4 ms·

None of us have leverage besides our willingness to walk away. That's not the difference. I see some people act like negotiating is an antagonistic game of chi

None of us have leverage besides our willingness to walk away. That's not the difference. I see some people act like negotiating is an antagonistic game of chicken or something. In reality, it's just an amicable case of you finding your best options, communicating them clearly to everyone involved, then taking the best option. Think of it as more like an auction than some slick game of poker. What's wrong with this script? Candidate: I'd like $150K. Comparable companies offer people with my experience $150K. Hiring manager: We'll offer you $100K. Candidate: I'll walk if you give me less than $140K. Hiring manager: Ok... Bye? Candidate: Okay, bye. [Takes a job earning $150k at one of those other companies] In general, I think the benefits of negotiating don't go to the individual. They go to next individual/the market. You repeat that script a few times and the hiring manager goes to HR and says nobody's taking the job unless they pay more. (If instead, you say "okay, fine I'll take $100k, I was bluffing" then that's what the next person is offered too.) > "Just negotiate better!" OK, great... how? My mental model is to approach it cooperatively. You're not trying to beat them. Talk about other data points if they say you're not being realistic, and talk about the reasons you're a better fit than they accounted for when you ask for more. They say they're better than the next company and you say you're better than the next candidate. But most of all, just make sure you actually have that alternative you're willing to walk away for. Interview while you have a job. Time your interviews so that you have options while this conversation takes place. YMMV. I've gotten like +10% from negotiating and +30% from walking away to take other offers, which should tell you the relative importance of each.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
The problem with most online salary negotiation advice is that it revolves around this idea that hiring is a 1-on-1 game between the candidate and the company. It assumes that the company has no other choices, so they must cave to the demands of the candidate. In practice, companies keep multiple candidates in the hiring pipeline and candidates usually interview with multiple companies at once. It's not a 1-on-1 game, it's an N-on-M game. Unless the specific candidate has something ultra-specific to offer, companies are fine with declining increased salary demands. I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't negotiate, but you have to keep in mind that neither side holds all of the cards. > Candidate: I'll walk if you give me less than $140K. > Hiring manager: Ok... Bye? As a hiring manager, I might have multiple candidates with different levels of seniority in my hiring pipeline. I might be willing to pay $300K for a senior, $200K for a mid-level, and $100K for a junior employee (example numbers). If my mid-level candidate threatens to walk unless I pay them $300K, I'm going to let them walk and give the $300K offer to the more senior candidate. I have no desire to overpay for a mid-level when I can get a senior-level for the same price. This is what most people forget in negotiations: You're not just negotiating against the company, you're negotiating against everyone else who wants the job. In practice, reaching equilibrium requires being willing to push the demands until your demands or offers are being rejected more than they're being accepted. That requires more sample points, so always apply to as many jobs as possible.
elzbardico 5y ago
Actually I sometimes answer recruiters from companies that I am not interested at working from, just to tell upfront how much I am getting paid and how much I would need to be convinced to change, just in the hope that the next guy they call and that actually needs this job will have a better initial offer. Incidentally, that's why I don't like those "transparency" initiatives too much. Most people willing to share their salaries on twitter probably are on the lower side of the pay scale, thus biasing the results down.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

The problem with most online salary negotiation advice is that it revolves around this idea that hiring is a 1-on-1 game between the candidate and the company. It assumes that the company has no other choices, so they must cave to the demands of the candidate. In practice, companies keep multiple candidates in the hiring pipeline and candidates usually interview with multiple companies at once. It's not a 1-on-1 game, it's an N-on-M game. Unless the specific candidate has something ultra-specific to offer, companies are fine with declining increased salary demands. I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't negotiate, but you have to keep in mind that neither side holds all of the cards. > Candidate: I'll walk if you give me less than $140K. > Hiring manager: Ok... Bye? As a hiring manager, I might have multiple candidates with different levels of seniority in my hiring pipeline. I might be willing to pay $300K for a senior, $200K for a mid-level, and $100K for a junior employee (example numbers). If my mid-level candidate threatens to walk unless I pay them $300K, I'm going to let them walk and give the $300K offer to the more senior candidate. I have no desire to overpay for a mid-level when I can get a senior-level for the same price. This is what most people forget in negotiations: You're not just negotiating against the company, you're negotiating against everyone else who wants the job. In practice, reaching equilibrium requires being willing to push the demands until your demands or offers are being rejected more than they're being accepted. That requires more sample points, so always apply to as many jobs as possible.

elzbardico 5y ago

Actually I sometimes answer recruiters from companies that I am not interested at working from, just to tell upfront how much I am getting paid and how much I would need to be convinced to change, just in the hope that the next guy they call and that actually needs this job will have a better initial offer. Incidentally, that's why I don't like those "transparency" initiatives too much. Most people willing to share their salaries on twitter probably are on the lower side of the pay scale, thus biasing the results down.