Banish Lowball Offers

We had the pleasure and privilege of sharing some of our recruiting thoughts with Frank Sennett, Editor of Employee Recruitment & Retention. He asked us to provide a pet peeve in recruiting -- and something many people take to be conventional wisdom but that we find to be a myth.  Here's our example, as permitted for repost/print by Frank.

A pet peeve that certainly ranks high on the list is employers who extend low offers to start the negotiation process in a highly competitive market.  The logic, as it has been described to me, goes something like this:   A manager (often relatively new at hiring) falls in love with a candidate.  Along the way, the recruiter learns the candidate's wage history and expectations, calibrates it with current market conditions, and coaches the manager about an acceptable price point.  Check—the desired amount is in the budget range.  The candidate is primed to receive good news...and then the hiring manager offers well below the price point because he or she wants "room to negotiate."  It's like watching the final tragic seconds of overtime in a basketball game where the deciding point is up in the air: he aims, he shoots...HE MISSES! 

In the spirit of setting up the new hire up for optimal retention, isn't it more efficient to approach the offer as a whole interaction that includes up-front discovery of needs, transparent calibration of company resources, and a resulting agreement on the number?  Great candidates always have other options (especially in a competitive market), and the price of low-balling isn't just the loss of talent; it's also the viral negative effect of word on the street about how your company does business.  Recruiting the next person gets more difficult as a result.

Technorati tags: salary, recruiting, negotiation

 

Comments

[Moises Lopez]

I've often said the same thing but is there anything that can be done. It seems like we are not waking up the the reality of a tight market. Thanks great post.