6 ms·

If you already have an offer in hand, you shouldn't be negotiating through the recruiter. This is a hiring decision not buying a home. CC the recruiter, take th

If you already have an offer in hand, you shouldn't be negotiating through the recruiter. This is a hiring decision not buying a home. CC the recruiter, take their advice, but work with the hiring manager directly. One of the worst things you can do in negotiation is talk to the wrong person. Instead of going you -> recruiter -> HR rep -> team lead -> hiring manager, you need to go you -> hiring manager. Talk to your recruiter, strategize, whatever, but everything else is playing telephone and it's very easy to get a yes from someone who's not allowed to say yes.

msy 3y ago
There's usually layers of approval for offers inside organisations, it's improbable anyone you're talking to is going to be able to make a decision independent of people outside your communication loop and they're all going to be talking to each other.
- michaelt 3y ago
  It's fine for them to talk to each other. The distinction is - if there's one person with the authority to say yes to your salary requirements, and three people who only have the authority to say no, does it benefit you to go via those three people? In some organisations it might benefit you! If your salary needs to be approved by a hierarch of the fourth level but you'll be reporting to a hierarch of the second level who'll be benefiting from your genius, they might be a highly motivated advocate in your favour. In other organisations though, the more opportunities there are to say no, the higher chance of the answer being no.
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    Those are all good points. I also look at it from the perspective of having an "inside person" championing a package you both agree on, versus you convincing the recruiter to champion it enough for HR to champion it too.
  - TheCoelacanth 3y ago
    The tricky part that it's not always clear who will be the best internal advocate. Sometimes, it's the manager because they benefit the most from hiring you and the organization probably values their opinion, but some managers are pushovers with zero people skills and will be useless. Sometimes, it's the recruiter because they are the most experienced with the hiring process and know what wheels to grease; sometimes they're useless because recruiters are often viewed as interchangeable cogs.
risfriend 3y ago
My experience has been hiring managers defer this to recruiters within the company simply because its not their job, and also may not have the authority.

msy 3y ago

There's usually layers of approval for offers inside organisations, it's improbable anyone you're talking to is going to be able to make a decision independent of people outside your communication loop and they're all going to be talking to each other.

michaelt 3y ago
It's fine for them to talk to each other. The distinction is - if there's one person with the authority to say yes to your salary requirements, and three people who only have the authority to say no, does it benefit you to go via those three people? In some organisations it might benefit you! If your salary needs to be approved by a hierarch of the fourth level but you'll be reporting to a hierarch of the second level who'll be benefiting from your genius, they might be a highly motivated advocate in your favour. In other organisations though, the more opportunities there are to say no, the higher chance of the answer being no.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  Those are all good points. I also look at it from the perspective of having an "inside person" championing a package you both agree on, versus you convincing the recruiter to champion it enough for HR to champion it too.
- TheCoelacanth 3y ago
  The tricky part that it's not always clear who will be the best internal advocate. Sometimes, it's the manager because they benefit the most from hiring you and the organization probably values their opinion, but some managers are pushovers with zero people skills and will be useless. Sometimes, it's the recruiter because they are the most experienced with the hiring process and know what wheels to grease; sometimes they're useless because recruiters are often viewed as interchangeable cogs.

risfriend 3y ago

My experience has been hiring managers defer this to recruiters within the company simply because its not their job, and also may not have the authority.