|
Blinky2099 posted:This has probably been covered a hundred times over in the other thread but I don't remember ever seeing it within the past few months... why is this such a firm belief in SA when there's a lot of research that suggests anchoring (being the one to give a number first) could potentially be even better? Anchoring can be positive if you are certain you are anchoring upwards of where you might otherwise achieve. Most people when changing jobs don't have a good sense for what they should be worth in a new job and so any anchoring, especially in the context of your old salary, will tend to be unfavourable. That's not to say it should never be done, but this is a thread targeted mostly at people who don't have a huge amount of negotiating experience or the knowledge of the recruiting process to make them successful at it. If you are informed enough about the role and your worth in it, as well as the benefits of anchoring expectations upwards then you probably aren't the right audience for this thread in any case. By way of counter-example, in a recent negotiation for my own salary and title for a new job, I had a strong expectation that had I not anchored value upwards I would have got an outcome that was poorer in both title and pay. I had a host of reasons for this expectation but it came down to having good intel on where my potential employer was thinking in terms of comp and title. I had an opportunity to reframe the discussion around a broader role with higher pay and made sure to position myself to get that. It helped a great deal that my BATNA was very strong so I was in a position to walk if they hadn't accepted the entirety of my proposal. It isn't always the right answer to let the party you're negotiating with set expectations, but in salary negotiations by inexperienced negotiators it often is, to the point where the best advice for the greatest number of people is 'let them speak first and you'll probably be positively surprised'. Dik Hz posted:Anchoring works better if the other party doesn't have a number in mind already. The hiring manager knows what the last guy got paid and knows what her budget is, generally. So she's already anchored. By throwing out a higher number, she'll just pass. If you throw out a lower number, you cripple your position. Your best bet is to get them interested before salary is discussed. This too Most companies have a fairly firm expectation (approved budget, salary ranges in larger companies, etc) before they even look at your resume. Your job is to find out what that is without giving your own hand away. If you do that you now have an informational advantage which can help you position yourself better relative to those expectations.
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:I agree that for most of the people we are advising in this thread, stalwartly attempting not to disclose a target is better than trying to anchor upwards. What would make an individual an exception to that general rule? This is perhaps unsurprisingly similar to the situation that led to me doing the same thing. Good salary visibility, known quantity, etc. I can say in my case I hit the absolute ceiling for the role though - there was no scenario where I was getting paid more than the person immediately senior to me. Matching what they got was a huge win.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:What are people's opinion about just lying about your current salary (or inflating it) and then using that number to negotiate slightly up from? Pointless and deceptive. It's the reason we say it's important to avoid talking about current salary and instead focus on expectations relative to the role. If I ever caught someone doing this I'd immediately throw their resume in the bin, regardless of other merits.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:See I think that's interesting if only because the metaphor that's always used in the negotiating rhetoric is poker. So there's no room for bluffing? Since bluffing's not a good course of action, why not ask the employer how much they have budgeted for the position during the interview, or is that another no-no? Bluffing is not necessarily lying. In poker, the best bluffs are representing a stronger hand with a chance for improvement. Depending on how aggressive you want to be it's certainly an option to represent a BATNA that doesn't exist or that is better than you currently have (if you don't accept my counter offer I'll walk and take some other job), but you have to be prepared to live your representation whether it's real or not. If you represent a BATNA that is better than the offer you're facing and then accept their offer under pressure they'll immediately know you're full of poo poo and you'll start your new job with a credibility problem. Just like in poker, your credibility had value. Unlike in poker, being caught in a bluff can mean you get fired or don't get an offer. It's just not worth it. As for asking what the salary band is, you can do it, but it's better to first convince the company that they need to have you, and then base your salary negotiations around that need, rather than talking about what the range for a more generic candidate is before you've had a chance to demonstrate your impact.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
Goons_ruin_everything.xls
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Lying is bad advice and leaves you without a credible negotiating position. The goal is not to gently caress the company as hard as possible, the goal is to establish a fair value for your time and effort. Establishing a salary that is too high based on a false premise leaves you with a hurdle that could be too high to live up to. The entire foundation of a successful, healthy, negotiating strategy is based on two parties dealing in good faith with each other. If you believe a company is actually lying when they say they will consider you for a raise in 6 months then why the gently caress are you dealing with them at all? If you believe they are offering 'consideration' in good faith but think the odds of actually getting a raise are low then just assign it a value of zero in your consideration of their package. At the end of the day you want the company to be if not happy, comfortable they paid the right amount for you if you care even a little bit about job security. If you spend your career doing 2 or less year stints at companies trying to just lever for the maximum possible extraction of money you will get figured out and eventually it will get harder and harder to do unless you're a legit genius at whatever it is you do.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
It's a standard part of the background check process for new hires to verify your claims re: past employment. Former employers will get questionnaires asking to confirm that you worked there and what your salary was. You will usually agree in advance that your potential new employer can do this as part of signing the offer. Lying now is a terrible idea.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Yeah there's no reason to lay a competing offer on the table in detail most of the time. Swenblack's approach is a bit more aggressive on that than many companies in my experience. The most important part about a competing offer is having it in hand so you can have the confidence to ask for what you think you're worth. If someone like swenblack asked me for a copy of the competing offer I'd say no 99% of the time. You can just put it back to them that "I have a competing offer and I've told you what I'd need from you to join your company in light of that offer. I don't think it would be appropriate to share the details of that offer, just as you would expect me not to show a third party your offer. I will need to have a final decision on the competing offer by (date), so I'd appreciate if you could put your best foot forward as soon as you can do I'm able to fairly consider your offer in light of my other options. I can tell you that if you meet the terms as I've outlined them I'd be ready to sign on the spot. Thanks for your consideration" Or something to that effect Has the benefit of giving them a clear line to jump over, showing your confidence, not lying, and giving a clear path / timeline to ending discussions or if the company doesn't meet your terms. Downside is a subset of companies with hard salary budgets and a hiring manager who doesn't want to rock the boat may just say no, but that's a risk with any situation where you're pushing for extra salary, particularly with a larger company.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
If you're only 6 months in and you already got to skip the entry level job it's probably a bridge too far to ask for an off cycle raise before your first year. Be patient and if they don't adjust at one year then you can start thinking about how to re-set. You're not credibly going to be in a position to threaten to leave either based on my assumption about your experience.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Tots posted:I'm 95% sure I could make a lateral move for ~7k more. Cool, but leaving a job after 6 months is something you'll have to explain to employers for the next 5 years. If you're as good as you say and enjoy your job then just continue to kick rear end and you will be really well positioned at 12 months for a real salary discussion. Seconding dwight's point as well. You've gone about as far as you're going to go on goodwill in the absence of demonstrating capability. If you have an offer in hand then you need to decide if it's worth your 'once per employer' opportunity to use an outside offer to bump your pay 6 months into a job that you've already acknowledged they had to stretch to offer you, or to just be happy in the job you're in for 12 months and focus on being good at the job you're in to set up for a healthy raise on a more normal cycle.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:Goons, I guess you didn't read the previous posts. Lying is bad and you will get found out. Try to narrow down your salary data to the region you actually live in - getting data points from cities with job markets that aren't related to where you live is pointless. Assuming B gives you an offer that's an improvement on A but A is where you want to work, you can certainly go back to A (if they give you an offer) and say "thanks for the offer, I'm excited to work for you but you should know that I've recently received and offer for a comparable role at $x. I'd prefer to work for you and would be happy to sign if you can match the other offer." Make sure that you get their written offers so that you can compare other terms like vacation and benefits.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Goons, How much do you need / want the job? Have you done your research? What kind of company is it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Good
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Yeah being totally ok not moving definitely helps your case. I would look at salary ranges for similar job titles on glass door and elsewhere, try to filter for the region to the extent you can, and be ready to say 'no' if they don't move what you think is far enough. If it's really the dream job then you should factor that into how hard to stick on pay though. Since you're just starting out you should be focused more on good experience that will set you up to get better value later in your career rather than maximum dollars now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Big Spoon posted:Hi everyone. I wanted to get an opinion on something I'm kinda split on. When do you discuss salary during the job interview process? One thought I had was simply to ask for the anticipated range during the phone screen if/when the recruiter brings up salary (if they don't then leave that discussion for another time). The other thought I had was to not worry about salary until an offer was in the works. Maybe its somewhere in between (after the phone screen and during an early interview with the hiring manager)? I suspect its much more dependent on the job-seeker and their BATNA but I wanted to see what y'all thought. The best time is usually to wait until they've made a decision to hire you. It's mentally harder for them to walk away after they've crossed that bridge, so you have more leverage. TheWevel posted:What do you do if you already know what the approved salary is (because you have friends working there) but you have to deal with an HR lackey that's trying to save the company money? If they are bringing you in like that odds are they will step up. If they don't, go to the real decision makers, who are the people you will work with, and ask / tell them what you need and to get the hr person to stop messing around. There's nothing at all wrong with short circuiting the hr loop if you have a good relationship.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
slothzilla posted:I'm looking to shift fields (from a non-profit to a consulting firm that works with non-profits) and the top of their range (with bonus) didn't quite reach my current salary, without bonuses it is significantly lower. How believable are bonus estimates? At what point in the interview process is it appropriate to probe about how firm their range is? You must live on bizarro world where you're making more at a non profit than you can at a consultancy Bonus estimates' worth depends to some extent on the firm offering them. I have a target range on my bonus but the company I work for has trended well below the disclosed target ranges for people at my level for the last couple years for ~reasons~. I'm still happy with the actual bonus ranges that are in effect but you need to get a feel for that or assume it's zero. I would tend to stay away from talking numbers until relatively late in the process - ideally you want to have the discussion after they've already made the decision to hire you as they'll psychologically be less likely to walk away even if you push them out of their range once they've decided you're the one they want.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
slothzilla posted:I was so surprised I accidentally told them what I make. I know we usually say it's a bad thing to bring up your current salary but in this case it's a positive anchor so not a big deal
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
thehandtruck posted:Got an on-site interview with a biotech/health company in Culver City, CA (few miles from Los Angeles) for Behavior Modification Specialist and they want me to fill out some documents one of which asks for desired salary. Kinda stumped on this one because even with a masters in psych (focus in industrial/organizational psych) and a few years of behavior modification therapy for little autism dudes some places value that experience highly and some don't. As my first real job out of post-grad I don't even really care about getting the absolute maximum I just want to get hired. Still, I hear that going too low demonstrates you don't value your skills possibly because those skills aren't that good or something. So 50k? I mean honestly that's probably the lowest I'd want to go anyway (I think). Again this is my first real job and I have been finding it extremely difficult to find a job that matches my degree because I -apparently- lack experience. I'm still somewhat narrowed on what kind of job I want and am hoping not to expand that circle until I really have to because even though I want to work with people the typical HR job sounds awful. Bleh, feel like I'm swimming in muck over here. Stop guessing (that sounds way too low btw) and go do some research. Glassdoor is a good salary reference site and there are several others. You may need to look for a broader title than the specific one you noted above though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:My thread contribution: For anyone interested in negotiations in general, I recommend a book that I used in a course about negotiations. Bargaining for Advantage by Richard Shell This is a good post and should be quoted or linked in the Op, I think. If people look back at the history in this thread (and the previous one) they will see that the more experienced negotiators' strategies align generally with a transactional approach. There are definitely cases where other approaches are appropriate but in general most companies with anything north of 10 or so employees will view most new employee hires as a transactional relationship. You are providing a specific package of value and while you are important to you the company sees you only as the best among a number of options. Executive or other very senior jobs, where you will have a significant impact on the entity you are joining, tend towards the balanced concerns approach due to better information and power symmetry. People will tend to get poor results in many cases with assuming a relationship attitude because someone taking that approach and being generous can be taken advantage of very easily by someone assuming a transactional approach. The thing that is common in all these approaches is that the greater the information you have, the better off you will be, as you will be better able to structure your proposal to gain value in things that are important to you while giving value in things that you know are important to your counterparty. This is why the first thing we say to almost everyone is 'go look at what other similar jobs are paying' and the second thing we usually say is that 'unless you have very good intel, let them open and see where it lands relative to your independently developed expectations'. You gain information by seeing their offer, and they have not gained information unless you convey it to them through your reaction.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
swenblack posted:I'm a bigger fan of this one: https://hms.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/assets/Sites/Ombuds/files/NegotiationConflictStyles.pdf. It draws a distinction between compromise and collaboration, with the latter being more desirable but harder to effect. Yeah I meant the dude's post that I was quoting, not necessarily the external source
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:The differential is a flat rate so for 8 hours I get an extra $200 for every Saturday I work. I would be working Tuesday to Saturday. Without knowing the job you are applying for we can't say specifically whether those amounts are reasonable for that job. What we can say (and Dwight did say) is that asking for 10% isn't at all crazy. Note going to 31 from 27 is more than 10%, it's closer to 15%, but still not crazy. Do you have a basis for the $31 aside from 'I want to make more'? Also, based on a 40 hr work week that $200 differential works out to $5/hr on average putting you to $32/hr avg comp, but there's no guarantee you'd keep that shift over time so it's not the same as a base pay bump. Any incremental O/T is gravy for working harder and shouldn't really factor into your decision much.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Gin_Rummy posted:I wish. At least in that situation I would've known from the vibe on-site that things would be sketch as hell. This is actually a major, multinational company. What about trying the hiring manager and just going around HR? The manager is going to ultimately have more say in what actually happens anyways. HR is mostly there to aid in the process.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Never Not Negotiate. Worst that happens is they say 'no' and you're left with an offer that it sounds like you'd be ok with anyways. If you're in the middle of the band for them as you say, ask for the top of their band. I'd also look at similar companies, or even different companies that have similar jobs and make sure they're not just a serial underpayer, then base your counteroffer on that.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Easy to just enumerate the most important reasons and costs nothing. Btw 3 weeks is long but not crazy. I had one job take 3 months of haggling because there was some chicanery on their part about needing to wait to fire someone so I could take their spot, and I wasn't in a particular hurry to leave my old job.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
SmellOfPetroleum posted:Company A already gave time to consider the offer but didn't want to go past Monday. How bad would it be to agree to the job but put off actually going in to sign things till Thursday? Very little company a could do but keep in mind you'd be risking burning some bridges
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:I always knew Unions raised worker bargaining power by resolving that "100 people behind you" problem but now i'm wondering how much is also gained because (i think?) these organizations employee professional negotiators. Unions raise the ability of workers as a group to extract more value but they stifle opportunities for individuals who outperform. I could layer on anecdotes about how people I know from my hometown were 'encouraged' by more senior workers in the union to not work so hard so as not to make the bottom feeders look bad. This is why anyone who is truly capable is moved to management so they can be compensated outside of the union box. And there's also some merit to the idea that companies by necessity will negotiate more professionally with unions while one off hires will be done more ad hoc and with managers who generally have poor training in negotiating skills.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:This runs the risk of turning into a political debate; but I'm going to try and steer it away from there. People with differentiable skill sets AND who possess good negotiating skills will likely come out ahead of collective bargaining, however if either of those aren't true, then there's a good chance that they'll do better with a union, depending on the union. Without a real differentiable skill set, it's hard for any employee to hold their labor from an employer effectively, the employer's BATNA is to find someone else providing similar-enough labor for a lower price. Without good negotiating skills, we see, well, the kinds of outcomes that people have before they read this thread. There's an academic argument that people should be able to focus on excelling at their chosen vocation without having to also develop good negotiating skills. While that argument's diametrically opposed to reality, I do appreciated the sentiment behind it. Yes, I wasn't saying they're bad necessarily but they are probably bad for people who are reading this thread, in general.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
If you're well informed about the ranges and are concerned that the other side will bias downwards then it can be beneficial to open with a number yourself. Are you in a position to have a quiet chat with the mgr that wants to hire you to try to frame expectations before he gets involved?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
epenthesis posted:If you plan to lie to your future employer, consider how insulted you really ought to be to have your honesty questioned. You can say someone needs to do better without lying. Just say you have a competing offer and to accept you'd need number X. X may or may not be the competing offer amount but it's not a lie to say what you want. If you say 'my competing offer is Y' when it's actually X then that's morally a bit more difficult to accept.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
Depends on the job and industry and can vary widely. If you are not being permanently relocated somewhere it is likely that you will pay for your 'home' base (rent) and they will pay for food hotel and transportation. If you are being relocated somewhere every (say) 6-12 months then it would shade more towards you paying for your place to live with a cost of living adjustment. I would ask them to describe what the travel arrangements and schedule typically are like and what costs are covered by the company.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Tots posted:Awesome, this is all really good information and at least gives me some starting points for questions. Industry matters because some industries have lower (or higher) overall standards for travel. You situation will likely be similar to what the guy above described if you're doing on-site consulting presumably to help people switch to an agile programming model. You'll go to a site and live there for x months until they accomplish whatever and then go to the next site.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
tentawesome posted:I want to thank this thread for getting me a new job with better pay, better benefits, and more PTO. Awesome  Always nice to hear that a goon did well. Hopefully the new city doesn't have a commensurate increase in the cost of living! If you have a second, fill out the survey linked in the OP and enjoy your new job!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Im not that interested tbh. Why take off work, so I have a better BATNA? I'm not interested in leaving. And I can make reasonable estimates thanks to glass door and payscale, even correcting for their off averages. Best case is maybe my current position at a compa closer to .8-.9 (since I was promoted to a technical level that I haven't been out of school long enough for). Thats a short sighted choice compared to the benefits of where I work. Companies wont just randomly pay me 2x my salary when they can hire a similarly qualified person for 1x my salary and I can reasonably say that they can based on the data I have. Great job on not negotiating and it paying off somewhat for you. This is the negotiating thread so unless you can offer something useful for those who don't have the precise scenario you had where you got away with it why are you posting here? I mean you just said you're not interested in negotiating or evaluating the market.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
I'm 35 and a VP at a public company whose responsibility includes contract negotiations and I'm making over $200k a year in base salary, plus I receive a bonus and stock options. I think your advice is stupid and mostly centred around mentally justifying the lovely situation you allow yourself to remain in. Is that sufficiently credible for you to stop telling people stupid things and representing it as 'advice' about negotiating? Kalenn Istarion fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Jan 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:i dropped out of school to make video games, almost immediately quit that industry to spend a decade as an artist in the film industry and now i make $220k as a programmer specializing in distributed systems and ~*~big data~*~  
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:That's excellent. Is there some advice I've given others you disagree with or is it mostly my attitude about liking what I've accomplished personally and being standoffish about it? All of it, mostly. I've commented previously on the bits I specifically thought were bad If you are satisfied with your situation that's great for you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
JohnnyPalace posted:You guys are making me jealous. I'm 35 and recently changed careers. I'm making under $60k. I feel like I'll never catch up, even if I take advantage of the great advice and strategies mentioned in this thread. I'm a lot better off than I was a few years ago, but it will be at least a few years before my income hits 6 figures. That's very respectable and frankly seeing some of the programmer salaries is making me wish I had focused on my programming degree instead of my business one You also are looking at a selection of people who chose to disclose what they make to shut up a nerd who was giving bad advice so it's not exactly a representative sample
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Have typed responses in lineHughlander posted:Looks like this was well timed. I was catching up on the thread with the intent to post this: I don't think the approach changes significantly at the middle management level. What will change is the level of confidence and sophistication of who you're negotiating against. quote:IE: The adage, "Never consider bonus as part of your compensation." Works when that bonus is 10-15% of base, but probably falls by the wayside when your bonus is 60-100% of your base. At that point what impact does it have on your thought process? Consider the expected value of your bonus, meaning evaluate your likelihood of getting your target bonus levelAs an exec at a public company it is very common to have target bonus levels, with achieving that bonus tied to meeting agreed upon goals or depending on the job milestone payments. As an example of the latter, a former CEO of the company I work for still had a contingent payment due when our operation reaches a certain size. As for your target bonus level, you will likely contribute in a significant way to defining your own goals and targets. In my case the role I have didn't really exist at my company but I pitched the CEO the business case (originally as a consultant), and he liked it enough to hire me. quote:
If you work for a large liquid (actively traded) company, your stock comp is basically good as cash. If you work for a smaller or private firm where you might have a hard time selling your shares, put less value on the shares. If you are leaving for another company, you can communicate the value of stock- based comp that you will be leaving behind and many companies will make you whole. quote:Etc... As a contributor, you are likely more replaceable than a manager or director / exec, so the balance of power in the negotiation is significantly different. Also the point above about the experience level of the counterparty - negotiations are a significant part of life for most execs so it's not as foreign to them
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
The other point I would add is that at the executive level, think of yourself as pitching a portfolio of services. I wrote a three page proposal for things I would do in my first 12 months and outlined long term strategic targets that I thought were achievable and then these ended up being worked into my compensation. It's not necessarily going to be a static job requirement - the posting will have broad strategic goals and may sometimes have systems-based requirements but you are pitching your approach to problems much more so than your basic skill set (I can program x lines per minute or I have high accuracy when typing, etc). To Dwight's point about a safety net, as a public company exec and specifically with what I do, my job would be 95% likely to disappear in an acquisition so in addition to contractual guaranteed notice (rather than relying on stat notice periods) I have a change of control clause that pays double the notice / severance should my job get deleted after an m&a transaction.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 16:54
|
|