Here is another similar guide. Easier said than done of course. http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/
Thanks for posting this, it's in the same vein as the original link but far more thorough.
Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
101–110 of 234 posts
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#102Another B.S. article about negotiating IT salary's. If IT salary's kept pace back before the Dot bomb days everyone would be making 150k starting. Here is why we don't IT has for the most part never been a money maker of a lot of companies. They see it as a loss leader. IT is seen as the "Oh boy here comes the IT budget again." Unless of course your business is making software for the masses. But then I have been at…
I got a $15K raise last month, from $60 to $75K. I expect a much bigger one next year. It's not impossible to get those raises, but you have to align your thinking with the way the company operates, have supporters in the company, and bring real value to the table. If you're just checking boxes or asking for more money "just because", then you deserve the arched eyebrow you're bound to get.
a 25% raise is unlikely next year, sounds to me that this was more of a salary adjustment than a raise which are typically between 3-9%. At your salary level it's not uncommon to have adjustments to bring you in line with others in your team. Possibly they started you low to see how it would work out.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand your objection to his original phrasing - he asked you what your salary requirement is?
Its almost never in your (an employee/interviewee) best interest to disclose that. You are essentially saying "here is the minimum I will work for" (and that's usually what you'll get) - let them try to figure that out!
What if you say your {last salary + 50%} is your minimum?
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#104The main tenet of this blog post is that you should argue for your compensation based on the amount of value you add to the company. That's nice in theory, but the techies' dilemma is that it's often difficult or impossible to put a hard number on the value they have added. How many customers were retained because you decreased response times by 100ms? How many customers were gained because of that slick UI you creat…
there are all kinds of intangibles not mentioned here. what if you have an idea that transforms the company's sales numbers or you dream up a better way of doing the builds that reduces integration bugs. So many ways an employee contributes intangibly.
you're right, pay is basically what your peers make +/-
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#105The main tenet of this blog post is that you should argue for your compensation based on the amount of value you add to the company. That's nice in theory, but the techies' dilemma is that it's often difficult or impossible to put a hard number on the value they have added. How many customers were retained because you decreased response times by 100ms? How many customers were gained because of that slick UI you creat…
How many customers were retained because you decreased response times by 100ms? How many customers were gained because of that slick UI you created?
These two things can be precisely measured, provided you have the traffic. And you should be measuring them anyway, because that slick UI might be hurting things.
A/B test all the things. Then you'll know both your value, and whether any specific improvement you made is worthwhile.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#106interesting to read all these from the engineer's perspective. from the manager's side of the table things are quite different. If an employee comes to me and asks for a raise then I begin the process to replace them. We give reasonable raises, we pay fair market value and an engineer might make a little more elsewhere but they'll be giving back their RSUs and the opportunity to work on really cool stuff. If, however, they want something else then good luck to them, people are all different and it's a free country, but asking for raises means they aren't happy so they will leave anyway, either way, I begin looking.
when someone joins, unless they are at vp level they really don't have much negotiating opportunity, we make a decent offer and they either take it or leave it. we very seldom adjust the offer.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#107The main tenet of this blog post is that you should argue for your compensation based on the amount of value you add to the company. That's nice in theory, but the techies' dilemma is that it's often difficult or impossible to put a hard number on the value they have added. How many customers were retained because you decreased response times by 100ms? How many customers were gained because of that slick UI you creat…
You can address most of those concerns with algebra, some light research, and Fermi estimates. This is not a problem where you need precision, just a reasonable level of accuracy and a well-presented argument.
the real world doesn't work this way when people are involved.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#108interesting to read all these from the engineer's perspective. from the manager's side of the table things are quite different. If an employee comes to me and asks for a raise then I begin the process to replace them. We give reasonable raises, we pay fair market value and an engineer might make a little more elsewhere but they'll be giving back their RSUs and the opportunity to work on really cool stuff. If, however…
This is true at most employers, and is one of the biggest contributors to churn and the lower-than-it-should-be pay in our industry. Companies whose offer includes (implicit or explicit) statements about how cool the projects are are peddling the same employees-are-pets nonsense that the "free food/perks" companies peddle, and there is no shortage of labor ready to lap it up.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like this is something that only inexperienced people fall for though. It's nice to get food, but perks like agency, autonomy, and trust are so much more important than free soda and pizza. Especially when I can get paid more and buy the kind of snacks I like.
Agency, trust, and autonomy are great, but they're no replacement for rock solid health, vision, and dental benefits, plus a matching 401k. Now that's sexy. Disclaimer: I'm married and a father.
Ha, touché. I was coming from the assumption that those things are a baseline that you'll get at most salaried programming jobs, but you're right for calling out that assumption.
The hilarity of maturing. At 19, pizza, soda and video games after work were sexy. At 31, a stable retirement plan is what gets me revved up.
Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an employer that provides free food, I think there's more to it than that in that both sides receive more value. We don't provide free food in order to pay our employees less. We provide free food because we see a lot of value in everyone eating together and employees get a lot of value in just not having to think about lunch or spend the time to go out and eat somewhere. I think most people get more value you out…
This is such an outdated way of thinking (asses in seats). Your company then completely eliminates the possibility of remote work if this lunch time eat-along is so important to the cogs in your machine. You're not providing your employees with food because it benefits them. You're providing your employees with food because it forces them to always be working. > We provide free food because we see a lot of value in e…
People work from home from time to time and it's fine. We do have a couple of remote contractors as well. I don't see how free food prevents this.
We don't tell employees what to think about or talk about at lunch. Sometimes it's work related and sometimes it's just shooting the shit. In either case I feel like both employee and company win.