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

Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 234 posts

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#131

Post by gaius »

watty wrote: post #25

I'm about to ask for a raise for the first time but I'm not entirely sure how to handle it. I've been with this company for 7 years and only received 2-3% increases the past 3 years. I interviewed at a competitor and they offered me a 20% increase, which I turned down. During negotiations should I simply ask for them to match? I don't want them to think I'm actively looking for a new job but want to get paid my worth…

The conversation would go something like, I am ready to take the next step in my career, take on more responsibility, company B have offered me a role doing X, Y, and Z, but I'm happy here and would like to stay, is there anything you can do for me?

The trick is, make them think you are not looking, but that others are looking at you.

But you have to have the offer in-hand, and you have to be willing to pull the trigger.

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#132

Post by orblivion »

gaius wrote: post #12

Free food is such a no-brainer, if you're a manager. For £5 of pizza you can get £50-100 of work, easy, and the workers think they're getting the better deal...

You may be right that it's not a win for the developer. But when talking about perks like this one, I don't understand why people approach analysis as if it's an adversarial relationship. A good deal for the company may also be a good deal for the developer. Why should I only accept a perk if I think I'm screwing over the company? However much they benefit from it, outside of assessing my negotiating position, is none of my business. To put another way, why would I expect to be offered a perk if it didn't benefit the company as well?

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#133

Post by aridiculous »

hnriot wrote: post #106

interesting 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…

I'm really perplexed by this common attitude.

Employees are sometimes happy. Sometimes they're miserable. Sometimes they're in-between — for complicated reasons, that may lie outside of work.

Firing any employee that asks for a raise is so unbelievably short-sighted, binary, sociopathic, and potentially bad for business (morale, replacement costs, unknown costs), it's cartoonishly villainous.

You sir, appear to have authoritarian tendencies.

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#134

Post by gaius »

orblivion wrote: post #132
gaius wrote: post #12

Free food is such a no-brainer, if you're a manager. For £5 of pizza you can get £50-100 of work, easy, and the workers think they're getting the better deal...

You may be right that it's not a win for the developer. But when talking about perks like this one, I don't understand why people approach analysis as if it's an adversarial relationship. A good deal for the company may also be a good deal for the developer. Why should I only accept a perk if I think I'm screwing over the company? However much they benefit from it, outside of assessing my negotiating position, is non…

It becomes adversarial when its used as a substitute. E.g. companies who push the line that lower than market wages are compensated for by pizza, table football, beanbags, stock options...

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#135

Post by gaius »

hnriot wrote: post #104
No1 wrote: post #40

The 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 +/-

Yes, particularly in the UK the vestiges of the old class system are that no matter what price the market clears at a blue-collar worker can never be paid more than a white-collar manager.

So if you are in a situation where there is a glut of junior managers and a scarcity of talented engineers, then seemingly inexplicable things start happening to salaries.

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#136

Post by gaius »

jasonwocky wrote: post #85
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time effort money multiplied by risk of getting less value That's the important component - the volatility of performance has a major impact on price of an option !

Well, to be fair, there's also a chance of getting more value.

Well, you are talking about risk adjusted return there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_%28investment%29

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#137

Post by mseebach »

No1 wrote: post #40

The 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…

> but the techies' dilemma is that it's often difficult or impossible to put a hard number on the value they have added.

Yes, but the point is that if you want to make a good salary, that's the problem you need to fix. What is your approach when you encounter something that's "difficult or impossible" in your daily work? You apply intelligence and creativity and create a solution.

> The reality is [..] If you don't like that, time to go into management or sales.

Whatever you do, DO NOT try to change the rules. DO NOT try to learn what it is management and sales do to get those nice, big salaries. When something is hard, GIVE UP.

Of course you need to understand the employer's BATNA as well: If they don't appreciate tech, ie. their BATNA is to fire you/ignore you until you leave, then that's what you do. But companies can do that to their sales and management teams as well.

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#138

Post by ido »

cozuya wrote: post #70
ido wrote: post #64

Earlier 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!

Ah I see. I still don't see the point of playing it stupid instead of answer with something like "what were you thinking of?"

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#139

Post by chrisbennet »

watty wrote: post #25

I'm about to ask for a raise for the first time but I'm not entirely sure how to handle it. I've been with this company for 7 years and only received 2-3% increases the past 3 years. I interviewed at a competitor and they offered me a 20% increase, which I turned down. During negotiations should I simply ask for them to match? I don't want them to think I'm actively looking for a new job but want to get paid my worth…

Because you've been at the company for 7 years they may take you for granted. You didn't make any noise or leave when you didn't get a raise for 3 years so they probably don't consider you to be a "flight risk".

Another possibility, is that you've stopped increasing your value to the company. This is normal. Einstein probably wasn't reading patents any faster at 7 years than he was at 3 years when he worked at the patent office.

More importantly to you, the company may not be a place where you can "up your game" any further. You need to seek out new jobs where you can increase your knowledge and value.

Re: Salary negotiations for techies (2011)

#140

Post by Terr_ »

ido wrote: post #138
cozuya wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

Ah I see. I still don't see the point of playing it stupid instead of answer with something like "what were you thinking of?"

"First, can you tell me what you have in mind? After all, you have a better idea exactly what you need done, and your company regularly hires people and possesses an HR department dedicated to that sort of research and negotiation. I, on the other hand, am an individual who--because I'm very good at what I do--am seldom on the market."

I haven't tried that one yet, but I find it's still handy to think about as a way to reassure myself that refusing to be the first to name a dollar-amount (baaaad idea) is reasonable.

Post reply on HN