3 ms·

You can do it without hardball tactics, though - if you keep your eye out for other opportunities (i.e. have a better BATNA), then you can present it honestly a

by T-R 15y ago

You can do it without hardball tactics, though - if you keep your eye out for other opportunities (i.e. have a better BATNA), then you can present it honestly as "the best move for me right now", and if they don't want to give a raise, you can discuss alternative benefits that would satisfy both parties. On the other hand, if they're trying to screw you, they're trying to screw you.

shawndrost 15y ago
Is that better for any of the parties involved? It's work for you to find a BATNA, work for the org that offered you your BATNA, and neutral for your employer. Seems more straightforward to just negotiate.
- T-R 15y ago
  I'd say it's better - it's not more or less straightforward, both distributive and integrative approaches are still negotiations. You need to know your BATNA anyway, whether it's leaving or sucking it up, so doing more research just puts you in a better position, no matter which route you choose. Bluffing might get you lucky, but not likely as lucky as if you can back it up, and if they call your bluff, or it doesn't work out for some other reason, you'll have less bargaining power in the future. It's also good to keep in mind that the best deal someone else got doesn't necessarily relate to the best deal you can get - just because someone negotiated a higher salary doesn't mean you can; it's not your BATNA unless someone makes you the offer. Also, if nothing else, distributive approaches tend to leave one or both parties feeling like they lost, which will likely sour future negotiations. Taking the integrative route means that the only losers are the companies that don't get you - assuming that's in their best interest (which it might not be, if they have a better BATNA than matching your BATNA). Also, if the amount of effort and time that the negotiation takes is amongst your interests, then that's really on the negotiation table too (regardless of approach), it just means that you'll be negotiating away other things, like your salary, in order to satisfy that interest.
  - microarchitect 15y ago
    I agree with all of what you're saying. I was just trying to point out to the OP that s/he doesn't need to feel dirty doing all this. I also don't think you need to be dishonest about any of this. In my case, instead of letting the cat out of the bag by telling them I wanted to take the job, I should've said the offer was well below my expectation (true) and said nothing about whether I wanted to take the job (no lying involved). One advantage of doing what I did (i.e. not bring in another offer) is that I can now get even more when I quit from here. My suggestion is that if you're getting screwed over and the company want to keep you - get the best deal your company can give and then use THIS as a baseline for your next offer.

by T-R 15y ago

shawndrost 15y ago

Is that better for any of the parties involved? It's work for you to find a BATNA, work for the org that offered you your BATNA, and neutral for your employer. Seems more straightforward to just negotiate.

T-R 15y ago
I'd say it's better - it's not more or less straightforward, both distributive and integrative approaches are still negotiations. You need to know your BATNA anyway, whether it's leaving or sucking it up, so doing more research just puts you in a better position, no matter which route you choose. Bluffing might get you lucky, but not likely as lucky as if you can back it up, and if they call your bluff, or it doesn't work out for some other reason, you'll have less bargaining power in the future. It's also good to keep in mind that the best deal someone else got doesn't necessarily relate to the best deal you can get - just because someone negotiated a higher salary doesn't mean you can; it's not your BATNA unless someone makes you the offer. Also, if nothing else, distributive approaches tend to leave one or both parties feeling like they lost, which will likely sour future negotiations. Taking the integrative route means that the only losers are the companies that don't get you - assuming that's in their best interest (which it might not be, if they have a better BATNA than matching your BATNA). Also, if the amount of effort and time that the negotiation takes is amongst your interests, then that's really on the negotiation table too (regardless of approach), it just means that you'll be negotiating away other things, like your salary, in order to satisfy that interest.
- microarchitect 15y ago
  I agree with all of what you're saying. I was just trying to point out to the OP that s/he doesn't need to feel dirty doing all this. I also don't think you need to be dishonest about any of this. In my case, instead of letting the cat out of the bag by telling them I wanted to take the job, I should've said the offer was well below my expectation (true) and said nothing about whether I wanted to take the job (no lying involved). One advantage of doing what I did (i.e. not bring in another offer) is that I can now get even more when I quit from here. My suggestion is that if you're getting screwed over and the company want to keep you - get the best deal your company can give and then use THIS as a baseline for your next offer.