Salary Negotiation • Hacker News Board

Re: Salary Negotiation

#31

Post by swombat » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:23 PM UTC

android521 wrote: post #22

swombat wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is worth any intrinsic amount. The amount is relative to the work they do, the industry they're in, the state of the economy, how many other people can do that job, how many have actually applied, etc. Any salary formula is entirely arbitrary. We have a pay scale simply because it is a useful tool for conversation, not because it represents any sort of intrinsic property of the person being placed on the pay s…

Seriously, if you can't afford a great employee, that's fine. But don't try to belittle someone because of your company's incompetence to pay. And don't stand on a morale high ground. It is disgusting.

> To answer a likely reflex-response to this: that doesn't mean we think people should be working for free, or that we judge people who want to earn more money. It's totally fine to want to make more money. Different people have different expectations and requirements at different stages of their life though.

No belittling intended.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#32

Post by blaze33 » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:23 PM UTC

swombat wrote: post #5

We're really trying to nail a good way to deal with salary negotiations when onboarding people, at GrantTree - one that gets out of this "gotcha" approach to salary. So far the best we've figured out is to be the first ones to name a number, and be super-transparent about how we arrived at that number. The reasoning is that "in a salary negotiation the first person to quote a number loses", so since we (as the employ…

I read about someone who described his own salary negotiation: he writes the minimum salary he's willing to take, the recruiter writes the maximum they're willing to pay , then you show your numbers. If minimum > maximum, call it a day otherwise you continue the negociation.

His trick was to write a minimum of 0 as in if you're not satisfied with his job he won't take your money, supposedly he got much better offers doing the negociation this way, probably because he gets the other party to give a number much higher than what they would otherwise have said. Also it may have been for contracting work and not an employee position. (Can't remember where I read this, probably on hn though).

Re: Salary Negotiation

#33

Post by gk1 » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:23 PM UTC

vox_mollis wrote: post #24

gk1 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware that he was (is) a developer himself, long before he became an evangelist of charging more?

Yes, I'm quite aware of this fact. But he's a socially competent developer, and my point still stands about those of us who are not.

"No true scotsman."

Would you prefer advice from a socially incompetent developer?

If I'm at point A and want to reach point B, I'd value advice from someone who went A->B (and now comfortably sitting at B) more than from someone who is still stuck in A with me.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#34

Post by qznc » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:24 PM UTC

swombat wrote: post #5

We're really trying to nail a good way to deal with salary negotiations when onboarding people, at GrantTree - one that gets out of this "gotcha" approach to salary. So far the best we've figured out is to be the first ones to name a number, and be super-transparent about how we arrived at that number. The reasoning is that "in a salary negotiation the first person to quote a number loses", so since we (as the employ…

> "in a salary negotiation the first person to quote a number loses"

This assumption is wrong. Read about the anchoring effect. Your process still seems fine though.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#35

Post by swombat » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:25 PM UTC

vonmoltke wrote: post #18

ianstormtaylor wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because getting to the point of being a successful business is a really long road, and going down it with someone whose primary motivation is to make money for themselves is going to make that trip way less fulfilling.

I assume everyone starting or working for a for-profit business is primarily (though not solely ) motivated to make money for themselves. Otherwise, they wouldn't be starting or working at a for-profit business.

That assumption doesn't bear out in practice, in my experience. There are plenty of people who believe that for-profit businesses can also achieve great, positive purposes in the world, and want to be a part of it.

Cases in point: Tesla and SpaceX. They aren't charities. They are very purposeful.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#36

Post by oafitupa » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

Are we still linking to this snake oil salesman?

Re: Salary Negotiation

#37

Post by sanderjd » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

havetocharge wrote: post #13

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead, we run a pay evaluation process internally, including feedback about the value of the role and the person from all the people who interviewed the candidate. We publish all that feedback, as well as the suggestion/reasoning of our pay trustees (a group of people who use that feedback to try to place the candidate on our pay scale) None of those factors are why someone is worth $X salary. You say I'm worth $X.…

This isn't correct. When I say you're worth $X, I mean: "you're worth $X to me". If you get a job offer elsewhere for $Y, you're still worth $X to me.

Even more pedantically: it's more like "you're worth at least $X to me" where there is some unknown maximum $X+delta that $Y may or may not be within.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#38

Post by st3v3r » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:30 PM UTC

swombat wrote: post #10

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead, we run a pay evaluation process internally, including feedback about the value of the role and the person from all the people who interviewed the candidate. We publish all that feedback, as well as the suggestion/reasoning of our pay trustees (a group of people who use that feedback to try to place the candidate on our pay scale) None of those factors are why someone is worth $X salary. You say I'm worth $X.…

No one is worth any intrinsic amount. The amount is relative to the work they do, the industry they're in, the state of the economy, how many other people can do that job, how many have actually applied, etc. Any salary formula is entirely arbitrary. We have a pay scale simply because it is a useful tool for conversation, not because it represents any sort of intrinsic property of the person being placed on the pay s…

"If your main concern is getting paid as much as possible then we're probably not the right place for you to work anyway"

That kind of phrasing is generally code for, "We pay crap wages and expect you to live at work."

Re: Salary Negotiation

#39

Post by swombat » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:31 PM UTC

threatofrain wrote: post #21

swombat wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither. We're a purposeful, for-profit, founder-owned[1] company. Just because we are for-profit doesn't mean profit is our only motivation. It's a false dichotomy to suggest that because you want to make money that must be your only driver. Our view of business is that, much like humans, it can achieve and balance multiple objectives. You want to make money: does that mean you want only that to the exclusion of or…

I don't see why paying people less would lead to an improvement in love, family, being a good person, respect, transparency, etc -- unless you're saying that due to pay difference vs market, you'll also expect less work out of them. And money is rarely the actual motivator. Often times, money is the mediator to the things that really motivate people, such as purchasing daycare and enrichment activities, splurging on…

> I don't see why paying people less would lead to an improvement in love, family, being a good person, respect, transparency, etc -- unless you're saying that due to pay difference vs market, you'll also expect less work out of them.

There's definitely no necessary causal link here. We aim to pay enough that they won't leave because it's too little but not so much that they will stay just because of the salary is too high. It's a pretty hard balance to achieve... not sure if we have. We used to phrase it as "pay people fairly" but then "fairness" is so relative as a concept that it is essentially useless.

Having transparent pay does have a clear link with creating a good working environment, in our experience, however - and transparent pay doesn't mix well with having salaries basically based on people's negotiation skills (rather than a more open system like I've described), in backroom deals.

> And money is rarely the actual motivator. Often times, money is the mediator to the things that really motivate people, such as purchasing daycare and enrichment activities, splurging on medical care plans, financial security, etc.

I wish that were always true... my observation is that some people are in fact motivated by the money, and the status that comes with being paid more than others, more than by the things they can actually do with the money. I find it puzzling, but so it is...

Re: Salary Negotiation

#40

Post by swombat » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

st3v3r wrote: post #38

swombat wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is worth any intrinsic amount. The amount is relative to the work they do, the industry they're in, the state of the economy, how many other people can do that job, how many have actually applied, etc. Any salary formula is entirely arbitrary. We have a pay scale simply because it is a useful tool for conversation, not because it represents any sort of intrinsic property of the person being placed on the pay s…

"If your main concern is getting paid as much as possible then we're probably not the right place for you to work anyway" That kind of phrasing is generally code for, "We pay crap wages and expect you to live at work."

Generally, perhaps - not in our case. We pay what we (meaning, the staff, who decide their own pay) believe to be a good wage, and we have excellent work-life balance - we have a number of new parents who have commented that GrantTree has been a very supportive culture for them in the first 6-12 months (which are pretty hard apparently). And we have remote work, flexible working hours, etc.