Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Salary Negotiation

kalzumeus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 419 posts

Re: Salary Negotiation

#281

Post by runT1ME »

swombat wrote: post #212
thomnottom wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company still has to have money in order to operate. I would assume that even without money being the primary focus, they have to be careful about paying out too much or they will be out of business.

Indeed. We are in a highly competitive market, and have a number of interesting projects going on to disrupt that market that won't pay off immediately. If we don't manage our costs reasonably well we won't stay in business. Money is like rocket fuel. If you're accumulating it for its own sake, rather than to get somewhere, I'd say you're doing it wrong - but that's just my opinion...

If you are not paying top of market wages, one or more of the following has to be true:

1. You don't believe top developers are intrinsically 'worth' the amount that FB/Goog/Amzn/ and many other SV companies pay, that it's not a net win for the company to have top talent.

2. You think that you don't need top developers, that really you're just going to be fine recruiting a bunch of B players, and it's some other 'thing' (business? Sales? Marketing? an 'idea'?) that will make you better than competition.

3. You are incapable of harnessing top development talent to produce adequate ROI that would justify top salaries.

Money is not my primary motivator, I love my job. I wouldn't leave just for more money. However, salaries in a certain ballpark are a strong signaler to how much a company values software engineers.

I think it's insulting to see developers significantly underpaid and have you attempt to justify it the way you do. If money is not your primary motivator, wouldn't you be OK taking a bit less salary and having that distributed out to other team members?

Re: Salary Negotiation

#282

Post by jkempe11 »

mehrdada wrote: post #231
jkempe11 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a recruiter and I will tell you this: you should abandon this advice, for certain. It's funny - probably the best advice anyone ever gives on negotiation is exactly the opposite of "don't name a number first." It's "anchor high." You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. This is especially true for senior- and late-career individuals who have som…

> You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. I very much agree with you and my other comments in this thread are very much advocating for this position. I'd just like to add an important caveat by saying anecdotally in multiple occasions I've seen friends (notably people who are just moving in to the Valley from elsewhere and/or right out of college) t…

Probably true. I'm actually in LA, and we experience this too. Honestly, the best thing you can do in salary negotiation (and in almost any negotiation, probably) is to gather as much data as you can to inform your position.

Similar jobs in similarly-funded companies at similar stages should yield a pretty strong dataset of numbers by which you can construct your own ask. Easier said than done, for sure, but if you can - gather data!

Re: Salary Negotiation

#283

Post by softawre »

vertex-four wrote: post #233
Mendenhall wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"always be able to walk away" to me includes never allowing yourself to be in a position where you cant walk away. I think of that as an actual survival trait not just a business skill. I would also say never pretend, actually be willing to walk away. Someone good at psychology or picking up subtle clues will see right through pretending. Anyway you slice it being desperate is never good, don't be desperate.

What a wonderful piece of advice. "Never get in a bad situation!" - people don't intentionally get into bad situations, really, believe it or not.

Just pick yourself up from your boot straps! Or cash in some of that 2m trust your Dad left you. Come on this isn't hard.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#284

Post by bigmanwalter »

pm215 wrote: post #116

So something I'd like to get advice on is: what do you do negotiation-wise if actually salary is not the thing you care most about? Suppose you (for health reasons or just because you don't need the extra money and like the reduced stress) want or need to work less than the usual five-day week -- at what point do you bring up the "hey, how about a four-day week" question, when the typical employer is looking for a fi…

I've been meditating on finding part time work for a while now. It seems the only options are to become indispensable to an organization before you demand it, and then you can keep it until they replace you, or to become a work from home contractor. If you have a new child and are without a stay-at-home partner, you could possibly prolong the amount of time before being made redundant but that seems to be the only socially acceptable reason to want to work part time. Mothers have been complaining about the absurdity of this situation ever since they joined the workforce. The only way to find respectable part time work while staying within the system is to go after traditionally women only jobs like nursing.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#285

Post by T-hawk »

gk1 wrote: post #33
vox_mollis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 in competent 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.

Perhaps. If one is a socially incompetent developer, it's quite possible that one might find advice from another socially incompetent developer to be more relevant and actionable than advice from a socially competent developer.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#286

Post by BuckRogers »

swombat wrote: post #15
brianwawok wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Importantly, we have no interest in trying to sucker someone into working with us if money is their primary motivation. Are you a charity doing good work with orphans? Or are you a business trying to make as much money for the investors as possible? If the latter is true, why wouldn't someone work for you with "money as the primary motivator" ? (This is not Rhetorical, I actually know nothing about your business. B…

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…

Ok I accept that answer at face value.

Now, is the inverse also true? If I take a job with you- can I work 4 day work weeks and stick strictly to the 8 hour workday?

Money is not your only motivator so I don't see why this would be a problem for your employees.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#287

Post by dlubarov »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #265
mehrdada wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. I very much agree with you and my other comments in this thread are very much advocating for this position. I'd just like to add an important caveat by saying anecdotally in multiple occasions I've seen friends (notably people who are just moving in to the Valley from elsewhere and/or right out of college) t…

Want to name some numbers? Ideally with context. I'd like to know how high is high in SV. Especially for junior positions.

I'd say if you're in SV, have a pretty good background, interview at top-paying public firms like Google/Facebook, get good scores, and negotiate very well, you can expect around

  - new grad: ~175k
  - 4 years: ~300k
  - 6 years: ~350k
Note that I'm including equity, expected cash bonuses, 401k matching, and sign-on bonuses (which I normally divide by 4, since 4 years seems like a typical period to stay at these companies).

Re: Salary Negotiation

#288

Post by draw_down »

jknz wrote: post #48

What follows is an honest salary determination process, where no party has incentive to lie. It is also very fast. The rules are as follows. (Can't remember where I read about this.) The company and the candidate write on a piece of paper a salary. The company should write the number above which it is not willing to pay the candidate. The candidate writes the number under which she/he is not willing to work for that…

Maybe read about game theory a little bit.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#289

Post by 15155 »

tedmiston wrote: post #280
15155 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct! But this is exactly the definition of "fit." When I was speaking about "worth" before, naturally one must scope their estimation to the market they're trying to sell to. Market worth is only what the market is willing to pay for something. If you've got a broad, valuable skillset, but a company can only use 10% of it, they can rightfully scope the role and issue an offer or decline to issue an offer. What is…

Is it? I've always looked at fit more from company culture, team dynamic, overall team skill level (A players, B players, etc.) vs. something that's directly associated with a certain compensation package.

Refining: it's a mutual combination of factors, but relative compensation is certainly a strong proxy for some of those factors (skill level, in particular).

Re: Salary Negotiation

#290

Post by mehrdada »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #265
mehrdada wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. I very much agree with you and my other comments in this thread are very much advocating for this position. I'd just like to add an important caveat by saying anecdotally in multiple occasions I've seen friends (notably people who are just moving in to the Valley from elsewhere and/or right out of college) t…

Want to name some numbers? Ideally with context. I'd like to know how high is high in SV. Especially for junior positions.

I'd say this thread is not a bad first approximation for what you are asking for (but note that high side has a lot of variance and is very much context, person, and importantly, timing dependent and the uniquely highs are always underrepresented in these threads, almost by definition):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11314449

As a skilled junior person without having/being known for specific connections/expertise, probably the best generic advice, if your goal is purely optimizing for salary $$$ [and I wouldn't blame anyone for this, but I'd say there are many other factors to optimize for as well], is to get offers at various places, while making sure at least a couple bigcos are included, and play the standard negotiation game (they don't really negotiate with you; they negotiate with each other over you). Also, don't be afraid to jump ship early on when you get a better sense of the numbers you can command and avoid inertia. Inertia can be a big hinderance, especially very early on when a recent decision with much less data is made; a course correction might be essential.

P.S. people who make the real $$$s, don't do that by optimizing for a (risk-free) "salary" taken from an employer, so always keep that in mind.

Post reply on HN