3 ms·

Another question might be something like: I know you need to pay me less than the value I create, because this needs to be a mutually profitable arrangement. Ho

Another question might be something like: I know you need to pay me less than the value I create, because this needs to be a mutually profitable arrangement. How much value do you expect I can bring to the company? Or maybe the more open ended question is better? I do like Never Split the Difference, great book. The most common complaint against it is that the author is a bit arrogant, but having read a couple other negotiation books first, I found the author's approach more fair and "real" than the bag-of-manipulative-tricks I found in the other books. Also, since it's the CTO your talking to, try to establish an (for lack of a better term) "tech people versus the rest of the world" mentality, then he will be more likely to side with you. As we've all seen, people side with their own perceived group. I don't mean this to be as aggressive as it sounds, just try to use the natural camaraderie between tech workers.

rubicon33 5y ago
> I know you need to pay me less than the value I create, because this needs to be a mutually profitable arrangement. This is the most awkward thing you could say.
- ErrantX 5y ago
  And unless you are doing something very specifically tied to revenue generation (so, sales basically) impossible to answer sensibly. Like, what value does an SRE engineer bring? Or a cyber person? For a large company; basically nothing on average, until you save them from a major incident, then potentially loads.
simonh 5y ago
>...I know you need to pay me less than the value I create... How much value do you expect I can bring to the company? I would never use this sort of phrasing, that sound really painful. Have you ever actually used that in a negotiation? Rather I'd highlight my experience in achieving results at reduced cost, identifying efficiencies, and developing new sources of revenue to highlight my own ability to bring extra value. You're the one asking for more, so you need to justify it.
- kqr 5y ago
  I'm not the person you're asking, but I tried a question very similar to that once. It -- the question -- did not have the intended effect. The negotiation itself left all parties happy though, so what do I know?
  - Buttons840 5y ago
    It seems most think it would be awkward, so it probably would be. I'd like to hear more about how it went for you. It seems like one of the ultra logical views which people find weird (or offensive) when spoken out loud. I mean, the principle here is clearly true, both the employee and employer must profit, if this condition doesn't exist the company soon dies.
    - kqr 5y ago
      It wasn't that it was awkward, it was just very hard to reason from the number that corresponds to future profits in a complicated way down to current compensation in a principled way.

rubicon33 5y ago

> I know you need to pay me less than the value I create, because this needs to be a mutually profitable arrangement. This is the most awkward thing you could say.

ErrantX 5y ago
And unless you are doing something very specifically tied to revenue generation (so, sales basically) impossible to answer sensibly. Like, what value does an SRE engineer bring? Or a cyber person? For a large company; basically nothing on average, until you save them from a major incident, then potentially loads.

simonh 5y ago

>...I know you need to pay me less than the value I create... How much value do you expect I can bring to the company? I would never use this sort of phrasing, that sound really painful. Have you ever actually used that in a negotiation? Rather I'd highlight my experience in achieving results at reduced cost, identifying efficiencies, and developing new sources of revenue to highlight my own ability to bring extra value. You're the one asking for more, so you need to justify it.

kqr 5y ago
I'm not the person you're asking, but I tried a question very similar to that once. It -- the question -- did not have the intended effect. The negotiation itself left all parties happy though, so what do I know?
- Buttons840 5y ago
  It seems most think it would be awkward, so it probably would be. I'd like to hear more about how it went for you. It seems like one of the ultra logical views which people find weird (or offensive) when spoken out loud. I mean, the principle here is clearly true, both the employee and employer must profit, if this condition doesn't exist the company soon dies.
  - kqr 5y ago
    It wasn't that it was awkward, it was just very hard to reason from the number that corresponds to future profits in a complicated way down to current compensation in a principled way.