While the general advice of open ended questions is sound, this question rarely works with companies. They'll simply respond with a vague answer.
"We did market research and determined that this is a competitive rate for your skills."
You have to counter that showing actual market data that disagrees with them.
I'm a but surprised no one mentioned the other "trick" in NSTD: Politely insist on a fringe benefit that they cannot provide (e.g. N weeks of vacation). This will make them more likely to increase the compensation to counter the benefit they cannot give you.
Where's the best place to pull this data from?
In my experience, they never do (if they're a decent sized company).
> "See, I did it this way, and I ended up with this other number. What do you think causes the difference?"
This does work at times to increase your pay, so I recommend it. However, when it doesn't, they are not going to respond to your question. It will be another "We're sorry, but our data suggests otherwise. We aim to be competitive."
Of course, if you're a very senior position and they really want to, they will have a conversation. In the remaining 99% of cases, they'll adjust the salary to an extent, and then you'll hit a wall. That's when you start negotiating on non-salary stuff.
Any good negotiator on the other side of the table would eventually throw you a bone if you are nice, don't relent, ask for reasonable things (if I sign up for you to own the fruits of my labour, I want to know I'm being cared for), and apply the right amounts of awkward silence.
If you're asking for something beyond their upper bound, they'll have a few other levers to offer you (more stock, one time sign on bonus, etc). But keep in mind: If the manager said you were "good, but not great", they're not going to go much higher than their initial offer to you.
In all these scenarios, they have zero incentive to discuss how they came up with that number. If you indicate you can't trust them if they don't, they'll agree and drop you and look for another candidate. The HR person is dealing with multiple hires for multiple positions. He/she doesn't have the time to do a detailed discussion with every one. What's more, what is the point of them sharing it? Put yourself in their shoes. They've come up with a compensation strategy for the whole company. If they're offering below market and they know it, your pointing it out to them doesn't strengthen your position. They know the information your providing them. If they were trying to save money, they'll increase the offer. If their policy is to underpay, they're not going to raise the offer unless the hiring manager indicated you're well above average.
> and apply the right amounts of awkward silence.
Silence is awesome for certain scenarios, but not when dealing with an HR person on a compensation package. Remember: Your asking a question (like the one in your comment) does not throw the ball in their court. They'll either ignore you or give you a canned response. Every offer has a deadline, and they'll ping you again near the deadline. If you continue the silence, they'll withdraw the offer and move on.
If you're joining a small company/startup, your tactics will work. Not so with established companies.
There are stories here on HN about people who had been hired, but were not happy with some of the paperwork they were being asked to sign on their first day on the job. They stood their ground and that was their last day at work. If a company is willing to do that after they've gone through the headache of hiring a person, then don't assume that you have any decent leverage with notions of "it's too painful for them to withdraw an offer and hire another person - they'd rather negotiate."
I'm not saying one should be picky, I'm just saying that if the worker and the employer have very different ideas of the value the worker brings, and one side is not open to discussing their perspective of things, my experience is that doesn't turn into a fruitful partnership with long-term prospects.
At best, it's a temporary gig and then the worker leaves with a bunch of knowledge. It's not a desirable position for anyone. (But that does happen, very often in larger companies, as you say.)
Or maybe the more open ended question is better?
I do like Never Split the Difference, great book. The most common complaint against it is that the author is a bit arrogant, but having read a couple other negotiation books first, I found the author's approach more fair and "real" than the bag-of-manipulative-tricks I found in the other books.
Also, since it's the CTO your talking to, try to establish an (for lack of a better term) "tech people versus the rest of the world" mentality, then he will be more likely to side with you. As we've all seen, people side with their own perceived group. I don't mean this to be as aggressive as it sounds, just try to use the natural camaraderie between tech workers.
This is the most awkward thing you could say.
Like, what value does an SRE engineer bring? Or a cyber person? For a large company; basically nothing on average, until you save them from a major incident, then potentially loads.
I would never use this sort of phrasing, that sound really painful. Have you ever actually used that in a negotiation?
Rather I'd highlight my experience in achieving results at reduced cost, identifying efficiencies, and developing new sources of revenue to highlight my own ability to bring extra value. You're the one asking for more, so you need to justify it.
I'd like to hear more about how it went for you. It seems like one of the ultra logical views which people find weird (or offensive) when spoken out loud. I mean, the principle here is clearly true, both the employee and employer must profit, if this condition doesn't exist the company soon dies.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21769264
The techniques won't work if you use them verbatim because someone else who has read the book will recognize it.
He simplifies things to a set of rules, but it's up to you to be judicious on when to use them and to do your homework on what the underlying principles are.
Arrogance is one thing. Outright misleading/lying about what other books say is another.
I'm new to negotiations, having been avoidant my whole life. I've started with GTY and Chris Voss's masterclass, but I know there's more out there. Someone here on HN mentioned once that 'salience models' are the now the cutting edge of negotiation theory, but I haven't been able to find much useful beginner/intermediate stuff on that.
Bargaining for Advantage does this. I expect most "academic" books do it.
So even if they do offer the 30 you'd be happy with, still negotiate. The outcome can only be happier for you.
The market is currently incredibly hot, which drives up average wages. But a good company will make a sensible offer on the low boundary with a willingness to go up. Then if someone offers you 4k more at least that sets me a marker.
When you receive the offer, you should comment on the differential between expected and offered wage, even if you intend to accept. For example, you might say with a gently puzzled tone, "this is lower than what I would ideally be earning, based on my experience and capabilities. Can you explain how you came to this number?"
You may be able to push back on them a little bit. You will be able to tell if there's room to negotiate, based on the response to you. Don't overdo it, as simply commenting on the differential and seeing how they respond is a way of gently squeezing them. If it seems the number is negotiable, ask if they can compromise with (for example) $33. The art is in doing this in a confident and friendly way, so that the position doesn't collapse.
Whatever number you set as the price you want, don't waver on it after it escapes your lips. Let them consider the number unless it's clear there will be no budging. If possible, do some research on other roles or other engineers you know in the business, so that you can justify your ask. It's not your standard of living that sets the price, it's your alternative job and their alternative hire.