Art Of The Deal: Negotiating With Prospective Employers

Sometimes, negotiating with a prospective employer is easy. "In fact, I wrote my own ticket," says K.C. Nicolaou, a chemist lured from the University of Pennsylvania after being courted by the Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, Calif., and the University of California, San Diego, for a dual appointment. "Essentially, [Scripps and UC-San Diego] did exactly what I asked them to do." It didn't hurt his position, he recalls, that "at the same time I was recruited by Yale." Clearly in the catbird seat, Nicolaou negotiated from a position of strength and chose a dream situation: two new labs, colleagues he respected at UC-San Diego, the opportunity to hire colleagues he wanted at Scripps, and, virtually, carte blanche to determine the direction of a new chemistry department at Scripps--on top, of course, of salary and benefits he describes as "very generous." Not bad. Yet hammering out an agreement doesn't always go so smoothly; even impressive credentials and generous offers don't guarantee a positive end to a negotiation. Biosciences placement consultant Erwin Posner of Southfield, Mich., recalls a Johns Hopkins University professor he recruited for a position with a "deep-pocketed" major research firm. The scientist, late in negotiations, botched the deal by implying that the offer was only his second choice, says Posner: "He told them a pending [National Institutes of Health] grant would supersede their offer if it came through." Adds Posner, groaning, "You wouldn't think a guy who had an M.D. and a Ph.D. could be so dumb." Then again, perhaps you would. Says J.M. Moerschbaecher, head of the department of pharmacology at Louisiana State University Medical Center, Baton Rouge, when it comes to job negotiation, "scientists are probably worse, I'd guess, than most people, on the whole. They should practice negotiating as well as they practice their seminars." The first thing they should learn, according to Sheryl N. Dawson, president of Dawson & Dawson, a Houston outplacement firm, is that "everything is negotiable." Dawson is the coauthor, along with her husband, Kenneth M. Dawson, of Job Search: The Total System (New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1988). And, she advises candidates, even if you don't have the leverage of a Nicolaou, once you're past the interview stage and into negotiation, "you're in the driver's seat. They want you--and you should take advantage of that." Taking advantage of that is what job negotiation is all about. It starts, as Dawson says, with doing some homework--finding out what is negotiable in your situation. In academia, for example, salary is rarely the key negotiating point, as universities do not want to create salary gaps among equal faculty members. "You have to keep in mind that [schools] want that parity, that equity, to keep up morale," says Moerschbaecher. Finding some room for negotiation is part of the homework the candidate must do. "In many institutions there are published salary listings," says Dawson. "But you might try other trade publications to find out what the going rate is. And try to talk to other professors or scientists about the negotiation process. You'd be surprised how much people will reveal." But this must be done early. Posner recalls a scientist who made the stunning negotiation gaffe of suddenly changing demands late in the process, after receiving information he should have found much earlier; naturally, the negotiation collapsed. Since salary will be negotiable only to a point, candidates should find out "what areas [potential employers] have traditionally been flexible in," says Dawson. That is, perhaps a university has historically helped with moving expenses, offered to help find work for spouses, or proffered extra secretarial help. In fact, the more an applicant brings up, the better. "I recommend that the candidate put down everything that concerns them, even if it's not usually considered compensation. Then, figure out what you can ask that would address that concern. That's where the creative ideas come up," Dawson says. These methods work in all areas of employment, but academia has its own terrain. "Teaching load is extremely negotiable," says Moerschbaecher. "A new professor often needs a reduced teaching load to establish a lab. And something I'm struck by is issues like pregnancy leave. I hear applicants saying, `I have two kids, and three days a week I have to drop them off at day care, so I need to be able to schedule classes around that.'" Claude Schochet, a professor of mathematics and associate dean of budget and personnel for the College of Liberal Arts at Wayne State University in Detroit, notes that "for nontenured people, there's a discussion about how many years get put on the tenure clock." Most universities run on a seven-year, tenure-or-bust cycle, so when starting at a new school, a professor should negotiate the years into the cycle to his or her own best advantage. A well-published professor might want to speed up the cycle by requesting that the tenure decision be made earlier, whereas a less-established professor will probably want to leave as many years as possible before the decision. Yet these concerns, says Walter Wales, acting dean of the School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, are usually secondary in negotiation. "In the first approaches, nobody asks about that," he says. Even salary isn't the first concern of most professors. "First," Wales says, "is startup costs"--money for equipment, staff, and supplies. "Ten years ago," Wales says, "[scientists would] come, then raise money, then start [doing research] a couple years later. That's not the case now. Now they want the assurance that they can put together a laboratory as quickly as possible." To do this, professors negotiate for start-up costs, which often run in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Moershbaecher notes that attempting to wrangle funds for such expenses, "in my experience, tends to be where people get hung up." Connected to start-up costs is lab space. A start-up package can include new or revitalized lab space, or even new buildings. But in most cases, lab space, like start-up dollars, must be negotiated. There is no consensus on the most effective way to bargain for these scarce resources. "My strategy," says Moerschbaecher, "would be to give the university multiple options. `Here's my bottom line, here's what would be just speculation, here's a wish list.'" Dawson disagrees: "My advice is, come in with the wish list, and use that as a basis for negotiation." Nicolaou used Dawson's technique, writing a five-page letter detailing exactly what he needed. Though not all candidates do as well as he did, aiming high is the best strategy. But an effective negotiator should be prepared, says Wales. "Know very specifically what you want. What's it for? If a candidate said, `Well, I have an offer for $500,000 [for equipment] from somewhere ' I would still say, `What's it for?' We may have another machine like it. I'd say, `Let's go look at this thing and see if you can use it.'" In industry, start-up costs are rarely an issue because a scientist almost always enters an existing program--one that is intended to make and sell a certain amount of a certain product. "The big difference between academics and industry is that we have a P&L [profit and loss statement] to answer to," says Mike Melore, director of corporate human resources for Centocor Inc. of Malvern, Pa. This environment is not conducive to laying out major expenditures for labs and personnel that may not generate income for years. Negotiations in industry are thus more focused on salary. Whereas a university, sensitive to prestige and appearance, may extend itself to hire a professor whose research may bear fruit only down the line, a business rarely has this luxury. Says Posner of universities, "Their budgets are such that time is worth less than money," so a new professor can often negotiate for time when money is not available. In industry, time and money are the same thing. Melore notes that while salaries in business are somewhat more negotiable than they are in academia, parity is still an issue in industry: "The one thing you've got to be concerned about is the internal equity. At times, individuals are just too expensive, and you have to pass." Zoltan Csimma, vice president of human resources and operations for the Cambridge, Mass.-based Genetics Institute Inc., echoes Melore's comments regarding internal equity, and then reduces negotiation space further by noting that "benefits in high-tech companies tend to be egalitarian." In other words, even benefits are often not widely negotiable. What are negotiable are bonuses, a concept uncommon in the university setting. Whether given in the form of a "sign-on" bonus, stock options made available at agreed-upon times, or other incentives, bonuses are a highly malleable and highly private element in the negotiation between a company and a scientist. "There are ways of maintaining parity but giving people more bonuses," says Melore. "It's the perquisites that make the difference." These perks, not unlike those mentioned by universities, are used to address the individualized needs of a particular candidate. "If a person's got a sticky situation," says Melore, the company can help. "Let's say you recruit him in March," and he can't sell his house or move until later, says Melore. "There are times when you can extend temporary living arrangements." Dawson agrees that areas other than salary might be the most useful ones for negotiating: "You might be able to negotiate support, or staffing arrangements. Performance appraisal timeframe is another good thing to consider." It's worth noting in these recessionary times that even when losing a job a scientist should remember to negotiate. Granted, it's not possible to negotiate your way out of a salary cut or job loss. "An organization will often make a decision for different reasons than they present," Dawson says, so if you're out, accept it. But "many institutions do not have a formal severance program--and usually there is a lot more flexibility there than there is in hiring," so you can negotiate for things like outplacement services, insurance continuation, and even use of a phone or office as you seek new employment. As usual, it can't hurt to ask. In government labs, hiring guidelines are even more rigid than they are in industry. Says John Thomas, head of the thermal stress program at the Naval Medical Research Institute in Bethesda, Md., "As a point of principle, one never hires an individual--you fill a slot. The salary [and benefits are] absolutely fixed by laws and legislation. The process of hiring a Nobel Prize winner is exactly the same as if a secretary comes in." The effect this has on negotiation with prospective employees is obvious. "It makes it extremely difficult," Thomas says. "The avenues available are actually very limited." Beyond the consideration of extremely rare and not very lucrative government incentive bonuses, Thomas says, he has little ground to give in negotiation. He describes the process whereby, when a government lab needs to fill a position, the lab director determines what level of scientist is needed and goes through the paperwork to create a slot for such a scientist. Then, when scientists apply for the position, "people called `classifiers' look through the vitas" and assign the applicants salary classifications. The scientist hired has to fit the slot. Of course, as ever, there's wiggle room. "You can create a slot that has many levels," he says, allowing the government to hire a scientist at any of several classifications, at which point the scientist can only hope his or her vita is rated at the highest level possible. (And yes, "the government or the individual can always request reclassification," if dissatisfied, says Thomas.) In fact, the classifiers often try to respond to the needs of the lab that is seeking candidates. Thus, "if the government needs computer scientists," says Thomas, in order to get the pay up to fill positions, "they may classify people upwards. I don't want to say they relax the standards, but they may evaluate [applicants] according to another standard." The earlier the scientist and the department are in contact, the better. "Once you have a slot created, you don't change it," Thomas says. Some ancillary topics are negotiable--such as expenses for moving or travel to interviews--but in most cases, Thomas says, "it's sort of a take-it-or-leave-it issue." It's tempting to see all negotiations as take-it-or-leave-it issues, especially, as Dawson says, when they want you. Cases like Nicolaou's San Diego deal make negotiating seem like an opportunity to fill a wish list of personal and professional goals. In truth, though, negotiation is just the final--and, probably, the most difficult--step in the process of getting a new job. Successful negotiators, after doing their homework and arming themselves with clear explanations of their needs and as much information as possible about what they can reasonably hope to get, also remember that the job itself is the real goal. As Nicolaou says, an institution doesn't "want someone to [take a job] for a better salary or because the weather is nice" in the city where the job is located. "You're looking for the opportunity to do better science. The rest of it is just decoration." Decoration, in any case, that's worth a few hours of homework. Scott Huler is a freelance writer based in Philadelphia.

Art Of The Deal: Negotiating With Prospective Employers

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of