4 ms·

Show HN: This guide is all you need to know about salary negotiation

52 points by JoshDoody 10y ago

JoshDoody 10y ago
After my recent discussion with @patio11 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11830598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11830598) and the great we got, I decided to make my book free to read online. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Cheers!
brianwawok 10y ago
Feedback - Really hard to actually follow the "book". Each page is far too small, and very hard to find the right link to "next". This would be 1000x more useful as maybe 4-5 pages if not 1. Now I assume it is like this because you want a bunch of clicks.. but I could not image hunting around trying to find all the content. It is a pretty bad desktop experience. Something 1/4 of the screen is content.. the rest is header, footer, another footer, and maybe a plug to buy your book.
- basch 10y ago
  its almost unusable. should be one long scrolling page with anchors.
  - JoshDoody 10y ago
    Thanks very much for the suggestion. I appreciate it!
- JoshDoody 10y ago
  Thank you for the feedback - I appreciate this and it gives me some great ideas to experiment with. I built it this way just because that's how I think of the negotiation process—a series of discrete steps. Can you elaborate on why it's difficult to find the "next" link? You mean the breadcrumbs make it hard to find the right link? Or placement on the page is challenging? Both? Thank you again!
  - CJefferson 10y ago
    You need to guide people around more accurately. Here is a stream of thought visiting the site. Bla bla how to read, let's get to the content, scroll down fast. Woops, went too far, now in footer. Put the content up-front when people arrive. "PART 1", that sounds good. But that's not a link, even though it's blue (the common colour of links). Now in part 1. Should I follow the links in the page, no let's go with 'Next'. This looks a lot like the main page again. It is the main page. I clicked on the word after Next, I should be 'Next'! Why have two links back to your main page after the words 'Next' and 'Prev'? https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/book/salary-structures https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/book/salary-structures is basically contentless. Should I click on the links in the page, or on 'Next?' If this is like a "book", I would expect to read it by clicking through 'next', but that misses most of the content. Basically, think about how you want people to navigate through. Do you want people to work through page by page with 'Next', or jump around freely? At the moment it seems I have to swap between the two myself, and try to search out all the content.
    - JoshDoody 10y ago
      Excellent, thank you for your feedback. I've updated the main Table of Contents so that when you click eg "Chapter 1. How companies manage their salary structures", you're taken to the beginning of the chapter's content rather than an overview of the concepts in the chapter. I see how this is better. Previous and Next are a little trickier to address, but your feedback helps me see how it can be confusing. Thank you!
dharmon 10y ago
"Don’t give the first number in your salary negotiation." Ugh, I get so tired of seeing this. I only see a few situations where this is true: 1) You really have no idea what someone in your position in your area makes. 2) You have no "best alternative", i.e., you really need this job and must take any number they give you. For everybody else, anchor, and anchor high. You can both prepare the recruiter in advance that you will be expensive and couch the actual number in terms where it's clear you aren't threatening to walk if you don't get it. Research has shown that anchors don't depend on any context to the actual issue at hand, so you just want to state an incredibly large number in some way, doesn't have to as direct as, "I want $2.5M / year in total comp from your company." Hell, you should want them to chuckle a little at your number. If they anchor low on you, your only option is to reset hard. You have to make it abundantly clear that the number is unacceptable. The less desperate you are for the job, the harder you should rebuff a low number, ideally with a "I wish I had known that's where you were thinking, we could have saved everyone a lot of time." Negotiating is a game. Have fun with it.
- chc 10y ago
  The point is that if you give a number first, there is now an upper bound on your final salary but no established lower bound. If they give a number first, there is now a lower bound on your salary but no established upper bound. A situation where your compensation can only go up is seen as more advantageous than one where your compensation can only go down.
  - the_cat_kittles 10y ago
    i think the problem comes if they put out a lower bound that is way too low, then there is no way for them to accept a much higher salary without looking stupid, so they wont.
  - whamlastxmas 10y ago
    It's a trade off. If you anchor high you're saving yourself time from the majority of companies that try to underpay you. If you don't anchor, you risk getting your time wasted but eliminate the risk not knowing what you're worth. If you are a highly in-demand, already highly-paid developer, it is likely in your best interest to anchor high. If you are a junior level and trying to get a middle-level role, it's probably better to not anchor.
whack 10y ago
"Recruiters and hiring managers like to present an offer in terms of “your total compensation package” or “total comp” because that number is usually quite a bit bigger than the base salary. It often includes target bonuses, stock options, etc. I recommend ignoring target bonuses or stock options when you negotiate your salary because the real value of those things is often unknowable." This actually sounds like bad advice for most companies I've worked with. Many financial companies offer contract-guaranteed 1st year bonus amounts, and there's a strong expectation that in future years, if you're doing even a reasonable job, your successive bonuses will keep growing higher. In big tech firms like Google/FB, you get a guaranteed number of RSUs that vest over 4 years, which sets a floor on your yearly bonuses for at least the first 4 years. For senior employees, this bonus can be just as big as the salary itself. Ultimately, the only number that matters is how much money you're going to get. Whether this money comes in the form of salary, cash bonus, or RSUs, is mostly irrelevant. It's good to be cynical about any unwritten promises the recruiter gives you. But going to the other extreme and optimizing for base salary, instead of total-comp, is a classic case of optimizing for the wrong metric.
- bbcbasic 10y ago
  It comes down to pricing a financial instrument. The expected amount of money you will get. You can take risk e.g. contract vs. permanent and startup vs big corp into that calculation, and probability (random bonus vs. almost guaranteed) into account.

52 points by JoshDoody 10y ago

After my recent discussion with @patio11 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11830598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11830598) and the great we got, I decided to make my book free to read online. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Cheers!

brianwawok 10y ago

Feedback - Really hard to actually follow the "book". Each page is far too small, and very hard to find the right link to "next". This would be 1000x more useful as maybe 4-5 pages if not 1. Now I assume it is like this because you want a bunch of clicks.. but I could not image hunting around trying to find all the content. It is a pretty bad desktop experience. Something 1/4 of the screen is content.. the rest is header, footer, another footer, and maybe a plug to buy your book.

basch 10y ago
its almost unusable. should be one long scrolling page with anchors.
- JoshDoody 10y ago
  Thanks very much for the suggestion. I appreciate it!
JoshDoody 10y ago
Thank you for the feedback - I appreciate this and it gives me some great ideas to experiment with. I built it this way just because that's how I think of the negotiation process—a series of discrete steps. Can you elaborate on why it's difficult to find the "next" link? You mean the breadcrumbs make it hard to find the right link? Or placement on the page is challenging? Both? Thank you again!
- CJefferson 10y ago
  You need to guide people around more accurately. Here is a stream of thought visiting the site. Bla bla how to read, let's get to the content, scroll down fast. Woops, went too far, now in footer. Put the content up-front when people arrive. "PART 1", that sounds good. But that's not a link, even though it's blue (the common colour of links). Now in part 1. Should I follow the links in the page, no let's go with 'Next'. This looks a lot like the main page again. It is the main page. I clicked on the word after Next, I should be 'Next'! Why have two links back to your main page after the words 'Next' and 'Prev'? https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/book/salary-structures https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/book/salary-structures is basically contentless. Should I click on the links in the page, or on 'Next?' If this is like a "book", I would expect to read it by clicking through 'next', but that misses most of the content. Basically, think about how you want people to navigate through. Do you want people to work through page by page with 'Next', or jump around freely? At the moment it seems I have to swap between the two myself, and try to search out all the content.
  - JoshDoody 10y ago
    Excellent, thank you for your feedback. I've updated the main Table of Contents so that when you click eg "Chapter 1. How companies manage their salary structures", you're taken to the beginning of the chapter's content rather than an overview of the concepts in the chapter. I see how this is better. Previous and Next are a little trickier to address, but your feedback helps me see how it can be confusing. Thank you!

dharmon 10y ago

"Don’t give the first number in your salary negotiation." Ugh, I get so tired of seeing this. I only see a few situations where this is true: 1) You really have no idea what someone in your position in your area makes. 2) You have no "best alternative", i.e., you really need this job and must take any number they give you. For everybody else, anchor, and anchor high. You can both prepare the recruiter in advance that you will be expensive and couch the actual number in terms where it's clear you aren't threatening to walk if you don't get it. Research has shown that anchors don't depend on any context to the actual issue at hand, so you just want to state an incredibly large number in some way, doesn't have to as direct as, "I want $2.5M / year in total comp from your company." Hell, you should want them to chuckle a little at your number. If they anchor low on you, your only option is to reset hard. You have to make it abundantly clear that the number is unacceptable. The less desperate you are for the job, the harder you should rebuff a low number, ideally with a "I wish I had known that's where you were thinking, we could have saved everyone a lot of time." Negotiating is a game. Have fun with it.

chc 10y ago
The point is that if you give a number first, there is now an upper bound on your final salary but no established lower bound. If they give a number first, there is now a lower bound on your salary but no established upper bound. A situation where your compensation can only go up is seen as more advantageous than one where your compensation can only go down.
- the_cat_kittles 10y ago
  i think the problem comes if they put out a lower bound that is way too low, then there is no way for them to accept a much higher salary without looking stupid, so they wont.
- whamlastxmas 10y ago
  It's a trade off. If you anchor high you're saving yourself time from the majority of companies that try to underpay you. If you don't anchor, you risk getting your time wasted but eliminate the risk not knowing what you're worth. If you are a highly in-demand, already highly-paid developer, it is likely in your best interest to anchor high. If you are a junior level and trying to get a middle-level role, it's probably better to not anchor.

whack 10y ago

"Recruiters and hiring managers like to present an offer in terms of “your total compensation package” or “total comp” because that number is usually quite a bit bigger than the base salary. It often includes target bonuses, stock options, etc. I recommend ignoring target bonuses or stock options when you negotiate your salary because the real value of those things is often unknowable." This actually sounds like bad advice for most companies I've worked with. Many financial companies offer contract-guaranteed 1st year bonus amounts, and there's a strong expectation that in future years, if you're doing even a reasonable job, your successive bonuses will keep growing higher. In big tech firms like Google/FB, you get a guaranteed number of RSUs that vest over 4 years, which sets a floor on your yearly bonuses for at least the first 4 years. For senior employees, this bonus can be just as big as the salary itself. Ultimately, the only number that matters is how much money you're going to get. Whether this money comes in the form of salary, cash bonus, or RSUs, is mostly irrelevant. It's good to be cynical about any unwritten promises the recruiter gives you. But going to the other extreme and optimizing for base salary, instead of total-comp, is a classic case of optimizing for the wrong metric.

bbcbasic 10y ago
It comes down to pricing a financial instrument. The expected amount of money you will get. You can take risk e.g. contract vs. permanent and startup vs big corp into that calculation, and probability (random bonus vs. almost guaranteed) into account.