8 ms·

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

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.
    - tedmiston 10y ago
      Is it? I've always looked at fit more from company culture, team dynamic, overall team skill level (A players, B players, etc.) vs. something that's directly associated with a certain compensation package.
      - 15155 10y ago
        Refining: it's a mutual combination of factors, but relative compensation is certainly a strong proxy for some of those factors (skill level, in particular).
mehrdada 10y ago
> You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. I very much agree with you and my other comments in this thread are very much advocating for this position. I'd just like to add an important caveat by saying anecdotally in multiple occasions I've seen friends (notably people who are just moving in to the Valley from elsewhere and/or right out of college) tend to widely underestimate the "realistic" estimation in your advice (they know in abstract that salaries are "high" but don't necessarily concretely know how high), and therefore following it can be dangerous and would mean lowballing themselves. Hence, not saying anything might result in a better net result end of the day.
- sillysaurus3 10y ago
  Want to name some numbers? Ideally with context. I'd like to know how high is high in SV. Especially for junior positions.
  - throwawoah 10y ago
    24 y.o college grad software engineer at "Big Tech" company in the valley. Started at 107.5k with promotion and raise to 120k
  - dlubarov 10y ago
    I'd say if you're in SV, have a pretty good background, interview at top-paying public firms like Google/Facebook, get good scores, and negotiate very well, you can expect around - new grad: ~175k - 4 years: ~300k - 6 years: ~350k Note that I'm including equity, expected cash bonuses, 401k matching, and sign-on bonuses (which I normally divide by 4, since 4 years seems like a typical period to stay at these companies).
    - teen 10y ago
      the 4/6 year ones are way too high unless you're going for some sort of specific role they need. like if you specialize in robotics or machine learning
ryanSrich 10y ago
I honestly never understood the notion of not naming a number first (that is if you know what you're worth). Take the number you want to make, add 15%, and they'll likely negotiate down to the actual number you want. It's really not that hard. Take this as an example: Say you currently make $80k and you want a 10% bump. So you're looking for $88k. Take that number and add 15%. Your ask is now around $100k. They may say something like "we actually start all new engineers off at a base salary of $85,000". This gives you a ton of power in negotiating just a $3k bump. If you had said you wanted $88k, that "starting salary" would have likely been $75k. Thus making it a pretty big leap to the $88k you wanted.
- vehementi 10y ago
  The rationale (which I don't agree with) is "what if their range is a lot higher than your guess? Then you're losing out!"
  - deanCommie 10y ago
    That's what things like Glassdoor are for
    - what_ever 10y ago
      Glassdoor data is often not good indicator as you can filter by only recent reports. So some numbers can be older than 5 years.
- tamana 10y ago
  Your example numbers show how you lastly underestimate what tech jobs pay, and you are inviting an employer to low ball and you won't even know
  - sciurus 10y ago
    No, that would be a decent salary for early to mid career tech workers outside the bay area.
  - 10y ago
ugh123 10y ago
I avoid giving a number early on in conversations. Rather than naming a number, I like to 'seed' the conversation with talk about market rate, 'premium' on top of that, and similar phrases to move them in the right direction. Establishing a position of strength can also mean other things like having the company and hiring manager invest as much time as they can in recruiting you; not hiring would be worse to them than over paying a little. Also, having other offers on the table always helps negotiating better. Even if its never mentioned to the recruiter I just happen to negotiate better with the mindset that I have other options.
- 15155 10y ago
  > Even if its never mentioned to the recruiter I just happen to negotiate better with the mindset that I have other options. Playing the game like you've got nothing to lose is what breeds the best. This applies to a lot of subjects.
cthalupa 10y ago
I generally tell a recruiter on the first phone call to tell me the salary range. If they refuse, I tell them I'm not interested. If they name a range that's low, I tell them what I'm looking for, and see if they're able to budge. If not, I tell them I'm not interested. Sometimes the range is higher than I'd initially expected and end up pleasantly surprised. Either way, I don't talk numbers first and I still don't waste time with places that can't offer the sort of salary I'm after. I'm not going to even bother with a phone interview if I don't have a firm number in hand.
Retric 10y ago
The problem is this forces everyone to know the market really well. That's one thing for a recruiter but as actual salaries are often hidden it's a serious information assemitry for most people. And many people especially women really undervalue their skills. Most people are much better off to simply ask salary ranges as the first question for a recruiter. Don't put it off and don't waste any time. Approximate location should the next question as again it minimizes wasted effort.
aubreykilian 10y ago
Agreed. I recently switched jobs after an 8 year stint at my previous employer, and it took me many months and many recruiters and possible employers, and every single time I started from the position of "Let's not waste anybody's time, my total Cost-to-Company is xyz, benefits include zyx, if you can't beat that, then we have nothing to talk about." Yes, brutally honest, but it also at least doesn't waste anybody's time with useless phone interviews and reference checks and and and.

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.
  - tedmiston 10y ago
    Is it? I've always looked at fit more from company culture, team dynamic, overall team skill level (A players, B players, etc.) vs. something that's directly associated with a certain compensation package.
    - 15155 10y ago
      Refining: it's a mutual combination of factors, but relative compensation is certainly a strong proxy for some of those factors (skill level, in particular).

mehrdada 10y ago

> You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. I very much agree with you and my other comments in this thread are very much advocating for this position. I'd just like to add an important caveat by saying anecdotally in multiple occasions I've seen friends (notably people who are just moving in to the Valley from elsewhere and/or right out of college) tend to widely underestimate the "realistic" estimation in your advice (they know in abstract that salaries are "high" but don't necessarily concretely know how high), and therefore following it can be dangerous and would mean lowballing themselves. Hence, not saying anything might result in a better net result end of the day.

sillysaurus3 10y ago
Want to name some numbers? Ideally with context. I'd like to know how high is high in SV. Especially for junior positions.
- throwawoah 10y ago
  24 y.o college grad software engineer at "Big Tech" company in the valley. Started at 107.5k with promotion and raise to 120k
- dlubarov 10y ago
  I'd say if you're in SV, have a pretty good background, interview at top-paying public firms like Google/Facebook, get good scores, and negotiate very well, you can expect around - new grad: ~175k - 4 years: ~300k - 6 years: ~350k Note that I'm including equity, expected cash bonuses, 401k matching, and sign-on bonuses (which I normally divide by 4, since 4 years seems like a typical period to stay at these companies).
  - teen 10y ago
    the 4/6 year ones are way too high unless you're going for some sort of specific role they need. like if you specialize in robotics or machine learning

ryanSrich 10y ago

I honestly never understood the notion of not naming a number first (that is if you know what you're worth). Take the number you want to make, add 15%, and they'll likely negotiate down to the actual number you want. It's really not that hard. Take this as an example: Say you currently make $80k and you want a 10% bump. So you're looking for $88k. Take that number and add 15%. Your ask is now around $100k. They may say something like "we actually start all new engineers off at a base salary of $85,000". This gives you a ton of power in negotiating just a $3k bump. If you had said you wanted $88k, that "starting salary" would have likely been $75k. Thus making it a pretty big leap to the $88k you wanted.

vehementi 10y ago
The rationale (which I don't agree with) is "what if their range is a lot higher than your guess? Then you're losing out!"
- deanCommie 10y ago
  That's what things like Glassdoor are for
  - what_ever 10y ago
    Glassdoor data is often not good indicator as you can filter by only recent reports. So some numbers can be older than 5 years.
tamana 10y ago
Your example numbers show how you lastly underestimate what tech jobs pay, and you are inviting an employer to low ball and you won't even know
- sciurus 10y ago
  No, that would be a decent salary for early to mid career tech workers outside the bay area.
- 10y ago

ugh123 10y ago

I avoid giving a number early on in conversations. Rather than naming a number, I like to 'seed' the conversation with talk about market rate, 'premium' on top of that, and similar phrases to move them in the right direction. Establishing a position of strength can also mean other things like having the company and hiring manager invest as much time as they can in recruiting you; not hiring would be worse to them than over paying a little. Also, having other offers on the table always helps negotiating better. Even if its never mentioned to the recruiter I just happen to negotiate better with the mindset that I have other options.

15155 10y ago
> Even if its never mentioned to the recruiter I just happen to negotiate better with the mindset that I have other options. Playing the game like you've got nothing to lose is what breeds the best. This applies to a lot of subjects.

cthalupa 10y ago

I generally tell a recruiter on the first phone call to tell me the salary range. If they refuse, I tell them I'm not interested. If they name a range that's low, I tell them what I'm looking for, and see if they're able to budge. If not, I tell them I'm not interested. Sometimes the range is higher than I'd initially expected and end up pleasantly surprised. Either way, I don't talk numbers first and I still don't waste time with places that can't offer the sort of salary I'm after. I'm not going to even bother with a phone interview if I don't have a firm number in hand.

Retric 10y ago

The problem is this forces everyone to know the market really well. That's one thing for a recruiter but as actual salaries are often hidden it's a serious information assemitry for most people. And many people especially women really undervalue their skills. Most people are much better off to simply ask salary ranges as the first question for a recruiter. Don't put it off and don't waste any time. Approximate location should the next question as again it minimizes wasted effort.

aubreykilian 10y ago

Agreed. I recently switched jobs after an 8 year stint at my previous employer, and it took me many months and many recruiters and possible employers, and every single time I started from the position of "Let's not waste anybody's time, my total Cost-to-Company is xyz, benefits include zyx, if you can't beat that, then we have nothing to talk about." Yes, brutally honest, but it also at least doesn't waste anybody's time with useless phone interviews and reference checks and and and.