ask for more than you want/need and allow them to counter that offer.

I've been warned that if you go high you might curse yourself, especially if the firm has two equal candidates and you ask for more than your competitor.

Making them state a number, then "thinking about it for a few days" and then coming back with a request for 10% to 15% more has usually worked well for me.
I have always been prepared to turn down any job though, if they haven't come up to my number. If you're dead set on working in a particular firm, or if you feel there aren't a lot of options out there for you, or if you're pressed financially to find something right away - any of those are reasons that this method won't work as well.

If you do want to state your own number in the interview, then a good way to do it is to state that you know that $XX,XXX (fill in number there) is typical for similar positions in the region. But make sure that the number you state is: A) toward the high end of what is really typical in that region - but not so high as to be completely dismissed. B) A number at least 15% to 20% higher than your true bottom number - because if you state a number first and they do decide to come back with a much lower one, then you'll have to argue them back up from there, and you probably won't get them back as high as your initial number.

Well, thought I wouldn't do this, but here goes...

BArch, 3 years experience, +60% IDP, all the CADD stuff, Mac and PC, a bit lacking in 3d modeling (though tons of SketchUp), TONS of photoshop, very good at physical modelmaking (my first love), 4 previous firms (3 large, 1 medium-small), international experience, many different project types (maybe too many), lots of CDs, schematics, and DD, need more techincal stuff like code research, coordination, etc.

I'm moving to Portland, so if anyone from there has some specific advice that would be great!

Be honest about your budget/needs.

i've never has a problem approaching it by asking for more than you want/need and allow them to counter that offer. you could preface it with that you are willing to talk.

i think all things considered equal, a good firm would call you back and let you know that it is between you and another person, but you are asking for too much. could you lower your salary to meet our expectations.

i would prefer to ask for slightly too much than ask for slightly too little.

Sorry. I realize my post was a bit vague. I guess what I mean is set a floor and stick to it - which would mean starting reasonably higher.

there is a natural tension between employees and employers when it comes to compensation ... most people assume that a) the employee wants to acheive the highest possible salary and b) the employer wants to pay the lowest possible salary ... inevitably, this divergence leads to game-playing and posturing and estrangement

let me propose that there actually is an alternative, and more professional, way to think about this problem ... i believe that a good employer and a good employee have the same objective -- namely, to find common ground about job design and compensation and career opportunity that both parties find comfortable and conducive to a long-term relationship

my view is that compensation is, at best, a black art ... nobody really "knows" what somebody's services are "worth" ... that includes both employee and employer ... that's why salary surveys exist - to bring some objectivity to the discussion ... but, even with somewhat decent salary survey information, there still remains a lot of room for disagreement

my view is that too many employers and employees approach salary discussions as a game and a struggle -- rather than what they really are ... the mutual exploration of how we together can achieve the objective stated above ... this takes time and it take courage and it takes patience and it takes a willingness to listen to the other party and maybe change your mind ... when both parties just name a price and then we start dickering, without really explaining how the number was determined and why it's important, it's very easy for positions to harden and psyches to become bruised

in my experience, spending extra time to actually go deep beneath the surface in a compensation discussion pays huge rewards later on ... it helps cement a relationship and it lets each party know that the other is genuine and flexible and fair

try it ... you'll like it !

i recognize, of course, that "it takes two to tango" ... but, somebody's got to start

Okay as an employer it goes like this I need more staff. put out an add and people come a present their resume. I always ask what their needs are. ( to some its financial, others want experience, some a part itme gig.) all are perfectly acceptable. I don't hire hourly its all contract to a fixed fee / month based on an assumed # of hours. I generally let them request a rate and then see if it makes sense but never accept in the first meeting.

Second meeting we talk alittle more about detail expectations both theirs and mine. and come up with a 3-month trial period where if they will work at about 85% of what they asked for. with the remaining 15 % in trust. If they work out then I pay them their agreed upon rate and they get the balance of the 15 % after three months and we go on. If they don't work out then they leave and I don't pay them the additional 15%. It gives me some back up. if they say they're good and they aren't then its cause for concern and we discuss the rate again.

It also puts them on the spot to see if they are as good as they say they are, and prove that they can make the office money. I have used that approach for years right out of school when I was an employee and found it to be very fair and shows that you also have a mind for the business aspect of hiring and employee relations.

That sounds like a good arrangement when both parties can trust one another. However, at the end of 3 months, there is some opportunity for the employer to exaggerate deficiencies to screw the employee out of the remaining 15%, since that person has presumably left a job and can't jump immediately back into their own position.

I just say this because much of my experience been working in Los Angeles, home of the Starchitect/Villain.

Based on the range of salaries you should expect, ask for $3,000 more than you want, so you've got some slack to work with.

Another issue: I HATE it when they ask you what your previous salary was. Is there a way to avoid this question? Simply decline to answer?

... we understand why you hate to answer that question ... just as we hate to hear the question "what does this job pay" ... but, consider this ... most jobs don't have a fixed value ... most individuals don't have a fixed requirement ... we ask about salary history simply as a guidepost so we can understand whether we're likely to be in the same ballpark ... some candidates i interview a) don't want to tell me what they're making in their current job; and b) don't have any idea what to ask for in this job ... at the end of the day, i lose a much, much higher proportion of such candidates because we don't ever seem to be able to have a truly meaningful dialogue about what they can contribute and what that contribution might be worth in the way of compensation (see my other post above) ... like salary surveys, prior salary history (particularly a nice progression in compensation from year to year) tells us a lot about a candidates capacity to learn, grow, contribute and be recognized by others ... but, i agree, most candidates find it an awkward question ... however, those who have a realistic appraisal of their own abilities don't seem to mind it as much

in any event, in my world, what you are paid where you are now only helps us understand a level NOT to go below ... there's always a lot of room for discussion above that number.

I’m not sure about numbers but when I’m negotiating my salary I always try to remember to take my piece out of my belt and set it on the table.

To add from the employers perspective. . .

I will say that what jumps out at me is the 3 years experience, 4 previous jobs. Without knowing anything about your particular circumstances, I would be thinking, "How much experience could he/she have gotten jumping around like that?" Again, without knowing anything about you, I would offer you less than someone that had worked for 3 years in one place.

Secondly, I would have to be thinking that you might be leaving soon to go to grad school. Might not be fair, but I would weigh this when making you an offer also, since it would cost me money to hire someone for only a year (especially someone without the quality of experience that comes with staying with a firm).

Take this for what its worth. No offense intended.

good point tyvek. i'd also be wondering, in general, how long nathanc would stay at your firm even if s/he weren't going to grad school. past history indicates s/he will last only 9 months. not very long. no offense intended either, but a good gauge of future behavior is to look to past behavior.

Yeah, I've encountered that longevity question before. Two of the firms were while I was in school, and I graduated in 2003 so it's really only been two full-time jobs since then. Some personal health issues forced me to move home for awhile which was the reason for my initial change, but I don't think interviewers want to hear that so I usually keep it to myself. Another thing, at my last job the architect I was hired to work with switched departments after a couple of months and they just left me completely hanging. I was just thrown around the office from then on to do whatever crap needed doing that others didn't want to do. I complained many times but nothing changed, so here I am.

depends too on the kind of office you are looking at too. last time i looked at the salary survey for frirms in london it was split into commercial, slightly fruity and insanely creative groups, with wages dropping the more creative the work the office did.

whistler, that whole holding back 15% of the wages thing sounds dodgy to me. my response would have to be to ask if you would be ok if i held back 15% of my work, to deliver to you after 3 months only if i was satisfied you were worthy. i think there must be more to it than you are saying cuz on the face of it sounds like a scam...;-)

whistler: i agree with jump about holding back of 15% of wages sounding a little dodgy. if i were to receive such an offer i also think my response would be to hold back 15% of my work. i would be extremely reluctant to put in any overtime or do anything else that would go the extra mile outside my job description.

this might be a good arrangement for an intern who's fresh out of school and never held an office job before, but if i took a 15% pay cut I wouldn't be able to pay my rent. i'm also not sure the whole arrangement is even legal, especially the part about withholding the money if things don't work out after 3 months. have you ever consulted a lawyer about it? i'm also not sure how you find high quality candidates who agree to these terms when no other firm does such a thing. either the base salary you're cutting the 15% out of must be extroridnarily high or your design portfolio must be extremely well respected.

A 90-day probationary period is pretty common, after which a review is held and a raise given (or I guess they could terminate you). Sounds like that's basically what whistler does.

You guys don't trust too many employers do you? Its a shame that it comes down to that, i guess there's a lot of dodgy employers out there who I've never come across. I think you have to agree that if you can't get a sense of trust or feel comfortable with that situation I would stick around to negotiate anything else. Trust between employee / employer is critical, its the same between the Client /Architect and Contractor too.

We always propose a written contract stating all the conditions of the trial period and therefore feel that a level of expectation is clear, whether that is legally okay or not I am not sure whether it's 100% correct. If you came to me and didn't feel that you trust me on that I'm sure not going to hire you either as that's not the attitude I want the the office to aspire to.

as with any relationship, trust is key.

There is always a level of mistrust surrounding salaries. The asked me what I wanted, I asked for the number 3k over what I wanted. They immediately said, OK! There was no negotiations. So while I am content, I am also suspicious. I would have liked to have added, "But if that number was not along the lines of what others at this firm make with this level of experience, I would be disappointed." But I didn't think of it in time.
On the other hand, I got another offer (another firm, same time but I let them throw out the first number), it was several thousand less than what I wanted, and they bragged about paying in the top 3/4 percentile because they didn't care to further the underpaid architect phenomena. IT IS ALL A LIE! ALL OF IT!

Your worth as much as you think your are. if you came to me and asked for a six figure salary but could deliver a few health care projects then your worth it. Its about value to the office not about salary, if you think salary you really don't understand the basis of the equation.

If you cost me money, or loose me money then why should I want to hire you, unless of course its a pure administrative role. I have known people in some offices whose only role was to network and land clients, they couldn't design their way out of wet paper bag but they were really connected and they knew how to smooze a client like nobody. Its a talent and a gift that some have and to lots of offices its of great value.

i trust employers who trust in themselves to hire competentent employees through the normal process of resume/portfolio review, personal interviews, and reference checking. if my schooling and employment history and stellar references aren't enough to prove my trustworthiness, i wouldn't see myself as the one with the trust problem and wouldn't see any reason to subject myself to three months of potential financial hardship.

probationary periods that withhold anything more than than health insurance and other fringe benefits or impose extreme requirements on the employee are just not reasonable and to me are another example of how we as architects undercut the value of our own profession. in many other industries i'd be receiving a 15% signing bonus to come aboard.

Problem is, I have yet to see the person who did not consider themselves a "competent employee". Everyone thinks that they are the greatest thing in the world and "deserve" a premium salary because of it.

While I do not have a probationary period in the same way the whistler's firm does, I wholeheartedly agree with the value/salary equation. I have always felt that employees need to focus on the value half of the equation and the salary will follow. As an employee, the more valuable I am to a firm, the more salary will just naturally follow. It's when an employee can easily be replaced by any other person with the same skills at the same salary that the compensation is not adjusted. When someone becomes so valuable that I cannot "live" without them, as an employer I simply have to pay them whatever they want as long as it is not in excess of their value.

And you cannot compare with other industries, because architecture takes a LONG time. It takes a long time to get a young intern to a place in which they are profitable. Much longer, I suspect, than in other professions. That is why the salaries are where they are. This idea (among employees) that their employers are simply raking in major dollars on thier hard work is somply misguided (from my perspective).

The major problem I see with Whistler's 15% later idea is that ANYONE can make themselves look good for 3 months. Doing it time and again is another story. Most firms do a 3 mo probation period anyway, why not just do a review at that point and leave it at that? I guess he wants to make sure people are serious before they start....a new one for me.

well said tyvek. and while most thing they are a great employee, the reality says they are not. i can't tell you the number of crappy portfolios i've reviewed.

Temp agencies, to protect themselves, demand a 15% wage reduction for 3-6 months for anybody who takes a permanent position with one of their clients. At the end of the period you get the back pay, and if the employer liked the work you were doing perhaps a raise.... while this may not fully apply to arch firms if its legal for a temp agency to do it to somebody no longer on their payroll then i dont see why it wouldnt be legal for whistler to do it in an agreed upon manner with his/her employees....

It s clearly going to be differnet situation for someone starting out vs. those who come with an extensive track record. I would say that the range of skill and experience is very diffierent at the starting range. I knew lots of people who never worked in an office environment until after they graduated and lots of friends that worked ever summer in an office and came to the profession with a prior design degree, like myself ( landscape architect ) but I had friends with industrial design education and training.

There's a huge difference in what a recent grad could do and the range of salary they could command is esily different based on what they could offer. I always had an ability to command a slightly higher rate and I wasn't fetching coffee, but many years before I had worked for a meagre rate too. but I was a new student, had high school drafting skills and deserved the rate I got. Didn't really care as it all went to the base experience that you build up.

Anybody senior enough to come in for a job brings multiple project experience and has earned their salary by virtual of the years of project experience. Having said that even at the highest level of business things still go side ways ( ie the Disney Corporation where best friends Michael Eisner is pitted against his long time friend ( can't remember his name ) but it was a case where even very experienced people read their role incorrectly and resulted in Eisner friend leaving under some very awkward conditions.

Its not about the 15% or what ever number you choose its about confirming ones value when there isn't the clarity in the skill and experience. Ie a new employee who has recently relocated from a different region? country and has no experience with wood frame construction, working in the mountains and his experience is culturally different too. Thats what I have had to deal with in past and therefore they could draw but didn't know the standards of construction Ie a 2x6 is actually 1 1/2" x 5 1/2" etc. its more common than you think.

whistler, if i recall you're in canada. in the US you might find that, technically, your arrangement would not be legal unless you allowed the employee to set their hours; determine their worksite (whether at your office or elsewhere); use their own equipment if needed; and perform their work relatively independently. of course many firms in the US do hire employees on "contract" as a way to get out of paying some taxes...

that being said, i have come to the realization that salary negotiations -- indeed, fee negotiations, too -- aren't exactly right. that is, each party should come to the table with the expectation that they will be paid fairly or that they will pay a fair price.

a fair price is probably neither the highest price you could receive nor the lowest price you could pay. it's up to both sides to think about what that fair is and it certainly is in the eye of the beholder. but it precludes jacking up one's price demand above the "fair" level ... or offering a salary below the "fair" level ... in the name of profit and advantage.

My independent formula is to ask for $13,000 more than what I was making at my last job regardless of the market and all that and hope to get $10,000 more... my feeling is that if you're going to make a move it should not only be a jump professionally, but it should be a jump financially. very rarely would you get a $10,000 raise staying at the same spot, so make jumping ship worthwhile...

and if they ask what you made at your last job, tell them, a highly underpaid amount of (insert true amount here) that was offset by the following benefits.... free cell phone, friday afternoons off, or whatever else you can conure up that they have not offered.

37,000 to 41,000 is about right.... also ask what you should expect for annual review raise...between 3 and 5 percent is typical. If your work / portfolio is really hot shit you could get up to 46,000 but doubtful. Don't worry so much about these dollars, as they will go up over time. Look at the health insurance benefits and 401k plan as well, if that is even offered. Full health coverage is usually worth between 2,000 and 3,000 dollars annually depending upon your age. I find that if they are assholes they will offer you big money right off the bat. If they seem to be really "REAL" decent honest people then you can be straightforward and honest with them. Ask for what you think makes sense and don't be greedy. I've never seen any greedy person get hired.

LightMyFire66: Are you in Portland? Or are you using local statistics from there to get those numbers?

Ochona ... I was not referring to a "contract" position which is what you clearly are stating, and yes we have the same issues as noted I was referring to contract in terms of a legal document between two people.

Local statistics (I'm near Washington DC)

woops, sorry, I MEAN that I used the Local statistics from PORTLAND, Oregon to obtain those numbers. So they should be relatively accurate. Believe it or not, it may actually be comfortable to make less, as you'll be taxed less.

Ah, I used to work in NOVA. From memory, I'm not in danger of breaking up into another tax bracket anytime soon so I'll keep pushing for a higher salary. Where did you take the figures from, the AIA book?

I should add I'm not trying to be greedy, but I was underpaid at my last job and need to really know what I'm doing this go-round.

: "IT IS ALL A LIE! ALL OF IT!"

whistler: "You're worth as much as you think your are."

what ever happened to rational thought ?

I wonder what would happen if you just asked how much they feel they can bill you out at and said that you’d take 30% of that (or 25% if they argue). That is, in general, what is really going on anyway and then you both understand how much work you have to get done.

but not all work you do at a firm is billable and it varies from firm to firm. chances are if you work at a smaller firm, you spend more time doing non-billable work than if you work at a larger firm and get pigeon-holed into drawing bathroom elevations.