4 ms·
There's no reason to answer that question. Instead, talk about your expectations: say that your understanding is the role involves X, Y, and Z, and you have exp
by bonaldi 10y ago
There's no reason to answer that question. Instead, talk about your expectations: say that your understanding is the role involves X, Y, and Z, and you have experience in related areas A, B, C, and accordingly you'd be looking to get $x for this role. Then, transfer it all back to them: "Does that fit with your range for the position?"
- mooreds 10y agoOne point raised on the article is that they will have a better idea of market and salary range than you will (or they should!). So if you give them your desired salary it might be out of their range (too high or too low). Also, especially at the beginning of the hiring process, you don't know everything about the company, so how can you have a valid desired salary? Also, your value to them as a possible employee increases as you go through the interview process, so why would you limit yourself up front (I have done this before and it ended up in a offer that I didn't take).
- bonaldi 10y agoThe key point is that your desired salary should be an accurate amount based on your needs and expectations. If you're genuinely out of their range, why would you settle anyway? This is why it's crucial to focus the conversation on your expectations, not your current compensation. That might not be enough for you! That might be why you are looking for a new role! It's a waste of everybody's time if they misunderstand your expectations and hire you for less than you want/need. (Yes, your value increases as you go through the interview process, but this point of the process isn't the salary negotation. You're not going in hard at this point, just setting their expectations).
- mooreds 10y agoDid you read the article and not find the salary determination process convincing? Of course you should have an expectation, but why is it incumbent on you to list your range? Why is it not incumbent on them, since they'll be an effective monopsony of your labor? I guess it is a question of whether you want to maximize your potential income (in which case you want the cards close to your chest) or if you'd be happy getting what you expected (and maybe a bit more). I've been in both places in my life, but I remember an older person telling me when I was young (paraphrasing) that you should take your company for all it will give you, because you can bet they'll do the same to you.
- scarface74 10y agoWhy wouldn't you have an idea about market range?
- mooreds 10y agoI think you should have an idea about market range, but so should they. It is an asymmetric relationship--they have many employees, but you typically have only one employer. So they should have better data about pricing for the purchase of their labor than you should. Again, it's primarily a negotiation tactic.
- scarface74 10y agoTrue. If you're talking to recruiters and other people in your network, you should have a pretty good idea of your range. On the other hand, if you do accept a job below your range and you talk to enough recruiters, soon you'll be poached anyway.
- pleasecalllater 10y agoThe only reason is that if you don't answer, you won't get the job, because there will be someone who will answer. And this is sad.
- LoSboccacc 10y ago^ so much this. all those suggestion pretend the employer and the candidate exists in a vacuum of pure unadulterated haggling, while just the act of taking slightly more hr time for being difficult will get your resume thrown at the bottom of the pile.
- sneak 10y agoThis is your fear. This is not the truth.