When I applied for my last "office job", I was unsure whether I would - as a mom of three and with a commuting husband - be a very productive employee. My biggest worry was that I wouldn't manage the juggle - or that I wouldn't have control over all of the balls. It all worked out very well in the end, and I would say that I was just as productive - if not more - than I would have been without kids. I worked at a fast pace during the day to ensure I'd get things done. And I invested work time in the evenings when necessary - and when I felt like something was important or I wanted to clean my to-do plate quickly.
But when I applied and interviewed for the job, I had many self-doubts. I wanted the job (content-wise), and decided to try my best. But at the back of my head, I was worried about one big factor: the job had been advertised without a salary. This is usually, but not always, a bad sign. In this case it was a horrible sign. I interviewed and interviewed, and finally found out what the salary would be. I literally cried, because it was the lowest I had ever earned. I accepted the job nonetheless, thinking I would find other fulfillment and rewards, and hopefully climb the ladder (or jump!) quickly.
I'm currently in talks with another company, and have been asked for a salary expectation. I've been open this time around, and have stated my expectation. In return, I have asked whether this is at all in the ballpark that they can budget. No response. Talk first, pay later.
I understand that it makes sense for a potential employer to "lure" candidates in. Some employees may never consider a company or position if the salary is stated publicly. I sure would not have with my previous position. An interview process is relationship-building in some way, and an investment on both sides. An employee may feel like all that time and effort energy invested into interviews would be lost, just because the salary is much lower than expected in the end. The company may get a good deal this way, or may have sold themselves on other factors - making an employee realize that they are willing to take a cut.
On the other hand, I'm more and more starting to think that interviews are like sunk costs. No matter how much time and energy I invest, this doesn't justify taking a huge cut in the end. The expectations are simply too far apart if the financials are not even on the same planet. It's simply been wasted time then.
I think the best strategy is to try to compromise. If an organization is unwilling to make public their poor (or amazing?) salary package, I'm willing to give them a benefit of doubt - for a while. But after a while, I don't think it's worth anyone's time to go through lots of interviews without knowing whether you'll be driving a scooter or a Porsche. It does make a difference, and sometimes there are bills to pay, a life to live, and there's no option to take huge pay cuts.
In short: I'm all for transparency and up-front salary information. But I understand that it's not always in a company's interest - it rarely probably is, unless "truly competitive package" means exactly that, and not "absolutely appallingly embarrassing package".
Any thoughts or experiences - please comment or email me!
No comments:
Post a Comment