13 ms·

I've heard this "don't name a number first" advice so many times, but personally, it never seems to work. My current comp is significantly higher compared to ot

• SapphireSun 10y ago
  The point of the advice seems to be that you might get lucky and they'll name a higher price, so if you happen to know that they won't you have more information than they do and can set the anchor point appropriately I suppose. I'm not going to claim I'm some kind of master negotiator though.
• daxfohl 10y ago
  Perhaps try turning it on its head. Ask the interviewer what their salary range is, before they ask you.
  • linkregister 10y ago
    This sounds like some naive advice. Almost always salary range is discussed through a recruiter. This likely will be fruitless and will make you look like an amateur.
  • withdavidli 10y ago
    Adding to linkregister's reply. Unless it's the hiring manager, the interviewer likely doesn't have access to that information. The interviews are to judge skill and if everyone wants to work with one another. There are also different leveling with the title, so they won't know the range until all the interviews are finished. And while money is important, it comes off as you're only interested in the money to the interviewer. Your statement also says interviewer instead of recruiter, was that a mistake? I have never had an interviewer discussing salary range, maybe cost of living in the area, but not salary range for the role.
• cortesoft 10y ago
  If the offer comes in way too low, you can choose at that point to give your current salary. If you gave the current salary in beginning, you can't take back that bit of information.
  • mehrdada 10y ago
    This would work fine except you may not have a ton of time to waste. The problem is, in practice, as someone with an outlier comp, you may end up having to go interview at a company only to realize at the end of the whole interview dance when they cough up a number that such number is nowhere close to your expectations. (That said, I completely agree that it is generally good advice to not disclose your salary expectations in most cases. This is especially true for junior hackers without full awareness of the market conditions, who I have seen consistently underestimate their salary potential.)
    • zenlikethat 10y ago
      As another poster noted, the best way to resolve this is to ask the recruiter up front what the salary range at play is. If they still won't disclose, you have to make a calculated risk based on how much you like the org and how much they seem likely to offer.
      • mehrdada 10y ago
        Yes, and many savvy recruiters would make you make the calculated risk anyway. Note that at that stage, the recruiters are highly incentivized to say or allude to "we can beat everyone/are competitive" without saying a number and make you interview with the company at the beginning of the process (with various excuses, including not having the authority to talk about actual numbers and that decision being prorogued to a distinct person/team, but rest assured that we beat others according to your interview performance) and you later learn their guesstimate was far off.
        • zenlikethat 10y ago
• potatolicious 10y ago
  I'm in a similar boat - and definitely not naming a number first has caused friction when the initial offer ends up coming in way below my existing comp. But I'm sticking with the strategy. Ultimately the jobs where, in a vacuum and asked to value the job themselves, they come up with a number a sad fraction of your current comp, there was simply no scenario in which you would have been happy with comp at that place. It is simply the wrong job/company, and a change in negotiating tactic would not have fixed it. The lowball initial offer ruffles some feathers and produces bad feelings, but ultimately does not change the outcome of the game. Where withholding your current comp matters is where you're looking to make a step up - either a position with more seniority/responsibility, or simply at a company that pays people more. In these cases you have some knowledge that the upper end of the envelope is higher than your current comp, and so you don't want to anchor the negotiation low right off the bat. Knowledge of how much companies pay for what positions is invaluable in negotiation - personally I wouldn't even bother interviewing at places where I know for certain the comp won't hit my expectations. Side note: Glassdoor is incredibly bad for this kind of intelligence. Their medians lean low and the upper end of the envelope is in my experience almost entirely unrepresented. If you go in assuming the comp envelope is what Glassdoor says it is, you will lowball yourself severely.
  • chefkoch 10y ago
    >personally I wouldn't even bother interviewing at places where I know for certain the comp won't hit my expectations Why would anyone do that?
    • potatolicious 10y ago
      I dunno, yet people do. More commonly though I think people just aren't aware of the market situation, and comp ranges for specific jobs at specific companies. Knowing the lay of the compensation land in your area is pretty critical to negotiating well - from both sides of the table. And this goes beyond generalities like "market salary" but to specific recent offers made for specific jobs at specific companies.
      • 10y ago
• nimblegorilla 10y ago
  I think this advice works best for people with esteem issues. If you constantly undervalue your worth then of course other people tend to offer more than your initial amount.
• fourneau 10y ago
  The way I see it is that it boils down to: how likely will the employer greatly surpass your asking price? If the likelihood is low, you should lead. If the likelihood is high, then you should let them lead. In my opinion, with negotiations, (as much as people hate negotiations in this thread) nothing ever generically applies as not all people are expert negotiators... (including this advice I guess...)
• designtofly 10y ago
  I agree with you. I see this advice constantly parroted about, but I just cringe at the amount of work these people go through to avoid naming a number. If you want to deflect the first time the question is asked, fine. But if you have to deflect more than once, you won't come off like a professional. A professional knows their value. If you follow all of the rest of the advice, like doing your research, you'll know what you are worth and it shouldn't be a problem naming a fair price. The other point I have is that the first number isn't all that important. Yes, it might anchor the starting point, but you'll be in a stronger negotiating position when the written offer is actually made. I just went through this recently. Yes, their hiring manager asked me what my requirement was for a salary and I gave them a number without any fuss. In their first formal offer, they gave me the number I wanted; however, by that point in the hiring process, it was clear that I was a top candidate, and with other competing offers, I was able to get them to come up another 30%. In the end, I don't think the best approach is to force the company to make the first offer. They aren't going to give their best offer if you force them to make the first move. The only time that strategy might make sense is if your best number is much lower than their worst number; in that case, you did a lousy job in the research phase and need to take a step back.
  • carc 10y ago
    A person with some fixed 'value' X can be worth much higher to one company than some other company. In fact that is extremely common. Value is relative here so I completely disagree with your "a professional knows their value" sentiment.
    • designtofly 10y ago
      I don't understand your argument. I never said any value is fixed. Of course a person's value changes from role to role and from company to company. Part of doing your research is understanding the pain points for the company and the value you bring by fixing those pain points. If you disagree with "a professional knows their value," what are you arguing? That "a professional doesn't know their value?"
      • 10y ago
• theli0nheart 10y ago
  I tend to agree with you as well. I think in a market where a given role is undervalued, you might get a better salary by "fishing" a little bit and letting the company guess. But software engineering is a highly valued profession and employers aren't likely to shortchange a good engineer. IMO playing these games can just seem unprofessional. You're best off naming a range, with a stretch goal, and giving a little bit of context to the person asking. E.g., "I'm looking for $150-180k, but I'm interviewing with a few other companies, so anything in addition to that would really put this role at the top of my list. I'd really love to work for you, so I hope we can find something that works for the both of us." Notice how there's an implied "+ $X" in there. That X-factor can make all the difference and with this approach you don't come off looking like someone who's just playing games.
• quaffapint 10y ago
  Biggest problem I have is base salary vs overall 'salary'. Recruiters always ask what salary I'm looking for. How does one answer that, when you consider benefits, 401k, average bonus, etc. It could be $10k difference. So, I usually say I need to see the whole package they are offering to get you a number.
  • basseq 10y ago
    Be clear: "I am looking for a competitive package that includes base, bonus, equity, 401(k), and benefits." Then either: "I am looking for total comp package of $XX." or "I am looking for a base salary of $YY."
  • 15155 10y ago
    Never communicate or discuss a dollar amount without suffixing it with "base." All of those other perks are either known, standard, or negotiable after the fact. In general - save for a publicly traded company issuing RSUs - base salary is the most important factor to be optimizing for.
• Tactic 10y ago
  In my mind not naming your number first is advise given only if you are trying to maximize the negotiation. And even then it is quite debatable. I view it instead that I am offering a service. I am well aware of what my service is worth, what my financial needs are and what amount would make me feel satisfied with what I am being paid. So I tell them that number. I also tell them that the number is only negotiable in the sense of benefit trade-offs. I have built into my "price tag" such things as medical payments, etc. If they can offset some of those from salary to benefits that does not bother me. In the end my needs are met and I am happy. I refuse to see the relationship with an employer as adversarial. It is a business relationship, I treat it as such and demand they do as well. Otherwise I don't do business with them.
  • nissimk 10y ago
    Very well said. I don't find it necessary to maximized my result in a negotiation. I'd like to feel that I did well, but maxing out is not necessary. I've done very well for myself with this strategy so it really can work. I've seen the "refuse to say a number" tactic fail for candidates in the past. I distinctly remember hearing a manager on the phone with an agency recruiter saying that he wasn't going to interview someone if they wouldn't disclose their current comp.
    • tamana 10y ago
      And that manager is not someone good to work for
  • 15155 10y ago
    > I am well aware of what my service is worth This is the first and most important thing to understand and know before entering a negotiation. Without this fact, your negotiating ability is irrelevant (and kind of inherently non-existent), as you're operating blind. With that being said: many do not know what they are worth, to their dismay. > I refuse to see the relationship with an employer as adversarial I frame as such: You're two businesses/professionals trying to reach a meeting of the minds. You both want the same thing.
  • deleted 10y ago
• alain94040 10y ago
  The problem is that advice you read on Internet is geared toward the average person, not you. It's true that the #1 mistake people make is to sell themselves short by giving away a (low) salary upfront. So it makes sense for the Internet to emphasize that advice: it helps the most people and therefore has the most impact. On average. Why can't "the Internet" know that I'm not average? Based on my web browsing history alone, the Internet should know that I have reached expert level in resume and salary compensation discussions. So don't show me the stuff for beginners. There has to be some startup idea in there somewhere. All the raw data is there. Deep learning is hot. Who will come up with the first usable "Internet persona" or "Custom Internet" concept that actually works?
  • fecak 10y ago
    >It's true that the #1 mistake people make is to sell themselves short by giving away a (low) salary upfront. As an agency/3rd party recruiter/headhunter who asks people questions about salary all the time (current or desired), I'd argue that the #1 mistake people make is saying that they are willing to negotiate before getting any objection. I've written about this at length, but the typical conversation goes like this. ME: "How much are you looking to make?" CANDIDATE: "I'm looking for 100K." ME: PAUSES TO TAKE NOTE CANDIDATE: "...But I'm always willing to negotiate" I haven't even said "no" and they are already negotiating against themselves. Any hiring manager dealing with junior level candidates will likely know this tendency for inexperienced negotiators to mention flexibility when greeted with any silence, so they'll incorporate that silence into their "script".
• jkempe11 10y ago
  I am a recruiter and I will tell you this: you should abandon this advice, for certain. It's funny - probably the best advice anyone ever gives on negotiation is exactly the opposite of "don't name a number first." It's "anchor high." You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. This is especially true for senior- and late-career individuals who have some experience under their belt.
  • 15155 10y ago
    "Don't name a number first" is advice that really only pays dividends to those who don't know their worth. Those who do know their relative worth are already playing a different game than the former, and will probably be able to reap more advancement and value than someone "getting lucky" by having a company mess up and issue a highball offer. When entering a negotiation, you should know your worth and be able to articulate your reasoning behind it. In my experience, it's much easier for me to articulate how I am going to create value and justify my compensation than it is for the counter party to justify their beliefs I am not worth what I say I am. Usually, if diplomacy fails, it's because the entire team is anchored at a comp range that I would never consider. In that event, though, the counter party has done me a valuable favor: I do not want to work with individuals who are paid less than me.
    • tedmiston 10y ago
      Your worth does not necessarily equal what value a company places on a given role they are trying to place you for.
      • 15155 10y ago
        Correct! But this is exactly the definition of "fit." When I was speaking about "worth" before, naturally one must scope their estimation to the market they're trying to sell to. Market worth is only what the market is willing to pay for something. If you've got a broad, valuable skillset, but a company can only use 10% of it, they can rightfully scope the role and issue an offer or decline to issue an offer. What isn't okay, though, is taking the scoped offer and then performing in a far wider capacity - that is the very essence of being undervalued and/or underpaid.
• fsloth 10y ago
  I suppose it's a good rule of thumb while figuring out the dynamics and the influence game of the negotiations. The best thing I did for my negotiation skill was to read up popular psychology books on influence. It may not make me a negotiations pro but just being able to name some of the dynamics and recognize some of the tactics puts me (or so I feel) at a far better position at the discussions. E.g. it's easier to play football if someone explains the rules, especially if the opposing team is used to playing against players whoa are completely clueless of the game. In this context "don't name a number" is analogous to "be aware of the leverage at play, and don't yield leverage to the other side unless you know where the game is".
  • erikb 10y ago
    I would agree with your first statement "good for learning" if learning would be about maximing each result of a learning experience. But actually learning is more efficient if you do mistakes that you can evaluate and make decisions based on them. And if you don't say a number you don't make a mistake. Therefore I would say that not saying anything may increase your knowledge of your value but it doesn't increase your skill. Saying the wrong number, walking out happily and later learning from a coworker that you earn only 25% of him, then you learn something and look for another job.
    • bbcbasic 10y ago
      That makes no sense to me. What does being underpaid teach you?
      • erikb 10y ago
        Nothing. But finding out how you ended up being underpaid does. The mistake was not getting a paycheck but the bargaining for the amount. The difference between what you should get and what you get is money you pay for your education.
• basseq 10y ago
  There's also the concept of a negotiation anchor. In that it's better to name the first number and make it borderline ridiculous and in your favor. So that anything lower seems like a deal. Hypothetical situation time. I'm a job seeker and my minimum acceptable salary is $100k. You're a recruiter and your range is $80-$120k. Neither of us know the others' number. If I make you say a number first, you would start at the bottom of your range. (Why not?) Now I'm "negotiating up" to my minimum. Alternatively, I go first and anchor at $150k. Now it's much more difficult to lowball me at $80k, and we'll probably "negotiate down" to your maximum. The key with this technique is setting a good anchor. Too high (e.g., $200k) and you'll just walk away. Too low (e.g., $120k) and you'll whittle me down because you know you can negotiate. ----- Bottom line is knowing what you're worth and quickly testing whether you're in the ballpark. If you go into interviews without having a sense of whether the company will give you a competitive offer, you're wasting everyone's time. (And you have a bad HR department.) Don't use ranges: the employer will hear the lower number. Just say, "The market rate for this kind of role is $150k base. I'd look for a competitive overall comp package, and we can talk about salary, bonus, and equity. Is that what you had in mind?" You'll get one of three answers: 1. "Yes, that's in range." (And you can probably negotiate up.) 2. "No, that's too high. We were thinking $x." (Now you know where you stand, and how far apart you are. <20% is negotiation. Note that if they don't give you $x, don't give another number: you're just negotiating against yourself.) 3. "Ehh, it's on the higher end, but I think we can make this work." (Might actually be #1, but otherwise means you're in the sweet spot.)
  • Infernal 10y ago
    The first half of your post reduces to "know how much the prospective employer is willing to pay". Anchoring high only works if you know what "high" is. If the recruiter had a 150k-200k range in mind, and you throw out 150k, then you've just cheated yourself. There's lots of advice in this thread to "know what you're worth", but where is that signal coming from?
    • basseq 10y ago
      Market research, competitive offers, friends... there are a lot of sources. If you don't have at least a sense, it doesn't matter what negotiation tactic you're using. Maxing out at $200k would just be a factor of luck or a mistake on the part of the company. Anchoring is merely a technique: the first half of my post boils down to "it's ok to throw out the first number".
• erikb 10y ago
  Agreed. Setting both as a fixed part of your strategy is wrong. Always saying the first number or always waiting for the other one. The more information and leverage and options you have the more you want to say a number. And the other way around. In a few weeks I will have a job interview but the job is only partly interesting to me. I can earn my money without that job, so I can say no. And the chances that I'm really interested are currently 45% yes to 55% no. In that situation I would either tell him "I'm not interested if you don't give me a high number" or I would tell him something I consider high myself. His starting number is certainly much lower than what I would consider my "yes" range.
• maxxxxx 10y ago
  I always name a high number. That seems to set the tone for the discussion and they don't even try the lowball offer.
• wdr1 10y ago
  I've had the opposite experience. I've avoided naming the number at least twice where the company then offered something higher than the range I had in mind. Better, since I didn't start, I was able to still negotiate on top of their initial offer.
• ecesena 10y ago
  The first number is the anchor. If you can truly support an high number, then you should place the anchor high. In a good negotiation, if you give an info you can expect an info back, so that's also your opportunity to request something. For instance you may want to ask how the bonus structure looks like, or what's their view on remote work. And gain from there, negotiation is not just about money.
• joesmo 10y ago
  It's terrible advice as most companies are not likely in the range one is seeking and therefore are just a colossal waste of time. Seriously this article tells me to do three phone screens and one or two in person interviews before finding out the company is so far short of what I'm seeking that I won't take the job regardless of any other factors. Sometimes I wonder about people who write such advice and question whether they have actually gone through the job finding process while working another job, or worse, while watching one's emergency fund dwindle while unemployed. My experience suggests otherwise.
• siddharthdeswal 10y ago
  In cases like yours, it's wise to start by asking "Just to be clear, may I understand what's your budget for this position/role?" Most recruiters immediately get the hint and you can gracefully exit if they're expecting to pay far below your current comp. Edited answer to be less preachy.