[violentvinyl]

Thank you for this, especially the point about silence. This is such an under-recognized negotiation tactic. I'd venture to say that negotiations often wind up as a contest of "who can bear the silence the longest". I particularly like the suggestion about a stronger statement when making a counteroffer.

It's very refreshing to hear this advice from an agency recruiter, because they are indeed maligned here and elsewhere. Part of the problem I think, is that the incentives of the recruiter are rarely aligned with the candidate.

[fecak]

I hear the misalignment of incentives argument quite often and I've written about that several times.

If we are talking about an agency recruiter representing 15 different candidates for one position, clearly the alignment isn't there.

For smaller agencies like me (solo) doing lower volume work and working with startups, I find that my incentives are almost always aligned. If I only have one candidate submitted for a position at a given time, you can be sure that my incentive is for that candidate to get the job.

A system where candidates paid recruiters as a "job agent" would ensure aligned incentives, but candidates aren't likely to pay for a service they currently get for free (understanding of course that the hiring client is the primary recipient of the service as most view the relationship).