Mixing
Isn't negotiation all about accepting/disproving what he or she demands for? [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I asked for a 40% overall(20+20) increase on my current CTC to join my new company and had a valid reason to ask for it:
- 20% (out 40%) is because, I'm going to lose my appraisal for my past 1.5 years in my current company for the jump.
- Remaining 20% for jump to the new company.
All I said was, this is why I ask 40%, but they agreed only to 30% overall.
While I'm not happy about getting less than 40% overall, 10% less doesn't makea huge impact. But I rejected the offer mainly because, they didn't give me a convincing answer explaining why I believed I should get a 40% hike and not anything less than that.
What is wrong with my approach?
salary negotiation human-resources
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
closed as primarily opinion-based by Ricketyship, Jim G., bethlakshmi, CincinnatiProgrammer, Adam V Jan 30 '14 at 14:54
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |Â
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I asked for a 40% overall(20+20) increase on my current CTC to join my new company and had a valid reason to ask for it:
- 20% (out 40%) is because, I'm going to lose my appraisal for my past 1.5 years in my current company for the jump.
- Remaining 20% for jump to the new company.
All I said was, this is why I ask 40%, but they agreed only to 30% overall.
While I'm not happy about getting less than 40% overall, 10% less doesn't makea huge impact. But I rejected the offer mainly because, they didn't give me a convincing answer explaining why I believed I should get a 40% hike and not anything less than that.
What is wrong with my approach?
salary negotiation human-resources
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
closed as primarily opinion-based by Ricketyship, Jim G., bethlakshmi, CincinnatiProgrammer, Adam V Jan 30 '14 at 14:54
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24
add a comment |Â
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I asked for a 40% overall(20+20) increase on my current CTC to join my new company and had a valid reason to ask for it:
- 20% (out 40%) is because, I'm going to lose my appraisal for my past 1.5 years in my current company for the jump.
- Remaining 20% for jump to the new company.
All I said was, this is why I ask 40%, but they agreed only to 30% overall.
While I'm not happy about getting less than 40% overall, 10% less doesn't makea huge impact. But I rejected the offer mainly because, they didn't give me a convincing answer explaining why I believed I should get a 40% hike and not anything less than that.
What is wrong with my approach?
salary negotiation human-resources
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
I asked for a 40% overall(20+20) increase on my current CTC to join my new company and had a valid reason to ask for it:
- 20% (out 40%) is because, I'm going to lose my appraisal for my past 1.5 years in my current company for the jump.
- Remaining 20% for jump to the new company.
All I said was, this is why I ask 40%, but they agreed only to 30% overall.
While I'm not happy about getting less than 40% overall, 10% less doesn't makea huge impact. But I rejected the offer mainly because, they didn't give me a convincing answer explaining why I believed I should get a 40% hike and not anything less than that.
What is wrong with my approach?
salary negotiation human-resources
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
edited Jan 30 '14 at 13:40
yochannah
4,21462747
4,21462747
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
asked Jan 30 '14 at 13:04
thatzprem
973
973
closed as primarily opinion-based by Ricketyship, Jim G., bethlakshmi, CincinnatiProgrammer, Adam V Jan 30 '14 at 14:54
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
closed as primarily opinion-based by Ricketyship, Jim G., bethlakshmi, CincinnatiProgrammer, Adam V Jan 30 '14 at 14:54
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24
add a comment |Â
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
8
down vote
What is wrong in my approach?
If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.
On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.
Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
To answer the written question, no. Negotiation is not about proving that the other person doesn't deserve what they are demanding, or accepting that they do deserve it. Negotiation -- done right -- is about finding something that works for both people and leaves both people confident they have done the right thing.
For example, if you need to earn 100 somethings in the new job, and you would rather not work there than earn 99 somethings, and that is the absolute truth for you, then no matter what salary they offer you will be happy, because either it will be more than 100 and you'll take the job, or it will be less than 99 and you will not. If they need to hire a great whatever-you-are and spend no more than 110 somethings, they will be delighted to hire you at 100 somethings. If they must spend no more than 80 somethings, they will be sad not to hire you, but they will have met their constraints.
The best negotiations find out what matters and what doesn't matter. You want to wear casual clothing? That's worth more to you than 10 somethings? Well maybe I don't care, so I just saved money. You want an extra week's paid vacation a year (representing 2% of your annual salary) and you'll come down 5% to get it? Everybody wins! You're willing to put in your own time to get certified on something if I give you a 10 something raise? I'd be happy to have a certified person, even if I suspect you would have done it without the raise, I'm still happy.
Here's the trick. They don't care why you want 100 somethings. The fact you're making 60 somethings now and are sure you're about to get a raise to 80, and "deserve" a raise for changing jobs - that means nothing to your interviewer. What matters to the interviewer is this:
- are you worth that amount of money to the company?
- if they don't give you what you ask for, will you take the job anyway?
When they try to argue about whether or not you deserve it, they are working on the second point. They want you to accept less. This generally doesn't leave people feeling happy. But when you want a huge increase, you are setting yourself up for "only" getting a large one and feeling bad. Why do that?
As a note, I let my people set their own starting salaries. I ask them in the interview what they would like to make. If they're worth that, I hire them and if not, I don't. I never try to get them to accept less. This makes everyone happier, in my experience. I suggest you not inflate what you "need" or "deserve" if the truth is you would accept less. It just leaves you feeling that you started the job with a small failure.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
8
down vote
What is wrong in my approach?
If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.
On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.
Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
add a comment |Â
up vote
8
down vote
What is wrong in my approach?
If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.
On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.
Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
add a comment |Â
up vote
8
down vote
up vote
8
down vote
What is wrong in my approach?
If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.
On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.
Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
What is wrong in my approach?
If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.
On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.
Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
answered Jan 30 '14 at 13:17
Joe Strazzere
224k107661930
224k107661930
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
add a comment |Â
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
I agree. What you're going to need to figure out the pros and cons of the job against the salary offered. For example, I am considering a career move and have 3 different companies interested at the moment. I am not interested in one of them, but the pay is at least 10% better than my current position, and the others may be not as much and require a move, but I am interested in the position.
– bigdaveyl
Jan 30 '14 at 14:39
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
To answer the written question, no. Negotiation is not about proving that the other person doesn't deserve what they are demanding, or accepting that they do deserve it. Negotiation -- done right -- is about finding something that works for both people and leaves both people confident they have done the right thing.
For example, if you need to earn 100 somethings in the new job, and you would rather not work there than earn 99 somethings, and that is the absolute truth for you, then no matter what salary they offer you will be happy, because either it will be more than 100 and you'll take the job, or it will be less than 99 and you will not. If they need to hire a great whatever-you-are and spend no more than 110 somethings, they will be delighted to hire you at 100 somethings. If they must spend no more than 80 somethings, they will be sad not to hire you, but they will have met their constraints.
The best negotiations find out what matters and what doesn't matter. You want to wear casual clothing? That's worth more to you than 10 somethings? Well maybe I don't care, so I just saved money. You want an extra week's paid vacation a year (representing 2% of your annual salary) and you'll come down 5% to get it? Everybody wins! You're willing to put in your own time to get certified on something if I give you a 10 something raise? I'd be happy to have a certified person, even if I suspect you would have done it without the raise, I'm still happy.
Here's the trick. They don't care why you want 100 somethings. The fact you're making 60 somethings now and are sure you're about to get a raise to 80, and "deserve" a raise for changing jobs - that means nothing to your interviewer. What matters to the interviewer is this:
- are you worth that amount of money to the company?
- if they don't give you what you ask for, will you take the job anyway?
When they try to argue about whether or not you deserve it, they are working on the second point. They want you to accept less. This generally doesn't leave people feeling happy. But when you want a huge increase, you are setting yourself up for "only" getting a large one and feeling bad. Why do that?
As a note, I let my people set their own starting salaries. I ask them in the interview what they would like to make. If they're worth that, I hire them and if not, I don't. I never try to get them to accept less. This makes everyone happier, in my experience. I suggest you not inflate what you "need" or "deserve" if the truth is you would accept less. It just leaves you feeling that you started the job with a small failure.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
To answer the written question, no. Negotiation is not about proving that the other person doesn't deserve what they are demanding, or accepting that they do deserve it. Negotiation -- done right -- is about finding something that works for both people and leaves both people confident they have done the right thing.
For example, if you need to earn 100 somethings in the new job, and you would rather not work there than earn 99 somethings, and that is the absolute truth for you, then no matter what salary they offer you will be happy, because either it will be more than 100 and you'll take the job, or it will be less than 99 and you will not. If they need to hire a great whatever-you-are and spend no more than 110 somethings, they will be delighted to hire you at 100 somethings. If they must spend no more than 80 somethings, they will be sad not to hire you, but they will have met their constraints.
The best negotiations find out what matters and what doesn't matter. You want to wear casual clothing? That's worth more to you than 10 somethings? Well maybe I don't care, so I just saved money. You want an extra week's paid vacation a year (representing 2% of your annual salary) and you'll come down 5% to get it? Everybody wins! You're willing to put in your own time to get certified on something if I give you a 10 something raise? I'd be happy to have a certified person, even if I suspect you would have done it without the raise, I'm still happy.
Here's the trick. They don't care why you want 100 somethings. The fact you're making 60 somethings now and are sure you're about to get a raise to 80, and "deserve" a raise for changing jobs - that means nothing to your interviewer. What matters to the interviewer is this:
- are you worth that amount of money to the company?
- if they don't give you what you ask for, will you take the job anyway?
When they try to argue about whether or not you deserve it, they are working on the second point. They want you to accept less. This generally doesn't leave people feeling happy. But when you want a huge increase, you are setting yourself up for "only" getting a large one and feeling bad. Why do that?
As a note, I let my people set their own starting salaries. I ask them in the interview what they would like to make. If they're worth that, I hire them and if not, I don't. I never try to get them to accept less. This makes everyone happier, in my experience. I suggest you not inflate what you "need" or "deserve" if the truth is you would accept less. It just leaves you feeling that you started the job with a small failure.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
To answer the written question, no. Negotiation is not about proving that the other person doesn't deserve what they are demanding, or accepting that they do deserve it. Negotiation -- done right -- is about finding something that works for both people and leaves both people confident they have done the right thing.
For example, if you need to earn 100 somethings in the new job, and you would rather not work there than earn 99 somethings, and that is the absolute truth for you, then no matter what salary they offer you will be happy, because either it will be more than 100 and you'll take the job, or it will be less than 99 and you will not. If they need to hire a great whatever-you-are and spend no more than 110 somethings, they will be delighted to hire you at 100 somethings. If they must spend no more than 80 somethings, they will be sad not to hire you, but they will have met their constraints.
The best negotiations find out what matters and what doesn't matter. You want to wear casual clothing? That's worth more to you than 10 somethings? Well maybe I don't care, so I just saved money. You want an extra week's paid vacation a year (representing 2% of your annual salary) and you'll come down 5% to get it? Everybody wins! You're willing to put in your own time to get certified on something if I give you a 10 something raise? I'd be happy to have a certified person, even if I suspect you would have done it without the raise, I'm still happy.
Here's the trick. They don't care why you want 100 somethings. The fact you're making 60 somethings now and are sure you're about to get a raise to 80, and "deserve" a raise for changing jobs - that means nothing to your interviewer. What matters to the interviewer is this:
- are you worth that amount of money to the company?
- if they don't give you what you ask for, will you take the job anyway?
When they try to argue about whether or not you deserve it, they are working on the second point. They want you to accept less. This generally doesn't leave people feeling happy. But when you want a huge increase, you are setting yourself up for "only" getting a large one and feeling bad. Why do that?
As a note, I let my people set their own starting salaries. I ask them in the interview what they would like to make. If they're worth that, I hire them and if not, I don't. I never try to get them to accept less. This makes everyone happier, in my experience. I suggest you not inflate what you "need" or "deserve" if the truth is you would accept less. It just leaves you feeling that you started the job with a small failure.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
To answer the written question, no. Negotiation is not about proving that the other person doesn't deserve what they are demanding, or accepting that they do deserve it. Negotiation -- done right -- is about finding something that works for both people and leaves both people confident they have done the right thing.
For example, if you need to earn 100 somethings in the new job, and you would rather not work there than earn 99 somethings, and that is the absolute truth for you, then no matter what salary they offer you will be happy, because either it will be more than 100 and you'll take the job, or it will be less than 99 and you will not. If they need to hire a great whatever-you-are and spend no more than 110 somethings, they will be delighted to hire you at 100 somethings. If they must spend no more than 80 somethings, they will be sad not to hire you, but they will have met their constraints.
The best negotiations find out what matters and what doesn't matter. You want to wear casual clothing? That's worth more to you than 10 somethings? Well maybe I don't care, so I just saved money. You want an extra week's paid vacation a year (representing 2% of your annual salary) and you'll come down 5% to get it? Everybody wins! You're willing to put in your own time to get certified on something if I give you a 10 something raise? I'd be happy to have a certified person, even if I suspect you would have done it without the raise, I'm still happy.
Here's the trick. They don't care why you want 100 somethings. The fact you're making 60 somethings now and are sure you're about to get a raise to 80, and "deserve" a raise for changing jobs - that means nothing to your interviewer. What matters to the interviewer is this:
- are you worth that amount of money to the company?
- if they don't give you what you ask for, will you take the job anyway?
When they try to argue about whether or not you deserve it, they are working on the second point. They want you to accept less. This generally doesn't leave people feeling happy. But when you want a huge increase, you are setting yourself up for "only" getting a large one and feeling bad. Why do that?
As a note, I let my people set their own starting salaries. I ask them in the interview what they would like to make. If they're worth that, I hire them and if not, I don't. I never try to get them to accept less. This makes everyone happier, in my experience. I suggest you not inflate what you "need" or "deserve" if the truth is you would accept less. It just leaves you feeling that you started the job with a small failure.
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
answered Jan 30 '14 at 14:50
Kate Gregory
105k40232334
105k40232334
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
We can't answer that for you. What is right/wrong depends on you and the outcome vs. the outcome you wanted. It's always easy in hindsight, of course. For future use, remember that negotiation is a back-and-forth process much of the time. If you want 3x, ask for 4x, as they will counter with 2x, and then you all can 'win' by agreeing to 3x.
– DA.
Jan 30 '14 at 16:37
Your reasons may seem valid to you but they woud not seem valid to the business doing the hiring. They want to feel your performance will be worth that big a jump in salary and that the salary is in line with what they pay others or what the market is charging not that you want the money. I think you are being extremely unrealistic in what you expect and in how you go about asking for it. And no they don't have to "Disprove" your reasons, that is one of the silliest notions I have ever read. They will offer what they can afford and what they think you are worth. You are free to turn it down.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 18:24