4 ms·

>Because you've now anchored the negotiation at 210 as the max, and he's going to try to get you for less because this is business. Why though? The manager has

>Because you've now anchored the negotiation at 210 as the max, and he's going to try to get you for less because this is business. Why though? The manager has a budget, you are within the budget, getting into negotiation when the condition is already satisfied can, at most, win 10K per year and lose the whole placement, which will cost much more in the additional search. >But if he offers 200 and you have not given any number at all, you can negotiate and possibly get more than 210. You also might get less.

pdonis 3y ago
> Why though? If you say 210, are you going to absolutely refuse any offer that's less than that? If you would, then you picked a bad number: you should have said 220. Or 230. Or 250. You've already hypothesized that the manager's actual range is 200-250; given that hypothesis, you should be targeting at least the top of that range, not the bottom 20%, if you're going to give a number at all. And if your objection to that is that you don't know the manager's range, yes, that's the point! That's why you shouldn't be risking anchoring the conversation in the wrong place. If you wouldn't refuse an offer less than 210, then the manager is not going to lose the placement by negotiating with you for less. Yes, 210 is "within budget", but that doesn't mean negotiating for less has no benefit. That's still budget he could now use for something else. In my experience any number you give is not going to be interpreted as your absolute minimum. It's going to be interpreted as the first step in a negotiation--one in which you should have waited for the company to take the first step, but you didn't and the company will feel no compunction in taking advantage of that. But in any case, even if you get 210, you have, as I said, foreclosed any chance of getting more. See below. > You also might get less. But you're not going to get more, and that's what you should be thinking about. You've already said the manager's actual range is 200-250. If you say 210, then, as noted above, you're restricting yourself to just the bottom 20% of that range no matter what. If you give no number and the manager offers 200, when his range is 200-250, that probably means he views you as a baseline hire and you wouldn't have gotten 210 anyway if you'd given that number first. In any case you're no worse off not giving a number; the key point is that the manager views you as a baseline hire. If you give no number and you're a good enough hire that the manager would give you at least 210, he'll probably offer 210. And then you can negotiate from there.
- pandaman 3y ago
  >If you say 210, are you going to absolutely refuse any offer that's less than that? I, for one, tell the number, which if was given to me during negotiation would result in acceptance on my part. > You've already hypothesized that the manager's actual range is 200-250 And I have not hypothesized the range, in my example I speculate why people believe they would have been offered more than they asked for if they did not ask first, this is the hypothesis, not the actual range. >But you're not going to get more, and that's what you should be thinking about It's trivial to raise it if you suddenly decided you can get more, just say you have another offer for $X+10K, but you like the company so much you are willing forfeit 10K. More so if you can actually secure such an offer. This is why negotiating down from already satisfactory for both sides comp is a bad strategy for the HM.
  - pdonis 3y ago
    > I, for one, tell the number, which if was given to me during negotiation would result in acceptance on my part. That's not the same as saying you would refuse any offer for less. So you haven't answered the question I actually asked. > I have not hypothesized the range Yes, you did. In the scenario we're discussing, you said the manager's range is 200-250. > this is the hypothesis, not the actual range In other words, you're moving the goalposts. Sorry, not playing that game. Of course you can make up any numbers you like, but at the end of the day my argument is still the same: it's to your disadvantage to anchor the conversation on a number first. And you don't have to: as I've pointed out in another subthread in this discussion, if the company genuinely wants to hire you, at some point they have to commit to an offer. You don't; you can always go away and talk to someone else. (If you object that you might not be able to, my response is that you're already assuming you might get a better offer, which means you're assuming you can go away and talk to someone else. See further comments below.) > It's trivial to raise it if you suddenly decided you can get more I don't see how. You've told them you'd accept an offer from them for 210, but now you're reneging. The fact that you might get another offer for more than 210 is a reason not to tell them the 210 number at all. It's not a reason to go back and revise the 210 number afterwards if you get a better offer. > This is why negotiating down from already satisfactory for both sides comp is a bad strategy for the HM. You're assuming that the company will interpret your giving them the 210 number up front as a sign that your negotiating position is strong. I think they will assume the opposite: that your negotiating position is weak. Someone who already has good offers on the table, or expects to get them soon, doesn't have to commit to a number up front. They can just say "Give me an offer you think is competitive and I'll consider it in the light of my other options".

pdonis 3y ago

> Why though? If you say 210, are you going to absolutely refuse any offer that's less than that? If you would, then you picked a bad number: you should have said 220. Or 230. Or 250. You've already hypothesized that the manager's actual range is 200-250; given that hypothesis, you should be targeting at least the top of that range, not the bottom 20%, if you're going to give a number at all. And if your objection to that is that you don't know the manager's range, yes, that's the point! That's why you shouldn't be risking anchoring the conversation in the wrong place. If you wouldn't refuse an offer less than 210, then the manager is not going to lose the placement by negotiating with you for less. Yes, 210 is "within budget", but that doesn't mean negotiating for less has no benefit. That's still budget he could now use for something else. In my experience any number you give is not going to be interpreted as your absolute minimum. It's going to be interpreted as the first step in a negotiation--one in which you should have waited for the company to take the first step, but you didn't and the company will feel no compunction in taking advantage of that. But in any case, even if you get 210, you have, as I said, foreclosed any chance of getting more. See below. > You also might get less. But you're not going to get more, and that's what you should be thinking about. You've already said the manager's actual range is 200-250. If you say 210, then, as noted above, you're restricting yourself to just the bottom 20% of that range no matter what. If you give no number and the manager offers 200, when his range is 200-250, that probably means he views you as a baseline hire and you wouldn't have gotten 210 anyway if you'd given that number first. In any case you're no worse off not giving a number; the key point is that the manager views you as a baseline hire. If you give no number and you're a good enough hire that the manager would give you at least 210, he'll probably offer 210. And then you can negotiate from there.

pandaman 3y ago
>If you say 210, are you going to absolutely refuse any offer that's less than that? I, for one, tell the number, which if was given to me during negotiation would result in acceptance on my part. > You've already hypothesized that the manager's actual range is 200-250 And I have not hypothesized the range, in my example I speculate why people believe they would have been offered more than they asked for if they did not ask first, this is the hypothesis, not the actual range. >But you're not going to get more, and that's what you should be thinking about It's trivial to raise it if you suddenly decided you can get more, just say you have another offer for $X+10K, but you like the company so much you are willing forfeit 10K. More so if you can actually secure such an offer. This is why negotiating down from already satisfactory for both sides comp is a bad strategy for the HM.
- pdonis 3y ago
  > I, for one, tell the number, which if was given to me during negotiation would result in acceptance on my part. That's not the same as saying you would refuse any offer for less. So you haven't answered the question I actually asked. > I have not hypothesized the range Yes, you did. In the scenario we're discussing, you said the manager's range is 200-250. > this is the hypothesis, not the actual range In other words, you're moving the goalposts. Sorry, not playing that game. Of course you can make up any numbers you like, but at the end of the day my argument is still the same: it's to your disadvantage to anchor the conversation on a number first. And you don't have to: as I've pointed out in another subthread in this discussion, if the company genuinely wants to hire you, at some point they have to commit to an offer. You don't; you can always go away and talk to someone else. (If you object that you might not be able to, my response is that you're already assuming you might get a better offer, which means you're assuming you can go away and talk to someone else. See further comments below.) > It's trivial to raise it if you suddenly decided you can get more I don't see how. You've told them you'd accept an offer from them for 210, but now you're reneging. The fact that you might get another offer for more than 210 is a reason not to tell them the 210 number at all. It's not a reason to go back and revise the 210 number afterwards if you get a better offer. > This is why negotiating down from already satisfactory for both sides comp is a bad strategy for the HM. You're assuming that the company will interpret your giving them the 210 number up front as a sign that your negotiating position is strong. I think they will assume the opposite: that your negotiating position is weak. Someone who already has good offers on the table, or expects to get them soon, doesn't have to commit to a number up front. They can just say "Give me an offer you think is competitive and I'll consider it in the light of my other options".