Isn't negotiation all about accepting/disproving what he or she demands for? [closed]

manpreet Best Answer 2 years ago

I asked for a 40% overall(20+20) increase on my current CTC to join my new company and had a valid reason to ask for it:

1. 20% (out 40%) is because, I'm going to lose my appraisal for my past 1.5 years in my current company for the jump.
2. Remaining 20% for jump to the new company.

All I said was, this is why I ask 40%, but they agreed only to 30% overall.

While I'm not happy about getting less than 40% overall, 10% less doesn't makea huge impact. But I rejected the offer mainly because, they didn't give me a convincing answer explaining why I believed I should get a 40% hike and not anything less than that.

What is wrong with my approach?

manpreet 2 years ago

What is wrong in my approach?

If you decide that 30% isn't enough, or you decide that you need to be "convinced" for some reason, and you feel strongly that you can quickly get more elsewhere (or at least be "convinced" elsewhere), then there was nothing wrong with your approach.

On the other hand you said "10% less doesn't make a huge impact". If the 30% turns out to be better than you can actually get elsewhere, you may need to rethink your approach. Rejecting an otherwise good offer because their answer wasn't "convincing" may or may not be a mistake. "How much time and money is 'convincing' worth to you?" is something you need to judge for yourself.

Some folks decide before starting negotiations what they "really need to end up with" and focus on that, rather than worrying about "getting the top dollar" or "gaining a convincing explanation". Some folks don't consider negotiations to be the same as debating, and don't aim to prove or disprove anything.