11 ms·

One of my negotiation principles is "Don't disclose your current or desired salary" during the negotiation. With persistence, the recruiter or hiring manager wi

One of my negotiation principles is "Don't disclose your current or desired salary" during the negotiation. With persistence, the recruiter or hiring manager will usually just move on. Another principle is that you should always counter. So I'm _extremely_ surprised to hear that 95% of the time, people have refused to continue talking with you. I can't refute your experience, but I can say this has never happened to me or anyone that I've worked with to negotiate a starting salary. Patrick's writing, which you alluded to, was a big inspiration for me to write and think more deeply about this subject. He knows what he's talking about. If you watch the Salary Negotiation workshop (linked in my original comment), you'll see a section on "The Dreaded Salary Question" and there was a 15-minute discussion on it in the Q&A. (Both are linked in the notes below the embedded video.) You might watch those segments to see if anything jumps out at you that yo haven't' tried before. Thanks for the question!

p4wnc6 11y ago
In the handful of cases where the company was OK with my non-answer about salary, and I went on to get all the way to a job offer, the salary ended up being entirely miscalibrated to a candidate of my skill and experience, and the overall interview process (which usually included some technical screens, programming tests, take-home tests, and long on-site technical interviews) was a massive waste of my time, not to mention extremely stressful. Places where I experienced this gross miscalibration: a large U.S. food retailer's digital analytics team; a small pharmaceutical research software company; a 25-year-old multinational scientific computing and supercomputing consulting firm; and an FFRDC research lab attached to a university. In one of these places they even went on at length about how much the hiring manager liked me, how I fit all the skills they were seeking, and many team members remarked that I would "mesh instantly" with the team, and so forth. I had walked away from those interviews knowing that I had done a good job and feeling very confident. Then they made a job offer than was around 75% of what I had been making before in a similar job in a similar cost of living area, and the new job's other benefits were far worse. When I told them what I was making before, they just said, "it just looks like there's a bit of a gap here that we are unable to make up, but we think you'll be very happy on this team so we hope you'll consider our offer despite that." The people interviewing me in that company had even gone on at length about how successful their business unit had been recently, signing a new important contract, and how their biggest challenge was recruiting good people and staffing up to support some projects that had important deadlines looming towards the end of 2016. I still continue to avoid sharing salary info, because I'm not convinced that sharing it would be better. But I think what you might not be accounting for is that almost every single candidate in the tech world does share salary, freely and openly, from the very first minute they are asked, without even realizing it might have any side effects. A lot of corporate recruiters are conditioned to expect this, and the minute someone fails to share salary, they flag them as "not a dope, can't hire them cheaply" and they just move on. Constraint number one, above any and all talent requirements, is that they must be cheap to hire ... for a lot of firms.
- lexhaynes 11y ago
  How do you respond when they ask you for your salary information? Would it be perceuved as rude to say "I decline to state"?
  - p4wnc6 11y ago
    I have practiced that part and read just about everything I can find about it. Generally I say something like, "I appreciate the need to consider salary as an important part of the process, but since we have only just started talking about the position I feel it would be best to make sure that I really am the sort of technical and cultural fit you are looking for. If we can determine that I am the right fit for the role, then the salary information will fall into place at the appropriate time. But if it seems that I am not the right fit for your team, then no amount of salary discussions will be able to help us." I have a few variations on that kind of description that I use. It's entirely possible that the way I say it can come off as rude, and I think that did happen to me especially a few times when I first started doing this. But I have practiced it, asked friends for advice about how to say it better, how it sounds, etc., and researched a lot about this online. So I have some confidence that it is coming off as strong and assertive, but not rude, and it is communicated clearly in good-faith because I truly am primarily interested in whether the cultural fit is a good one. Even so, these kinds of HR-approved ways of talking only ever result in about a 95% chance of immediate rejection. Whenever I have made it past the initial question about salary, and eventually salary comes up again towards the stage when an offer is made, I have a different way of talking about it. At that stage, if they ask me again, I will usually say something like, "I have spoken with the team and had a great chance to learn about your company and how I could fit in with this role. If you have a particular salary range that you'd like to share with me, I can definitely let you know how it will match up with my expectations." Again, I have some slight variations on that, but it's more or less the same idea of changing their question asked of me into my question asked of them. They can't keep coming back and specifically asking me for a number without seeming very awkward, and if they do that it's sometimes a red flag and I would usually be happy walking away if they were to heavily press me at that point. Unfortunately, as I mentioned above, when people have been OK with all of this and they have actually come back with their offer, it has been not just a tiny bit below my ideal, but way, way off base from what I was previously earning, let alone what I was actually seeking to earn in the new role.
fweespee_ch 11y ago
> One of my negotiation principles is "Don't disclose your current or desired salary" during the negotiation. With persistence, the recruiter or hiring manager will usually just move on. Honestly, discussing desired salary is a good screening tool and when following advice like this I find ~50% of job applications are a waste of my time. So desired salary is an important filter if a job doesn't state the salary range.
- robertcope 11y ago
  I just tell them "I need to be making at least X". It's a good screen for me. Most of them aren't anywhere near my number.
  - vidarh 11y ago
    At least two of my past jobs were jobs where the employers stated range was substantially below what I was finally offered, so this can backfire. In one case I negotiated my way up 50% over the initial offer, and the initial offer was already at the top of the advertised range. In the other I got 30% above the top of the range + about twice the options. Both cases it was the situation where they realised I was overqualified for what they'd spec'ed, but they decided they wanted me anyway and upped their budget. I know it can often mean wasting time, but focus on whether it's a company you want to work at. If it is, see it as a way of getting on their radar, and if you can't agree for that position, ask them to keep you in mind if they get something more suitable.
deeteecee 11y ago
Here's my only question with the negotiation technique of not disclosing a desired salary. So is it expected that the other side should state the salary offer? That was my only problem with all these negotiation techniques saying "never mention your salary." Eventually, one side or the other needs to mention and at the end of it all, most articles online never closed it off with saying either side would state the expected salary.
- p4wnc6 11y ago
  The candidate could put their minimum acceptable salary in an envelope. The employer could put their maximum acceptable salary in an envelope. The two parties could agree with a third party arbiter that if the maximum from the employer is larger than the minimum from the candidate, the salary will be set to the midpoint between the two numbers, and otherwise, no deal can be reached so both walk away. That's one way, at least, where neither party has to concede the information advantage. In fact, I'm surprised there aren't already 37 start-ups that offer this as a service. You could have a cute little envelope logo like the MS Outlook logo and give a TED talk about how you're totally disrupting information asymmetry in recruiting, and eventually be pressured by techtopus to provide data about what candidates are asking for to perpetuate information asymmetry.
  - j_mcnally 11y ago
    TInder for salaries.
  - kybernetikos 11y ago
    You don't need the trusted third party. You could share the hash of the numbers so they couldn't be changed during the process, then do the millionaires problem [1] to find out which number was bigger, and finally and only if the right one is bigger, share the figures (setting the salary at the midpoint is the same as sharing the figures in terms of information transfer) and calculate it that way. The only way to not reveal the offers after a successful round would be to introduce some randomness, maybe choose a number at random from some agreed portion of the range between the numbers. I don't know if there is a zero knowledge protocol for selecting a number at random from a range where the extremes are set by two different people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Proble...
pumblechook 11y ago
One technique I've tried that seems to get a particularly stubborn hiring manager or recruiter past the salary question is giving a generic number range. Before talking to anyone I usually do some basic research to get some idea of what a generally reasonable range is for the position, and adjust that based on my situation at the time. If pressed (I still don't give it up right away) I give that range. Example: today I was talking with a recruiter about an iOS developer position. The salary question came up (in the form of: how much do you make right now?), and I gave the standard deflection about wanting to make sure the position was a right fit, etc... When pressed, I said that based on my research, the base for this position is $75k - $95k, and that a number in that range would be acceptable as a starting point for negotiation, but contingent on the details of the position. This kind of response seems to give you some wiggle room without giving up all your leverage, while giving everyone a general idea if you're in the ballpark. I only use this as a last resort if I'm getting the feeling that there is little chance I'll be able to proceed with the opportunity if I don't answer. True, by not establishing salary up front you may be wasting each others' time due to different expectations, but that is a very small risk to take compared with the potential upside of a big raise.
- noisy_boy 11y ago
  Based on the assumption that the least you would accept is your current salary, it is safe to assume that the lower range is same as your current salary i.e. using your example, a recruiter can deduce your salary is $75k.
  - Terr_ 11y ago
    > Based on the assumption that the least you would accept is your current salary, it is safe to assume that the lower range is same as your current salary "Lower bound you'd accept" != "Lower bound you SAY"
    - pumblechook 11y ago
      Exactly. The lower bound I'm prepared to give is always a raise from my current salary. I may be prepared to accept less if the opportunity is right, but my only purpose in offering this information in the first place is to get to the next stage of the process. It is a tricky thing to keep as much negotiating leverage as possible while still signaling that you can come to an agreement, which is why I only offer the number if I feel like I won't progress to the next stage without it.
knite 11y ago
I've wanted to share my thoughts and experiences regarding the "never be the first to quote a number" strategy for some time, but I usually see these threads when they're too stale to comment on. My background: I'm a senior-level engineer in my early 30s, in SF. After a consulting stint, I interviewed heavily in 2013, and again in the second half of 2015, and currently speak with 1-2 recruiter cold calls per week to keep my options open. My sample size is many dozens of intro calls, across startups ranging in maturity from 1st engineer through some of the unicorns everyone knows. In short, I agree with p4wnc6. A very relevant fraction of recruiters, say a third, will refuse to proceed until you quote a figure. This is true for internal and external recruiters. No amount of push back works with this group, they'll see you as difficult or otherwise not worth pursuing, and would rather end the discussion than proceed number-less. This leaves the two-thirds of recruiters who are willing to play ball. Now there's another problem - not quoting a number is only a good idea if you want to avoid being low-balled - it's a tremendous waste of time if your desired compensation is above the expected range. For transparency and knowledge sharing, I'll be specific: my background is in operations and infrastructure ("devops"). 90+% of the roles coming my way pay in the range of $130-180K base. My base is above this, and very few companies will be willing to pay a premium of 50% more than they expected to. No amount of wishful thinking about "your payroll is a drop in the bucket" will bridge the gap if it's too large. Which brings me to a question I'd love the answer to: other than working for the big ~6 (Google, Facebook, Uber, Apple, etc), how can I push my comp up to $2X0 (or even $3XX!)? I feel like I'm near max, so I'm biding my time until the right VP/Director/etc of Ops role comes along. Is there anything else I can do?
- p4wnc6 11y ago
  FWIW I am basically in the same situation. My base pay is in the same region you describe for yours, and I rarely see offers that are even 80% of what my salary expectation is, let alone other forms of compensation and other benefits. I am in scientific computing and machine learning, and I actually love being an implementer and a coder. I don't want to be a people manager (mostly because I think all companies force managers to treat their subordinates in unhealthy ways, and no matter how good your intentions are, being a manager will ruin your humanity). I worry about finding any job, and then further worry about what growth path there could possibly be.
enraged_camel 11y ago
I interview techies, and I always make a point to ask them to give me their expected salary range. The purpose behind this isn't to one-up them and pay them as little as possible. It's just in both parties' best interest to avoid wasting time if the expected pay is too high. Neither we nor the candidate want to go through several rounds of interviews for something that ultimately won't work out. And at the opposite end of the spectrum, if a candidate gives a number that's too low, we ignore that and offer them what we think they are worth (which is a higher number). Our reasoning is simple: if we treat people fairly, they will be more loyal and less likely to jump ship at the earliest opportunity that pays more.
- tamana 11y ago
  Why don't you just tell the candidate your offer range and let them decide if they are interested? Because you aren't honest at all, to system is trying to get rmpoyees for less.
- p4wnc6 11y ago
  A lot of recruiters say that it's not about ensuring the candidate gets the lower end of their expected range, but that's just what they say. I actually have a friend who worked at one of the aggressive boutique recruiting firms who mostly focus on the New York investment banking jobs. He told me that almost always, their client companies would tell them that if they were able to get a candidate to come in with a salary below X, the recruiting firm would get an extra bonus on top of their commission, and the bonus was priced to make sure it was more lucrative to try to suppress candidate wages than to adequately represent the candidate's higher-end expectation. Whenever I hear a recruiter say anything like, "Look, I don't get paid unless you do so clearly I'm trying to get you the most that I can..." it's an immediate dealbreaker. They are probably being paid a bonus precisely to ensure I come in at a lower salary than what I could otherwise command.
  - mdpopescu 11y ago
    Agreed. I had two different recruiters offer to increase my contract rate when I told them I had accepted another offer. That suggests to me that they're paid amount $X and were offering me $Y < $X, with their commission being the difference.
plainOldText 11y ago
Actually, contrary to popular belief the party that makes the first offer could have the upper hand. This advantage is due to what psychologists call "the anchoring principle" [1], which is one of many cognitive biases. [1] Thinking, Fast and Slow - by Daniel Kahneman [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-make-first-offer-2014-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-make-first-o...
- tempestn 11y ago
  I really agree with this. As a business owner, I definitely find if I'm talking to someone good and they confidently state a number that's above my intended range (but not completely nuts) I'll start thinking along the lines of how I could make that work, or at least make an offer that wouldn't be completely out of their expected range. It only works if you're someone they really want to hire though, and if you know what's a good amount to ask for. If I'm at all on the fence about someone and they quote a crazy high number, there isn't much point in continuing. (Whereas if they'd held off, perhaps they could have convinced me they were worth hiring, and then negotiate a bit.) But if you're a great candidate, anchoring high can definitely be a good move.
  - nissimk 11y ago
    Yes, "don't say a number" is more applicable to those who are under-compensated. Since this is the case with most people, it is generally good advice. I'm not the best negotiator, but I have put myself into a position of making a pretty good salary and this is what I would suggest for someone that is trying to get a big bump higher: give them a range where the bottom number is the minimum you will accept. For example, say you're 2 years out of school, making 80k and you hear on hn and elsewhere that you should have a 100k base. When numbers come up, don't be afraid to say one first, but say "I'm looking for a base in the range of 100 - 120k.". Say that even if they just asked "what is your current comp?". If they press forward with needing to know you're current comp, eventually you will have to say it, but reiterate your required range immediately after telling then your current/history. The most important part here is that this will end the conversion with many recruiters. This helps you to know that those recruiters were not trying to help you. Just repeat with more recruiters.
Diederich 11y ago
I take the opposite approach. The last time I moved, I made a secure web page that had my current comp package, in detail, and the minimums on my required comp package, in detail. This I sent to every recruiter that had contacted me in the previous 18 months. Scores of them. Before I would speak to any of them on the phone, I'd get a soft confirmation via e-mail that they had a position that could meet my requirements. The web page also had information about what areas I was willing to commute to. I've used variants of this approach for more than 20 years, and it's working exceedingly well.
- mixmastamyk 11y ago
  Is it necessary to state your current info?
  - ryanbrunner 11y ago
    Personally, I think it's worthwhile to include, as social proof. If another company was paying $X and was perfectly happy with the employee, $X plus a modest / reasonable $Y doesn't seem so crazy. It shows that you're not just pulling an unrealistic salary out of thin air.
    - Diederich 11y ago
      Right, though I would put "scare quotes" around "proof", since from their perspective I could be making it up. (: When things get more serious, I sometimes go over my history of compensation with them. To me, it comes down to the question: does company X need me more than I need company X? For the right people with the right skills and the right experience, the "power" is with the potential employee.
      - mixmastamyk 11y ago
        Interesting, I've never ever shared my salary with another company, and been working two decades.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
phamilton 11y ago
With startups, I disclose a target comp that's in the mid $200k range (I truly believe that's market rate at BigCo). They then make their best salary offer and try to convince me that the equity makes up for the difference. Since equity is funny money, they tend to overvalue it and it's really easy to discount its value and say the offer isn't high enough. I get a serious offer plus lots of negotiating wiggle room.

p4wnc6 11y ago

In the handful of cases where the company was OK with my non-answer about salary, and I went on to get all the way to a job offer, the salary ended up being entirely miscalibrated to a candidate of my skill and experience, and the overall interview process (which usually included some technical screens, programming tests, take-home tests, and long on-site technical interviews) was a massive waste of my time, not to mention extremely stressful. Places where I experienced this gross miscalibration: a large U.S. food retailer's digital analytics team; a small pharmaceutical research software company; a 25-year-old multinational scientific computing and supercomputing consulting firm; and an FFRDC research lab attached to a university. In one of these places they even went on at length about how much the hiring manager liked me, how I fit all the skills they were seeking, and many team members remarked that I would "mesh instantly" with the team, and so forth. I had walked away from those interviews knowing that I had done a good job and feeling very confident. Then they made a job offer than was around 75% of what I had been making before in a similar job in a similar cost of living area, and the new job's other benefits were far worse. When I told them what I was making before, they just said, "it just looks like there's a bit of a gap here that we are unable to make up, but we think you'll be very happy on this team so we hope you'll consider our offer despite that." The people interviewing me in that company had even gone on at length about how successful their business unit had been recently, signing a new important contract, and how their biggest challenge was recruiting good people and staffing up to support some projects that had important deadlines looming towards the end of 2016. I still continue to avoid sharing salary info, because I'm not convinced that sharing it would be better. But I think what you might not be accounting for is that almost every single candidate in the tech world does share salary, freely and openly, from the very first minute they are asked, without even realizing it might have any side effects. A lot of corporate recruiters are conditioned to expect this, and the minute someone fails to share salary, they flag them as "not a dope, can't hire them cheaply" and they just move on. Constraint number one, above any and all talent requirements, is that they must be cheap to hire ... for a lot of firms.

lexhaynes 11y ago
How do you respond when they ask you for your salary information? Would it be perceuved as rude to say "I decline to state"?
- p4wnc6 11y ago
  I have practiced that part and read just about everything I can find about it. Generally I say something like, "I appreciate the need to consider salary as an important part of the process, but since we have only just started talking about the position I feel it would be best to make sure that I really am the sort of technical and cultural fit you are looking for. If we can determine that I am the right fit for the role, then the salary information will fall into place at the appropriate time. But if it seems that I am not the right fit for your team, then no amount of salary discussions will be able to help us." I have a few variations on that kind of description that I use. It's entirely possible that the way I say it can come off as rude, and I think that did happen to me especially a few times when I first started doing this. But I have practiced it, asked friends for advice about how to say it better, how it sounds, etc., and researched a lot about this online. So I have some confidence that it is coming off as strong and assertive, but not rude, and it is communicated clearly in good-faith because I truly am primarily interested in whether the cultural fit is a good one. Even so, these kinds of HR-approved ways of talking only ever result in about a 95% chance of immediate rejection. Whenever I have made it past the initial question about salary, and eventually salary comes up again towards the stage when an offer is made, I have a different way of talking about it. At that stage, if they ask me again, I will usually say something like, "I have spoken with the team and had a great chance to learn about your company and how I could fit in with this role. If you have a particular salary range that you'd like to share with me, I can definitely let you know how it will match up with my expectations." Again, I have some slight variations on that, but it's more or less the same idea of changing their question asked of me into my question asked of them. They can't keep coming back and specifically asking me for a number without seeming very awkward, and if they do that it's sometimes a red flag and I would usually be happy walking away if they were to heavily press me at that point. Unfortunately, as I mentioned above, when people have been OK with all of this and they have actually come back with their offer, it has been not just a tiny bit below my ideal, but way, way off base from what I was previously earning, let alone what I was actually seeking to earn in the new role.

fweespee_ch 11y ago

> One of my negotiation principles is "Don't disclose your current or desired salary" during the negotiation. With persistence, the recruiter or hiring manager will usually just move on. Honestly, discussing desired salary is a good screening tool and when following advice like this I find ~50% of job applications are a waste of my time. So desired salary is an important filter if a job doesn't state the salary range.

robertcope 11y ago
I just tell them "I need to be making at least X". It's a good screen for me. Most of them aren't anywhere near my number.
- vidarh 11y ago
  At least two of my past jobs were jobs where the employers stated range was substantially below what I was finally offered, so this can backfire. In one case I negotiated my way up 50% over the initial offer, and the initial offer was already at the top of the advertised range. In the other I got 30% above the top of the range + about twice the options. Both cases it was the situation where they realised I was overqualified for what they'd spec'ed, but they decided they wanted me anyway and upped their budget. I know it can often mean wasting time, but focus on whether it's a company you want to work at. If it is, see it as a way of getting on their radar, and if you can't agree for that position, ask them to keep you in mind if they get something more suitable.

deeteecee 11y ago

Here's my only question with the negotiation technique of not disclosing a desired salary. So is it expected that the other side should state the salary offer? That was my only problem with all these negotiation techniques saying "never mention your salary." Eventually, one side or the other needs to mention and at the end of it all, most articles online never closed it off with saying either side would state the expected salary.

p4wnc6 11y ago
The candidate could put their minimum acceptable salary in an envelope. The employer could put their maximum acceptable salary in an envelope. The two parties could agree with a third party arbiter that if the maximum from the employer is larger than the minimum from the candidate, the salary will be set to the midpoint between the two numbers, and otherwise, no deal can be reached so both walk away. That's one way, at least, where neither party has to concede the information advantage. In fact, I'm surprised there aren't already 37 start-ups that offer this as a service. You could have a cute little envelope logo like the MS Outlook logo and give a TED talk about how you're totally disrupting information asymmetry in recruiting, and eventually be pressured by techtopus to provide data about what candidates are asking for to perpetuate information asymmetry.
- j_mcnally 11y ago
  TInder for salaries.
- kybernetikos 11y ago
  You don't need the trusted third party. You could share the hash of the numbers so they couldn't be changed during the process, then do the millionaires problem [1] to find out which number was bigger, and finally and only if the right one is bigger, share the figures (setting the salary at the midpoint is the same as sharing the figures in terms of information transfer) and calculate it that way. The only way to not reveal the offers after a successful round would be to introduce some randomness, maybe choose a number at random from some agreed portion of the range between the numbers. I don't know if there is a zero knowledge protocol for selecting a number at random from a range where the extremes are set by two different people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Proble...

pumblechook 11y ago

One technique I've tried that seems to get a particularly stubborn hiring manager or recruiter past the salary question is giving a generic number range. Before talking to anyone I usually do some basic research to get some idea of what a generally reasonable range is for the position, and adjust that based on my situation at the time. If pressed (I still don't give it up right away) I give that range. Example: today I was talking with a recruiter about an iOS developer position. The salary question came up (in the form of: how much do you make right now?), and I gave the standard deflection about wanting to make sure the position was a right fit, etc... When pressed, I said that based on my research, the base for this position is $75k - $95k, and that a number in that range would be acceptable as a starting point for negotiation, but contingent on the details of the position. This kind of response seems to give you some wiggle room without giving up all your leverage, while giving everyone a general idea if you're in the ballpark. I only use this as a last resort if I'm getting the feeling that there is little chance I'll be able to proceed with the opportunity if I don't answer. True, by not establishing salary up front you may be wasting each others' time due to different expectations, but that is a very small risk to take compared with the potential upside of a big raise.

noisy_boy 11y ago
Based on the assumption that the least you would accept is your current salary, it is safe to assume that the lower range is same as your current salary i.e. using your example, a recruiter can deduce your salary is $75k.
- Terr_ 11y ago
  > Based on the assumption that the least you would accept is your current salary, it is safe to assume that the lower range is same as your current salary "Lower bound you'd accept" != "Lower bound you SAY"
  - pumblechook 11y ago
    Exactly. The lower bound I'm prepared to give is always a raise from my current salary. I may be prepared to accept less if the opportunity is right, but my only purpose in offering this information in the first place is to get to the next stage of the process. It is a tricky thing to keep as much negotiating leverage as possible while still signaling that you can come to an agreement, which is why I only offer the number if I feel like I won't progress to the next stage without it.

knite 11y ago

I've wanted to share my thoughts and experiences regarding the "never be the first to quote a number" strategy for some time, but I usually see these threads when they're too stale to comment on. My background: I'm a senior-level engineer in my early 30s, in SF. After a consulting stint, I interviewed heavily in 2013, and again in the second half of 2015, and currently speak with 1-2 recruiter cold calls per week to keep my options open. My sample size is many dozens of intro calls, across startups ranging in maturity from 1st engineer through some of the unicorns everyone knows. In short, I agree with p4wnc6. A very relevant fraction of recruiters, say a third, will refuse to proceed until you quote a figure. This is true for internal and external recruiters. No amount of push back works with this group, they'll see you as difficult or otherwise not worth pursuing, and would rather end the discussion than proceed number-less. This leaves the two-thirds of recruiters who are willing to play ball. Now there's another problem - not quoting a number is only a good idea if you want to avoid being low-balled - it's a tremendous waste of time if your desired compensation is above the expected range. For transparency and knowledge sharing, I'll be specific: my background is in operations and infrastructure ("devops"). 90+% of the roles coming my way pay in the range of $130-180K base. My base is above this, and very few companies will be willing to pay a premium of 50% more than they expected to. No amount of wishful thinking about "your payroll is a drop in the bucket" will bridge the gap if it's too large. Which brings me to a question I'd love the answer to: other than working for the big ~6 (Google, Facebook, Uber, Apple, etc), how can I push my comp up to $2X0 (or even $3XX!)? I feel like I'm near max, so I'm biding my time until the right VP/Director/etc of Ops role comes along. Is there anything else I can do?

p4wnc6 11y ago
FWIW I am basically in the same situation. My base pay is in the same region you describe for yours, and I rarely see offers that are even 80% of what my salary expectation is, let alone other forms of compensation and other benefits. I am in scientific computing and machine learning, and I actually love being an implementer and a coder. I don't want to be a people manager (mostly because I think all companies force managers to treat their subordinates in unhealthy ways, and no matter how good your intentions are, being a manager will ruin your humanity). I worry about finding any job, and then further worry about what growth path there could possibly be.

enraged_camel 11y ago

I interview techies, and I always make a point to ask them to give me their expected salary range. The purpose behind this isn't to one-up them and pay them as little as possible. It's just in both parties' best interest to avoid wasting time if the expected pay is too high. Neither we nor the candidate want to go through several rounds of interviews for something that ultimately won't work out. And at the opposite end of the spectrum, if a candidate gives a number that's too low, we ignore that and offer them what we think they are worth (which is a higher number). Our reasoning is simple: if we treat people fairly, they will be more loyal and less likely to jump ship at the earliest opportunity that pays more.

tamana 11y ago
Why don't you just tell the candidate your offer range and let them decide if they are interested? Because you aren't honest at all, to system is trying to get rmpoyees for less.
p4wnc6 11y ago
A lot of recruiters say that it's not about ensuring the candidate gets the lower end of their expected range, but that's just what they say. I actually have a friend who worked at one of the aggressive boutique recruiting firms who mostly focus on the New York investment banking jobs. He told me that almost always, their client companies would tell them that if they were able to get a candidate to come in with a salary below X, the recruiting firm would get an extra bonus on top of their commission, and the bonus was priced to make sure it was more lucrative to try to suppress candidate wages than to adequately represent the candidate's higher-end expectation. Whenever I hear a recruiter say anything like, "Look, I don't get paid unless you do so clearly I'm trying to get you the most that I can..." it's an immediate dealbreaker. They are probably being paid a bonus precisely to ensure I come in at a lower salary than what I could otherwise command.
- mdpopescu 11y ago
  Agreed. I had two different recruiters offer to increase my contract rate when I told them I had accepted another offer. That suggests to me that they're paid amount $X and were offering me $Y < $X, with their commission being the difference.

plainOldText 11y ago

Actually, contrary to popular belief the party that makes the first offer could have the upper hand. This advantage is due to what psychologists call "the anchoring principle" [1], which is one of many cognitive biases. [1] Thinking, Fast and Slow - by Daniel Kahneman [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-make-first-offer-2014-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-make-first-o...

tempestn 11y ago
I really agree with this. As a business owner, I definitely find if I'm talking to someone good and they confidently state a number that's above my intended range (but not completely nuts) I'll start thinking along the lines of how I could make that work, or at least make an offer that wouldn't be completely out of their expected range. It only works if you're someone they really want to hire though, and if you know what's a good amount to ask for. If I'm at all on the fence about someone and they quote a crazy high number, there isn't much point in continuing. (Whereas if they'd held off, perhaps they could have convinced me they were worth hiring, and then negotiate a bit.) But if you're a great candidate, anchoring high can definitely be a good move.
- nissimk 11y ago
  Yes, "don't say a number" is more applicable to those who are under-compensated. Since this is the case with most people, it is generally good advice. I'm not the best negotiator, but I have put myself into a position of making a pretty good salary and this is what I would suggest for someone that is trying to get a big bump higher: give them a range where the bottom number is the minimum you will accept. For example, say you're 2 years out of school, making 80k and you hear on hn and elsewhere that you should have a 100k base. When numbers come up, don't be afraid to say one first, but say "I'm looking for a base in the range of 100 - 120k.". Say that even if they just asked "what is your current comp?". If they press forward with needing to know you're current comp, eventually you will have to say it, but reiterate your required range immediately after telling then your current/history. The most important part here is that this will end the conversion with many recruiters. This helps you to know that those recruiters were not trying to help you. Just repeat with more recruiters.

Diederich 11y ago

I take the opposite approach. The last time I moved, I made a secure web page that had my current comp package, in detail, and the minimums on my required comp package, in detail. This I sent to every recruiter that had contacted me in the previous 18 months. Scores of them. Before I would speak to any of them on the phone, I'd get a soft confirmation via e-mail that they had a position that could meet my requirements. The web page also had information about what areas I was willing to commute to. I've used variants of this approach for more than 20 years, and it's working exceedingly well.

mixmastamyk 11y ago
Is it necessary to state your current info?
- ryanbrunner 11y ago
  Personally, I think it's worthwhile to include, as social proof. If another company was paying $X and was perfectly happy with the employee, $X plus a modest / reasonable $Y doesn't seem so crazy. It shows that you're not just pulling an unrealistic salary out of thin air.
  - Diederich 11y ago
    Right, though I would put "scare quotes" around "proof", since from their perspective I could be making it up. (: When things get more serious, I sometimes go over my history of compensation with them. To me, it comes down to the question: does company X need me more than I need company X? For the right people with the right skills and the right experience, the "power" is with the potential employee.
    - mixmastamyk 11y ago
      Interesting, I've never ever shared my salary with another company, and been working two decades.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

phamilton 11y ago

With startups, I disclose a target comp that's in the mid $200k range (I truly believe that's market rate at BigCo). They then make their best salary offer and try to convince me that the equity makes up for the difference. Since equity is funny money, they tend to overvalue it and it's really easy to discount its value and say the offer isn't high enough. I get a serious offer plus lots of negotiating wiggle room.