Unless you're already extremely out of band and are pretty sure your range will be higher than 95% of your incoming offers, I do not recommend doing this. Never give first numbers, and if you're in software and haven't gotten past the middling, typical startup salary numbers and onto the mind-blowingly high numbers, you will not feel confident enough to handle a negotiation where you've already given away too much information.
I have >20 years of experience and my comp is absolutely >95% of inbound offers. So yes, I definitely want to not waste time with those and instead focus on the 5%.
That's great, and I'm in a similar situation myself. But your intro mentioned this being early career advice, which could mislead people into making pretty big negotiation mistakes.
Definitely negotiate, but the first rule of negotiation is to never be the first to give a number. And the 2nd rule is to always have multiple options that you'd consider.
I disagree: the first one who gives a number is able to anchor the negotiation around their preferred outcome; it's much harder to negotiate up from a lowball number than the other way around.
The preferred outcome of the company is making a successful hire, so they will go high enough to make sure they get a great candidate, or if they can't afford that, will go to their max budget. And if they don't then you don't want to work there anyway.
There is no situation where you will say a high number and they will move up to meet you if that number was greater than their max budget to begin with.
> There is no situation where you will say a high number and they will move up to meet you if that number was greater than their max budget to begin with.
Yes, and since it's quite common to have companies where their max budget is not acceptable (probably because they are the ones who can't fill their vacancies and thus have recruiters spam everyone all the time), it's important to filter them out by saying the high number before you've wasted many hours on worthless interviews.
The point is the tactic of giving the first number, though successful in ending many unappealing recruitment attempts, also has the unintended side effect of making it impossible that you'll ever get an offer SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE your target range. Because comp boosts in the 50-100% range are possible, and you actually want to see those, you should let the recruiting org offer the first number.
You can simply quote a much higher amount instead. Boost your own salary by 100% and ask for that. When I was still working, that's what I used to do, and lo and behold, I 8x'ed my salary within 5 years.
Again, as others have repeatedly said here, this is a textbook example of why that’s a bad strategy. 100% sounds like a ton to you. How could it not? My last top offer was literally 2.5x what I was making. Never in my wildest dreams would I have been able to pick a number that high and say it with a straight face.
Interviewee: OK, I can consider it if you promise me a reasonable revision in a year.
2:
Interviewee: Whats your offer?
Company: Z, Z<Y
Interviewee: That's too low. I want X.
Company: You're asking for X when we offered Z. That's too much of a difference and it doesn't sound reasonable to us. We find it insulting. Let's end it here.
Can't tell whether it is sarcasm or not. A "Company" might get insulted, but, lucky you, you talk to a hiring manager. Who is just a person, not an entire organization, and who is not spending that X out of their own pocket.
The hiring manager is a person representing a company, which is exactly why they would find their downplaying the offer (because they were hoping to increase it somewhat to meet the candidate in the middle, so they had to start low because they want to keep some gap there) embarassing and feel insulted.
They may not be spending out of their pocket but they are spending out of their budget.
In corp dev where I worked until 2020. The compensation range is small enough that you know when you’re asking for top of range and you are at most leaving a couple of thousand on the table.
