Harper's Rules by Danny Cahill

extinguished. Harper Scott: Mr. Buzzkill.
    â€œWhat should I have said?”
    Harper sighed the way you sigh when you have spent years trying to change someone. “Okay, you want to write a chapter? Write what I say down and send it to me.”
    I flipped open my laptop.
    â€œI’m not sure how I got downgraded to stenographer, but go!”
    HARPER’S RULES
How to Handle The Compensation Discussion in an Interview
    If you are on your first interview and the decision maker asks you how much money you desire, you’ve witnessed a very clear buying sign. Interviewing 101 says you don’t discuss money on the first interview; you know it and they know it. If, knowing this rule, they can’t keep from breaking it, it’s because they already know at some level they want to hire you and now want to get to the bottom line.
    But danger lurks! In my headhunting career, nothing has cost candidates more jobs or money than the wrong response when it comes to the money discussion in an interview.
    Here is the age-old dynamic: they want to hire you at the lowest amount possible; you want to get the highest amount possible. Neither one of you wants to feel like you were taken advantage of, and neither one of you wants the other feeling like they were exploited. Both are deeply suspicious that the other is guilty of “fudging” the numbers. (The company says it couldn’t possibly pay what you say you want for budgetary reasons, and you say you couldn’t possibly accept less due to personal financial commitments.) There is gamesmanship in play here. It’s not about money; it’s about playing the game well.
    â€œBut this isn’t a rug at a tag sale,” you say, “this is a person’s livelihood, a company’s bottom line. This shouldn’t be trivialized into some puerile notion of one-upmanship. Surely we’re all beyond that when it comes to our career!”
    Uh, that would be a “no.”
    Everything is a game, a negotiation. Whether it should be that way is not my concern; my job is to identify the game and win it, for me and my candidates.
    Here’s the risk: If you answer the seemingly innocent question, “What kind of money are you looking for?” and your answer is too high, the client might assume they can’t get you and never make an offer .
    If your answer is too low, the client will offer you less than they would have been willing to pay if pressure were properly applied. So the key is to stay neutral . This is wage war, and you are Switzerland.
    Neutral Response When Asked About Money
    â€œI am currently at X [your current salary], and looking at a number of opportunities. Right now I’m just interested in pursuing this job and learning more about your company. I’m sure if we get to the offer stage, you will make a fair offer.”
    Now you can’t be trapped. You have established that they are not the only game in town and that others are competing for your talents. You have implied that a reasonable increase will be required without risking overkill.
    (If they ask you where else you are interviewing, you may disclose the types of jobs but not the actual companies. Let them know you were asked to keep it confidential and that you are offering everyone the same courtesy.)
    â€œI’m sorry to interrupt,” I blurted, “but isn’t that a little dicky, Harper? Uh, Harper?”
    â€œI’m sorry, you threw me off. I’ve never heard the words, ‘little dicky’ and ‘Harper’ in the same sentence before.”
    â€œCan you hold on, Harper, while I throw up in my mouth?”
    â€œYou’ve tapped into the problem, Casey. An interview is, by design, a weak power dynamic for the candidate: one job, many candidates, and the decision maker is lord and master. Everything I’m telling you serves the larger purpose of shifting the power dynamic. You are there by choice; you want for