5 ms·

Some people say this because it's true. This is an ineffective negotiating tactic. You shouldn't accept anything less than stellar equity/benefits/WLB. But if y

Some people say this because it's true. This is an ineffective negotiating tactic. You shouldn't accept anything less than stellar equity/benefits/WLB. But if you do, now you are in the position of saying "Well, your equity/benefits/WLB suck, so I want more money." There's no positive way to spin that. You look like an ass and are negotiating from weakness. I tell them exactly what number I'm looking for. Saves everybody a bunch of time. Yes, my current job I got what I asked for.

projectazorian 4y ago
> But if you do, now you are in the position of saying "Well, your equity/benefits/WLB suck, so I want more money." "The equity/benefits/WLB you describe aren't consistent with what I was expecting. I'll need higher base if this is going to work." Salary is not the only part of a compensation package. If other parts of the package pencil out, great, if not, you're within your right to ask for more salary. Some employers have more flexibility on salary, others might be more flexible in other areas. This is a very common negotiating technique; if you can't reach agreement on one point, expand the negotiating space. Anyone who would be offended by the above worth working with anyway. > There's no positive way to spin that. You look like an ass and are negotiating from weakness. If you think negotiation is about what party can project dominance the most, you don't have a clue about negotiation. You're not haggling for cab fare, you're establishing the terms of a relationship that will continue for years if things go well, and in those situations you want to be collaborative rather than adversarial. This will pay dividends down the road.
- lowbloodsugar 4y ago
  If you believe everything you just said, then you'd understand why opening with the minimum salary is not consistent with it.

5 ms·

Some people say this because it's true. This is an ineffective negotiating tactic. You shouldn't accept anything less than stellar equity/benefits/WLB. But if y

by lowbloodsugar 4y ago

projectazorian 4y ago
> But if you do, now you are in the position of saying "Well, your equity/benefits/WLB suck, so I want more money." "The equity/benefits/WLB you describe aren't consistent with what I was expecting. I'll need higher base if this is going to work." Salary is not the only part of a compensation package. If other parts of the package pencil out, great, if not, you're within your right to ask for more salary. Some employers have more flexibility on salary, others might be more flexible in other areas. This is a very common negotiating technique; if you can't reach agreement on one point, expand the negotiating space. Anyone who would be offended by the above worth working with anyway. > There's no positive way to spin that. You look like an ass and are negotiating from weakness. If you think negotiation is about what party can project dominance the most, you don't have a clue about negotiation. You're not haggling for cab fare, you're establishing the terms of a relationship that will continue for years if things go well, and in those situations you want to be collaborative rather than adversarial. This will pay dividends down the road.
- lowbloodsugar 4y ago
  If you believe everything you just said, then you'd understand why opening with the minimum salary is not consistent with it.