5 ms·

The "Pre-Reqs" piece is not right. You really don't need to have another job offer or a current job to negotiate. A while ago I wrote up this script for how to

by GavinB 13y ago

The "Pre-Reqs" piece is not right. You really don't need to have another job offer or a current job to negotiate. A while ago I wrote up this script for how to negotiate a job offer with no leverage at all when you intend to accept it no matter what: http://bit.ly/1185CGm http://bit.ly/1185CGm Most job offers come with leeway for negotiation, regardless of your situation. All you really have to do is ask.

gangst 13y ago
In your script, you have: > You: This is a really great offer because [a sentence or two about why you want to work for them.]. But I was really looking for a little higher compensation. > Then, this is the most important part: they need to speak next. You have to be silent until they respond. They will give you one of three responses: At which point you list the three responses. But the most common (in my experience) response is missing: "Okay, what were you thinking for salary?".
- GavinB 13y ago
  I'd say name a number or range 15-25% above the offer. Or even just "I was hoping for 15-20% more." Thanks, I'll add this. The point is just to ask for what you want. Often people will give it to you just for asking. It took me a long time to figure this out!
  - carmaa 13y ago
    Never name a range. Ask for 15, 20 or 25% more, based on what you want. If someone comes to me asking for 15-20% more, I'm going to offer them something below the low end of the range. You're essentially giving away 5% for free.
    - lawnchair_larry 13y ago
      Always name a range. Bound it on the low end by your minimum. Otherwise you're essentially removing their ability to give you n% for free. In a few cases, I've seen offers come back right in the middle of the range, when I was expecting the bottom. Free money! Ideally, have 2 offers that are aware of each other and name the range. They won't both come back with the bottom number. At least, not in this market. They've wasted a ton of time and need to hire someone, so they're going to make their offer count. Internal recruiters have performance-based metrics too, and while I'm sure getting a better deal on a hire looks good, failing to fill positions is not good.
  - wikwocket 13y ago
    Good addition to a great writeup, but you might want to revise the surrounding text. A lot of it still refers to there being just 3 options.
amirmc 13y ago
Most job offers come with leeway for negotiation, regardless of your situation. All you really have to do is ask. Absolutely. People who don't ask (esp by default) end up losing out. [1] [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_work_for_a_large_multinational_tech_company_i/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_wor...
run4yourlives 13y ago
>You really don't need to have another job offer or a current job to negotiate. No, but if I know that you don't have another option, I'm not going to be as willing to give up more. A known secondary option puts pressure (sometimes, tremendous) on your negotiating partner. The absence of such an option does not. That's what the article is saying.
- kelnos 13y ago
  > No, but if I know that you don't have another option, I'm not going to be as willing to give up more. That doesn't really make sense. The candidate has at least this much in their favor: 1. A recruiter has had probably 2-3 phone calls with them, a technical person (or two) has done a phone screen, and they've taken up the time of, say, 4-6 people for in-person interviews. The company has already spent a not-insignificant amount of time (aka money) evaluating this person, and losing them over a (reasonable) salary increase would be foolish. 2. Having evaluated the candidate, the company has decided they want this person to work for them. Assuming the candidate is great for the position, but the only sticking point is salary, why would the company go back to square 1 to save a little money? Hiring is hard. Available comp for a particular position is usually a range, and the initial offer will rarely (if ever) quote the top of that range. If the budget is available, and the candidate is good, whether or not they have a competing offer isn't relevant, unless you know that they'll be forced to take your offer even if you don't budge (which in tech, at least, is pretty rare, I'd think).
  - run4yourlives 13y ago
    The company has already spent a not-insignificant amount of time (aka money) evaluating this person, and losing them over a (reasonable) salary increase would be foolish. Any company worth anything has an a, b, and c candidate (plus, often the option to wait) already in their pocket. While what you say is true, the assumption that your demands are "reasonable" is one you simply cannot make. Only the other party can define that. The cost of hiring is not assigned to you, it is a sunk cost that the company will absorb regardless of who they hire. It's pretty insignificant to keep an already posted position open. Assuming the candidate is great for the position, but the only sticking point is salary, why would the company go back to square 1 to save a little money? Budgets. Existing pay scales. Their evaluation of your value. There are numerous reasons. The idea is that you want to work there too, for the most they are willing to pay. That means pushing to the limit but not going past it. The easiest way to do this is to force their hand. One of the best ways to force their hand is to generate a call to action that is time-based. It's a pretty basic marketing principle that I'm really surprised a lot of people don't seem to understand. This is just like saying "Act fast, quantities are limited!"
jcomis 13y ago
What if they put the initial number on you? As in, they ask what you are expecting?
- EvanKelly 13y ago
  When this happened to me, I used legitimate data that was in my favor. I was graduating college and used the published salaries of graduates from my department as published by my department. You can find numbers from glassdoor or look at what government salaries are for your job type in that location. Just know that if you provide an acceptable range, they will lock in on the bottom of the range.
- ams6110 13y ago
  I've had reasonable success answering this question by saying something along the lines of "I'd have to consider the full offer, salary, benefits, etc." If pressed, have a number ready, that's somewhat higher than what you think is realistic. Unless you are so far out of the ballpark that you look ridiculous, a high initial salary demand is not going to knock you out of consideration if you're an otherwise good candidate.
- eru 13y ago
  Actually, you always want to provide your own numbers first. That's what they call `controlling the document' in the legal profession, and `anchoring' in Psychology.
  - lawnchair_larry 13y ago
    It's more common advice to never name the first price. I'm no expert negotiator but personally I think this depends on the situation. In more than one case I've underestimated my worth and received more than I would have though I could get away with asking for. Once they name their price, I know it's their lower bound, so I'm comfortable asking for even more. I think negotiating a salary has different dynamics than negotiating a sale. For a sale, I would probably agree with the anchoring tactic.
    - 13y ago
DanielRibeiro 13y ago
As Mark Suster's mom used to tell him[1]: You don’t ask, you don’t get. [1] http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2013/05/15/the-one-word-that-shouldnt-exist-in-an-entrepreneurs-vocabulary/ http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2013/05/15/the-one-word-t...

by GavinB 13y ago

gangst 13y ago

In your script, you have: > You: This is a really great offer because [a sentence or two about why you want to work for them.]. But I was really looking for a little higher compensation. > Then, this is the most important part: they need to speak next. You have to be silent until they respond. They will give you one of three responses: At which point you list the three responses. But the most common (in my experience) response is missing: "Okay, what were you thinking for salary?".

GavinB 13y ago
I'd say name a number or range 15-25% above the offer. Or even just "I was hoping for 15-20% more." Thanks, I'll add this. The point is just to ask for what you want. Often people will give it to you just for asking. It took me a long time to figure this out!
- carmaa 13y ago
  Never name a range. Ask for 15, 20 or 25% more, based on what you want. If someone comes to me asking for 15-20% more, I'm going to offer them something below the low end of the range. You're essentially giving away 5% for free.
  - lawnchair_larry 13y ago
    Always name a range. Bound it on the low end by your minimum. Otherwise you're essentially removing their ability to give you n% for free. In a few cases, I've seen offers come back right in the middle of the range, when I was expecting the bottom. Free money! Ideally, have 2 offers that are aware of each other and name the range. They won't both come back with the bottom number. At least, not in this market. They've wasted a ton of time and need to hire someone, so they're going to make their offer count. Internal recruiters have performance-based metrics too, and while I'm sure getting a better deal on a hire looks good, failing to fill positions is not good.
- wikwocket 13y ago
  Good addition to a great writeup, but you might want to revise the surrounding text. A lot of it still refers to there being just 3 options.

amirmc 13y ago

Most job offers come with leeway for negotiation, regardless of your situation. All you really have to do is ask. Absolutely. People who don't ask (esp by default) end up losing out. [1] [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_work_for_a_large_multinational_tech_company_i/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_wor...

run4yourlives 13y ago

>You really don't need to have another job offer or a current job to negotiate. No, but if I know that you don't have another option, I'm not going to be as willing to give up more. A known secondary option puts pressure (sometimes, tremendous) on your negotiating partner. The absence of such an option does not. That's what the article is saying.

kelnos 13y ago
> No, but if I know that you don't have another option, I'm not going to be as willing to give up more. That doesn't really make sense. The candidate has at least this much in their favor: 1. A recruiter has had probably 2-3 phone calls with them, a technical person (or two) has done a phone screen, and they've taken up the time of, say, 4-6 people for in-person interviews. The company has already spent a not-insignificant amount of time (aka money) evaluating this person, and losing them over a (reasonable) salary increase would be foolish. 2. Having evaluated the candidate, the company has decided they want this person to work for them. Assuming the candidate is great for the position, but the only sticking point is salary, why would the company go back to square 1 to save a little money? Hiring is hard. Available comp for a particular position is usually a range, and the initial offer will rarely (if ever) quote the top of that range. If the budget is available, and the candidate is good, whether or not they have a competing offer isn't relevant, unless you know that they'll be forced to take your offer even if you don't budge (which in tech, at least, is pretty rare, I'd think).
- run4yourlives 13y ago
  The company has already spent a not-insignificant amount of time (aka money) evaluating this person, and losing them over a (reasonable) salary increase would be foolish. Any company worth anything has an a, b, and c candidate (plus, often the option to wait) already in their pocket. While what you say is true, the assumption that your demands are "reasonable" is one you simply cannot make. Only the other party can define that. The cost of hiring is not assigned to you, it is a sunk cost that the company will absorb regardless of who they hire. It's pretty insignificant to keep an already posted position open. Assuming the candidate is great for the position, but the only sticking point is salary, why would the company go back to square 1 to save a little money? Budgets. Existing pay scales. Their evaluation of your value. There are numerous reasons. The idea is that you want to work there too, for the most they are willing to pay. That means pushing to the limit but not going past it. The easiest way to do this is to force their hand. One of the best ways to force their hand is to generate a call to action that is time-based. It's a pretty basic marketing principle that I'm really surprised a lot of people don't seem to understand. This is just like saying "Act fast, quantities are limited!"

jcomis 13y ago

What if they put the initial number on you? As in, they ask what you are expecting?

EvanKelly 13y ago
When this happened to me, I used legitimate data that was in my favor. I was graduating college and used the published salaries of graduates from my department as published by my department. You can find numbers from glassdoor or look at what government salaries are for your job type in that location. Just know that if you provide an acceptable range, they will lock in on the bottom of the range.
ams6110 13y ago
I've had reasonable success answering this question by saying something along the lines of "I'd have to consider the full offer, salary, benefits, etc." If pressed, have a number ready, that's somewhat higher than what you think is realistic. Unless you are so far out of the ballpark that you look ridiculous, a high initial salary demand is not going to knock you out of consideration if you're an otherwise good candidate.
eru 13y ago
Actually, you always want to provide your own numbers first. That's what they call `controlling the document' in the legal profession, and `anchoring' in Psychology.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  It's more common advice to never name the first price. I'm no expert negotiator but personally I think this depends on the situation. In more than one case I've underestimated my worth and received more than I would have though I could get away with asking for. Once they name their price, I know it's their lower bound, so I'm comfortable asking for even more. I think negotiating a salary has different dynamics than negotiating a sale. For a sale, I would probably agree with the anchoring tactic.
  - 13y ago

DanielRibeiro 13y ago

As Mark Suster's mom used to tell him[1]: You don’t ask, you don’t get. [1] http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2013/05/15/the-one-word-that-shouldnt-exist-in-an-entrepreneurs-vocabulary/ http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2013/05/15/the-one-word-t...