7.25/hr with a cap of $9/hr for the clerks was making it increasingly difficult to manage the store and help it grow because of a lack of investment in people who actually want to be there. I was not a part of the final conversation/negotiation, but the pay range was bumped up to $8 starting with a cap of $10 (big deal, but in the context of an owner who operated for 30+ years under, "hiring college students and letting them move on after a year is best," that was... a significant change). In the last two weeks, we laid off one of our more recent hires for being terrible, and one of our other, not-terrible employees put in their two weeks notice after their partner received a job offer out-of-state. We've gone through applications and interviews to replace those leaving, and we picked the top three candidates to offer the job. Our second and third picks accepted the offer with a starting pay of $8, but our top pick, who was amazing on paper and interviewed confidently, declined the offer at $8. I pushed to pursue this candidate further and managed to convince the owner (who is normally pretty stingy) that it was worth hiring this person at the cap of $10 instead, to which he consented. We called the candidate back with the revised offer (making it clear $10 was, unfortunately, the cap), and thankfully they accepted and will be starting soon. (There is a bit more to it than that as far as the general manager's role, or lack thereof, in this hiring process, the timing of the not-terrible employee's two-weeks notice and the interviews, a desperate gambit in convincing the owner, etc., but this is already overly long and it would require too much history anyway. So.) We landed arguably the best candidate we've had apply to our store in years, but with that relief came two demoralizing realizations: we're hiring the other two candidates at $8/hr, and none of our current clerks (who are all 1-2.5 year employees at this point) are at the (new-ish) $10/hr cap yet. poo poo.  In my desperation (and frustration), I tunnel-visioned, did what I could for one person, and neglected everyone else.So this is where I'm at now. Do I push for the other two new hires to start at $10/hr as well? Do I leave them to start at $8 and push for the other managers to ensure the new hires' pay increases are accelerated to get them up to $10 quickly over their first six months? (As it is now, the bumps from $8 to $10 come in 25-50 cent increases over the course of three loving years.) I know we're going to push for our current employees to be bumped up to $10 in their next evaluations (between now and mid-June) since most of them are at the $9.00-$9.50 range, but we're bringing in someone totally new and technically unproven already above the other clerks' pay. Where my naive idealism comes into play is understanding that even $10/hr is not a livable wage, let alone $8, and that we need to a) pay people more in general because our wages (and salaries, frankly) are a loving joke, and b) we need to invest in people that actually care about our store (even if it is still retail). On top of that, last year I negotiated a raise and got the amount for which I asked, and while I'm up for a yearly review again next month and should probably ask for another raise, I feel it would be more fair to, either in addition to my own raise or in place of it, push for a raise for the rest of my coworkers who are not salaried and do not get the opportunity to ask for raises. Our store culture is, mercifully, extremely progressive and socially aware, but I am not sure how successful I will be in convincing the owner to invest more in our current amazing staff, even if, at most, it would be a $15k/yr increase, total, to bump all of the clerks up to $10/hr.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 03:56
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:Does Glassdoor skew low or is this for anchoring? I believe it's fairly accurate, but I don't have enough information to back that belief up definitively. I have looked at other sources for salaries at a few major companies and they aligned. It's of course possible for this to be manipulated on individual smaller company basis, but I think it's reasonably accurate for the industry in a region as a whole. Naturally if you are a badass you should anchor way higher, but, yes, this is for anchoring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 04:21
|
|
|
Baron Fuzzlewhack posted:I have a potentially odd question stemming from some admittedly naive idealism: how do I negotiate a pay raise across the board for the employees working with/under me? Unionize
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 07:50
|
|
|
Yeah. I read your post last night, Baron, and didn't respond until now because I'm torn about it: I feel like there really isn't much to say, but I don't want you to think I'm trivializing your predicament, which is real, and sucks real bad. But the answer to your question is: You don't, and if you try too hard you'll get fired. Find a job at a better company ASAP. But in anything remotely resembling retail, you are never going to find any company willing to invest in the few grunt workers who care. It's just not done in that industry. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Apr 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 12:41
|
|
|
Was just contacted about a position and theyre asking if i have a non compete. Technically yes - its in the standard employee agreement that everyone signs and Im wondering what the best way to approach this is. The company is similar in many ways whic is attractive but we service different demographics so it would be easy to argue we dont directly compete. They did specifically mention my company though when referencing the non compete and they have had issues hiring candidates from us in the past. For reference i am in admin. Nothing product/sales/client related.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Keystoned posted:Was just contacted about a position and theyre asking if i have a non compete. Technically yes - its in the standard employee agreement that everyone signs and Im wondering what the best way to approach this is. Might depend on state, check your state law (MA is super good about this)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
Twain of Pain posted:Unionize This is both the funniest and most depressing answer I could get. Eric the Mauve posted:Yeah. I read your post last night, Baron, and didn't respond until now because I'm torn about it: I feel like there really isn't much to say, but I don't want you to think I'm trivializing your predicament, which is real, and sucks real bad. Nah, no worries, I appreciate the thoughtfulness. I recognize that I'm one of the oldest employees at 30, and our store culture's young, wide-eyed idealism doesn't necessarily line up with the reality of business, especially retail, and especially from the perspective of the owner at 55+. It's a weird situation where we've made significant strides away from being your stereotypical board game store insofar as the culture and demographics of both our staff and patrons, but because this is still a retail store, we've made much smaller steps towards being economically progressive. There's a lot tied up in that, and I am genuinely worried that I might be at the get-fired-or-quit stage despite really loving this place, but the economic disparity is a huge sticking point for me. For reference, the general manager makes 70k, while all of the part-time clerks combined make around the same amount. The managers all make 25k-35k, with me squarely in the middle of that range, and I can say with full confidence that the value each one of us managers generates individually is worth way more than what they're paid, and certainly way higher than the value-to-dollar ratio of the general/HR manager. I'll keep stewing on it and talking with the other three managers to figure it out if this is a hill I'm willing to die on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:Any tips for negotiating with a company that seriously underpays its employees? Other than leave the negotiating table?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
I took a verbal offer from a company yesterday and I’m giving my notice soon, but I kinda want more money. The 15% raise as it is but if I can get an extra two or three grand that would be huge. I hate my job as it is and I’m more than happy to take this offer so I don’t want to risk screwing anything up, but negotiation is something I have not had the opportunity to do in a job choice in years. I know my company now will not counter offer so is there may be a good way to approach this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
If you haven't already given them a number, you could just tell them after reviewing their offer, you think that [offer] + $5000 would be reasonable. Worst possibility is that they say no; more likely is that they throw you an extra couple or try to give you something else. If they somehow rescind an offer because you try to negotiate it's a good heads up that you're trading one terrible company for another.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
Baron Fuzzlewhack posted:This is both the funniest and most depressing answer I could get. Just think of it this way. If you manage to get raises for everyone you wont be lined up against the wall more than likely!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:I was hoping to get something like 66% of what the recruiter was charging, as I stepped up above and beyond what they were looking for, but they really want to keep payroll down. They have a couple attorneys on staff that make 40k, and this is Boston. They really do need me, but then again I kind of need this as well because I lucked my way in to "management" when all I could get before was AR and AP jobs. I'm hoping to springboard to something much better after this. That’s loving criminal - get thee away from this place if you can manage it. Maybe negotiate hard af to the best number you can get, then look at leveraging the new title into something at a place that will pay you money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Inept posted:If you haven't already given them a number, you could just tell them after reviewing their offer, you think that [offer] + $5000 would be reasonable. Worst possibility is that they say no; more likely is that they throw you an extra couple or try to give you something else. If they somehow rescind an offer because you try to negotiate it's a good heads up that you're trading one terrible company for another. I already accepted the non-official offer in writing :/
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 14:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
momtartin posted:I already accepted the non-official offer in writing :/ Like in an email or an actual signed offer letter? If you signed an offer letter oops you boned yourself. If it was just an email saying yea I accept then it’s the equivalent of a verbal over the phone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 16:00
|
|