>You can really only pay more money. No, the company can also _not_ pay more money and use that constraint as a hiring filter. Example from the article: >The

>You can really only pay more money. No, the company can also _not_ pay more money and use that constraint as a hiring filter. Example from the article: >There is one motivation that should raise a red flag, though. “The candidates that I don't usually want to spend much time on are folks who are basically just looking for the next big check. Another personal related story... In my of my past jobs, the hiring manager said upfront that "We pay a lot but we never pay the most, and we never match other offers. We want candidates to look at our whole package and decide we're the right choice." I have to admit that when I first heard the manager brazenly admit that they didn't pay the most and that they don't get into bidding wars for talent, it seemed like corporate self-sabotage. However, I later realized it was very creative game theory to hire the specific type of people they wanted. I ended up taking that job because they were at the forefront of data warehousing which I really wanted to get into. It was one of the best jobs I ever had. Although they didn't have the highest starting salaries, they did have the highest raises and bonuses but I didn't know that at the time I took the job. (I'm not recommending that companies not pay people the most. It's just interesting that one company used a seeming "disadvantage" of lower salary and flipped it around as a advantageous hiring tool. Very interesting reverse-psychology.)