Salary negotiation

There comes a point in every successful job interview when it's time to talk money. The standard advice to job applicants has long been to play it coy.

John Challenger, CEO of outplacement firm Challenger, Gray, and Christmas, urges applicants to "let the employer name a salary first -- it may be higher than you expect." Penelope Trunk, founder of Brazen Careerist, advises that "the right answer to the question, 'What's your salary range?' is almost always some version of 'I'm not telling you.'"

This often leads to an uncomfortable, even adversarial, game of chicken. If that's the sort of conversation you dread, here's good news: there are better alternatives.

A recent study out of the University of Idaho found that making a joke about a million-dollar salary actually increased subsequent offer amounts by more than 10%.The hypothetical applicant in the study's test scenario was an administrative assistant candidate who had listed her last salary as $29,000. When asked what salary she wanted in the new job, she either demurred or quipped, "Well I'd like a million dollars, but really I just want what's fair."

In the cases where the applicant declined to name any number, the average salary offer was about $32,500. When she joked about a million bucks, the average offer rose to almost $36,200.

The increase is a function of a psychological effect known as "anchoring." "When we encounter a number -- even an irrelevant number -- we fixate on it, and it influences our judgment," says Todd Thorsteinson, a psychology professor at the University of Idaho and the study's author.

But before you start throwing numbers around, you should consider the potential for backlash. "In practice, if one's negotiating partner opens with an offer that is too extreme, the most common response is to disengage from the negotiation," warns Rachel Croson, professor of economics at the University of Texas at Dallas and director of the school's Negotiations Center.

Participants in Thorsteinson's study were not given the option to decline to hire the candidate, but were merely asked how much they would offer to pay her.

So should job applicants make a high-salary joke in hopes of increasing compensation?

MORE: Vote: Businessperson of the Year Round 2

Only if you're comfortable with the possibility that you might lose the job offer altogether, says Croson. Before recommending the strategy in general, she'd want to see a follow-up study that quantifies the level of risk involved -- for example, "what percentage of interviewers would be turned off by the joke and choose to find a different employee."

Being the first to talk numbers can still pay off, though. The standard advice -- to dodge the question -- ignores the very real effects of anchoring.

The key is information, says Croson, who has taught negotiation strategies to undergraduates, MBAs, and executives for 18 years. If an applicant knows the salary range for a given position and can name a number at or near the top of what a company is willing to pay, being the first to throw out a dollar figure is always to her advantage.

Challenger still prefers to play it safe. "Companies are all over the map," he says. "The same position may pay 20% more or less, depending upon that company's specific salary structure."

But with company-specific salary data available from sites like Glassdoor.com, today's job candidates have at least a fighting chance to set a high anchor and come out ahead.

Croson also recommends researching the culture of a corporation -- is it individualistic and competitive? Then tough negotiation is fair game. In other environments, aggressive haggling won't play as well.

It's important to remember, says Challenger, that "you're negotiating with someone who may be your next boss, setting up a relationship for the future."

Croson agrees. "Neither side wants to look like a jerk ... or a creampuff," she says.

Things to learn when fired from a job...

There are some things worth being fired over. Sometimes your personal values don’t mesh with the company’s (regardless of what the company’s “Values Statement” says). Back in 2008, at Smith Barney, we had sold supposedly low-risk investments to our clients. But instead of their value declining modestly during the downturn, they went to very close to $0. I never found any evidence of wrong-doing; but I did recognize that we had nonetheless breached our clients’ trust, regardless of what the small print said. I proposed that we share part of the losses with them – both because it was the “right thing” to do, but also very much because sharing the impact of the hit would, I thought, be the “right business thing” to do. There were others who disagreed; after much back-and-forth (and many “no’s”), my team’s argument won the day, but it was clear I wasn’t long for the company.

Squeeze every bit of personal development out of the experience. Ok, this one can be hard. But in the first few weeks out of the company, I made it a practice to ask anyone and everyone what I could have done better or how I could have managed the situation more effectively. This was hardly pleasant, but surprised people into an invaluable honest discussion.

 …..But don’t listen to your “frenemies.” But know who to listen to. I remember a verysenior, very connected, very savvy woman who very kindly told me that my career was over, that having a falling out with a large company was a career-ending event, regardless of the reasons. She authoritatively told me that a man might be able to have a next career chapter, but a woman couldn’t. I chose to completely ignore her.

Cut the cord with the old workplace more quickly than you may want to.  Here is where I made a real mistake. I continued to speak regularly to my former colleagues; my reasoning was that I wanted to be helpful to them and continue to coach them. The truth is, it was a sad drag for them and for me. I should have closed that door faster.

 It’s important to have connections outside of your company. This is pretty self-explanatory. But it’s easy to tell yourself you’ll form these connections later, since few people plan to be fired and the return on this investment can be hard to see, when there are always more urgent matters.

If you’re able to, don’t make any big decisions right away. I had a friend tell me shortly after I left “When something like this happens, you think you’re thinking straight, but you’re not. You won’t think straight for at least three months.” If you have the luxury of avoiding any major career decisions that long, the perspective you gain after decompressing can be valuable.

Nobody cares as much about it nearly as much as you do. I promise.

….But candor helps with future employers. Evading the question wasn’t a particularly good idea in 1985, when your awkward silence may have been a give-away. In this age of social media, it’s an even worse idea.  Own it.

Good results help even more. Let’s face it: it’s one thing to be swept out of a company because a new manager wants to put his own team in place and another because you didn’t deliver business results. In finding that next job, be fact-based and specific on the business results you and your team achieved in the prior one.

If you don’t get fired at least once, you’re not trying hard enough. This isn’t quite true yet, but it is becoming truer. As the pace of change in business increases, the chances of having a placid career are receding. And if in this period of rapid change, you’re not making some notable mistakes along the way, you’re certainly not taking enough business and career chances. 

You can’t beat someone who won’t give up. Yes, I read this on a bumper sticker, but it’s still true.

Five self defeating behaviours to avoid...

In turbulent times, it's hard enough to deal with external problems. But too often people and companies exacerbate their troubles by their own actions. Self-defeating behaviours can make any situation worse. Put these five on the what-not-to-do list.

1. Demanding a bigger share of a shrinking pie

Leaders defeat themselves when they seek gain when others suffer, for example, raising prices in a time of high unemployment when consumers have less to spend, to ensure profits when sales are down. McDonald's raised prices three percent in early 2012 and by the third quarter, faced the first drop in same-store sales in nine years. The executive responsible for that strategy was replaced.

At bankrupt Hostess Brands, bakery workers refused to make concessions (though the Teamsters did), thereby forcing the company to liquidate, eliminating 18,000 jobs. By trying to grab too much, the bakery union could lose everything.

This happens to executives too. A manager in a retail company demanded a promotion during the recession, because he was "indispensable," he said. The CEO, who had cut her own pay to save jobs, fired him instead. Greed makes a bad situation worse.

2.Getting angry

Anger and blame are unproductive emotions. Post-U.S. election, defeated Mitt Romney blamed his defeat on "gifts" that "bought" the votes of young people, women, African-Americans, and Latinos for President Obama. Losing the Presidency is a big defeat, but Romney further defeated future electoral prospects with public bitterness and insults. History might remember the bitterness, not his gracious concession speech.

Anger hurts companies too, especially if misplaced. Years after a tragic explosion on an oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 in which 11 people lost their lives, BP was back in the news with a record fine and criminal charges. Former CEO Tony Hayward defeated himself and damaged the company in the public mind by issuing bitter statements about how unfair this was.

Angry words leave a long trail. An employee in another company who threw a temper tantrum over a denied proposal was surprised that this episode was still recalled two years later, overwhelming his accomplishments. He was the first terminated in a reorganization. Bitterness turns everything sour.

3.Giving in to mission creep

Sometimes self-perpetuated decline occurs more slowly, through taking core strengths for granted while chasing the greener grass. I can't say that this is happening to Google, a company I admire, but I do see potholes ahead — although driverless cars are an extension of mapping software close to Google's core strength in search. But should Google expand its territory to be a device maker and communications network provider, building a fiber-optics and mobile network? This could be mission creep. Perhaps Google should focus on improving Googling.

Trying to become something you are not while there's plenty of value in who you can be self-defeating. For professionals, this can mean branching out into new fields while falling behind in the latest knowledge in the field that made their reputation. People can get caught in the middle — not yet good enough to compete in the new area, while losing strength in the old area.

4.Adding without subtracting

A related form of self-defeat is to allow bloat. Adding new items without subtracting old ones is how closets get cluttered, bureaucracies expand, workloads grow out of control, national budgets go into deficit, and people get fat. It takes discipline to cut or consolidate some things for every one added. Too often that discipline is missing.

A technology company tacked on acquisitions without integration, which made acquired companies happy. But one consequence was 17 warring R&D groups and the lowest R&D in the industry. Bankruptcy followed. Growing without pruning is bad for gardens and for business.

5. Thinking you'll get away with it

Whatever "it" is — lying, cheating, foreign corrupt practices, or swallowing extra bites of chocolate — lapses cannot remain secret for long in the digital age. Believing otherwise is delusional. The mistake will show up somewhere — in routine audits, unrelated FBI investigations, smartphone photos by strangers, or the bathroom scale. In the ultimate example of self-defeating behaviour  too many otherwise-intelligent politicians, military leaders, and CEOs think with their zippers, thereby jeopardizing companies, countries, and careers.

Happily, there's a cure for self-defeating behaviour: Get over yourself.

Humility prevents self-defeat. A desire to serve others, an emphasis on values and purpose, a sense of responsibility for long-term consequences, and knowledge of both strengths and limitations can make it easier to avoid these traps. Google has enjoyed outstanding success, but that doesn't mean it will succeed at everything. The bakery union that fought Hostess into liquidation had solidarity, but perhaps it, too, should have eaten a little humble pie.

COURTESY :-http://blogs.hbr.org/kanter/2012/11/five-self-defeating-behaviors.html

How to know if the candidate fits your office culture

Motivation to do the work is the universal trait of success.

 If you want to improve your interviewing effectiveness, consider this simple idea the next time you’re conducting an interview: 

New Hire Success = Ability to Do the Work Times Motivation to Do the Work 

Ability is actually quite simple to assess, especially if you use the two-question interview approach I suggested in an earlier post. Motivation to do the work, on the other hand, is a bit more complex, and quite frankly, more important, since this is the universal trait of success. 

To get the motivation part right you need to uncover the candidate’s intrinsic interest in doing the actual work required (not competency to do it), the new hire’s likely relationship with the hiring manager, and the person’s ability to work effectively in the company’s inherent culture. Collectively, competency in relationship to interest and fit drives motivation. 

Most interviewers get much of the competency part right, but miss on the fit and motivation part. Since I could write a whole book on this topic, I’ll use this post to focus only on the cultural fit part, since this is the hardest to pin down. For example, in a recent online training program I asked 50 hiring managers from the same company to define their culture. Here were just some of their responses: 

1)   work hard, play hard

2)   have a sense of humor

3)   fast-paced

4)   friendly and warm

5)   like a box of chocolates

6)   intense

7)   a place to create your own destiny

8)   youthful and exuberant, but wanted to hire people of all ages

9)   collaborative, but independent

10)  getting too bureaucratic

In other words it was everything, yet nothing.

If you don’t want to try the random approach, here are some ideas you might want to use to assess cultural fit:

Pace and Position on the Corporate Life Cycle: having worked on more than 1,000 different hiring search assignments and projects, it’s pretty clear that the dominant driver of company culture is the pace of the organization and where it is on the corporate life cycle. Companies that are growing fast and moving from an entrepreneurial start-up to a well-managed company are culturally far different than large scale-organizations that are well-run, but slow to change course. Messed-up companies on life support are a different breed entirely. Examining the environment of a person’s best accomplishments provides a good sense of the types of cultures where the person thrives.

Job Structure: some jobs are more free-flowing (creative marketing), others highly structured (accounting), some are heavily supervised (call center), and others allow for more independence (field sales reps). In addition, I like to categorize jobs by their primary emphasis (maintain, improve, build, create, etc.) and match people accordingly, based on their past accomplishments. When the job structure and the company pace are out-of-alignment, like implementing public reporting systems in a Facebook-like organization, expect cultural shock throughout the company.

Managerial Style: Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model suggests that managers need to adapt their style to best suit their subordinates’ needs. Since few managers are adaptable enough to do this, a simpler solution is for managers to hire people who already fit their preferred style. Managerial style ranges from the very directive to the very loose with big steps like supervisor, trainer, coach and delegator filling the spaces in-between. Subordinate needs vary from those requiring heavy direction and supervision to those wanting none. The in-betweens include those that are trainable, coachable and manageable. Since the relationship with a person’s manager is so important to job satisfaction, performance and motivation, it’s vital to get this part of the assessment correct. Few companies even consider it, hoping to fix the problem later.

Adaptability and DISC: I recently described a super quick means to categorize a person’s personality into four dominant styles: Director, Influencer, Supporter and Controller. The point of the post was to suggest that many people can adjust their style to handle changing circumstances, and many can’t. To improve the chance of a good cultural fit, it’s best to find people who have successfully adapted to different cultures and rapid changes in the past. Rigid people fight change, so look for this and avoid hiring people who haven’t demonstrated an ability to perform at peak levels in a variety of different situations.

Cultural fit is hard to describe and more difficult to assess. Start by examining a person’s major accomplishments and dig into the organizational pace, the types of jobs where the person excelled, the style of the person’s best managers, and the person’s ability to modify their business personality to changing conditions. This will give you a good picture of the candidate’s ability to fit your culture. Cultural fit drives motivation. It should drive your assessment, as well.

courtesy :- http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20121112112646-15454-cultural-fit-is-much-more-than-affability 

In defense of "THE COMPANY MAN"

Do you feel underappreciated at work? Does the next promotion seem decades away, elusive and completely out of reach? Are lesser mortals at your workplace smoothly orchestrating their career progression, much to your disbelief?

Such feelings are common at any workplace. As a business school professor, one of my roles is to serve as a sounding board to students when they run into career difficulties. Once in a while, my students (who are usually working while earning their MBAs), will share similar concerns and ask me if they should switch companies or careers.

One school of thought endorses systematic career exploration even when there is no dissatisfaction with the current work environment. This belief system says that one’s resume should always be on the block. Many people see it as a stigma to remain at the same company for a long period of time. As a result, corporate tenures are getting shorter, and the Company Man seems a relic today.

But my aim is to offer a counter argument. It’s not always necessary to change companies to advance your career. Quite often, it’s possible to engineer your next career move right where you are.

Before changing your company or career it’s worth remembering the old adage “festina lente” – make haste slowly. If you are contemplating a change, consider the following:

Do you want a career change or a company change?

If you merely want to change your line of work, it can often be accomplished within the same company.

Jack Welch, the legendary former chief executive of General Electric, started as a chemical engineer, and gradually took on different roles within the company before landing the top job. Interestingly, he too contemplated leaving GE at one point early in his career. If he had succumbed to this impulse, he may not have had such a formidable career.

Every individual, however outstanding, will encounter a nadir at some point within his company. But that doesn’t mean one has to quit.

Success requires endurance and resilience. Quite often, if you stick around, the environment may change in your favor. A bad boss may be removed by your current company, or a new position may open up for you in another department within the same company.

But how long should you put up with a bad situation? The answer depends on your specific circumstances, but you should keep in mind that hiring managers generally don’t view candidates who have stayed in a company for less than two years positively.

It takes time to build a legacy: There are a number of examples of “lifers” who have stuck around with a company for most of their corporate careers. Besides Mr. Welch, other examples include Narayana Murthy of Infosys 500209.BY -1.43%, Sam Palmisano, who spent most of his corporate career with IBM IBM -1.58%, and Ellen Kullman, the chief executive of DuPont, who started there in 1988 as a marketing manager.

It’s hard to envision the legacy that these individuals have built without a focused commitment to a single place of work.

Malcolm Gladwell, author of the bestselling book Outliers: The Story of Success, talks about the 10,000-hour rule, which basically says that to achieve excellence in any profession, one needs to commit at least 10,000 hours of practice. Assuming a modest 50-hour work-week, to achieve competence, you may have to spend at least four years on a job.

If you have already invested decades in developing specific expertise, your best work could still be ahead of you, and it may not make sense to throw it all away as a result of short-term frustrations.

But sticking around for a long time in the same domain doesn’t mean you should stop learning and stop looking for innovative ways to do your job.

Don’t underestimate the time needed to reestablish credibility: Even if you have a stellar track record, when you join a new place, you need to work hard at reestablishing credibility, and convince your new colleagues that you can do it all over again.

You may have good intellectual and technical skills, but those are only good enough to get you the job. In senior management positions, it’s more important that you demonstrate empathy for your co-workers and have the ability to navigate political structures. Understanding the politics takes time and this is harder to do if you keep moving from one company to another.

The more time you have spent with your current company, the greater will be the depth of your social connections. Job hopping may therefore be more suited to younger people.

Do an honest self-assessment: Sometimes when I speak to restless employees, I find they haven’t taken an honest inventory of their own capabilities. They are unduly optimistic in the evaluation of their own merits, and excessively critical of their workplace.

If an employee is endowed with a major behavioral flaw, such as poor communication skills or inability to work in a team environment, it will not help to move to another company.

When the fault lies within you, you are better off staying where you are and focusing on self-improvement first.

However, if after careful deliberation you find that it’s not you, but an un-supportive boss or your company practices that are holding back your growth, it may be time to move on. In this case, make sure you do your homework and that you have the full support of your new company and new boss.

COURTESY :- http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2012/11/02/career-journal-in-defense-of-the-company-man/?reflink=djm_naukri_career_journal&othersrcp=15079&wExp=N