Just out of curiosity, what are the arguments that you considered for keeping the information closed?
A somewhat related anecdote... I recall with chagrin the first startup I joined. The CEO was a friend of mine. I kept asking him how much equity he was offering as a percentage. He kept responding evasively by snowing me with all sorts of dealy jargon that I didn't understand. In retrospect, of course, he was concealing the fact that the percentage was negligible. At the time, though, insecure in my knowledge of business, I walked away thinking that I was a pathetic noob for having the idea that percentage was a meaningful metric. (This guy was good at what he did, which was deceive smart but gullible people.) That experience is one reason I like your job post. I totally agree with the commenter who said that they hate the jockeying of the negotiation process and would find it a relief to just know up front.
Anyway, I find your post to be an interesting experiment and I think many of us would like to see a follow-up report on it someday.
Suppose you pay your top guys $100k, and a candidate comes along with about the same level of skill and experience that you really want to hire. But he won't join for less than $120k. At this point you either have to pass, or you have to bump everyone else's salary. If you have ten guys, instead of paying extra $20k, you suddenly have to pay extra $220k - a massive difference. Same goes for stock options.
I haven't heard a good argument in favor of hiding stock option percentages - I can't think of any other than concealing the fact that your share is negligible.
Comments
Just out of curiosity, what are the arguments that you considered for keeping the information closed?
A somewhat related anecdote... I recall with chagrin the first startup I joined. The CEO was a friend of mine. I kept asking him how much equity he was offering as a percentage. He kept responding evasively by snowing me with all sorts of dealy jargon that I didn't understand. In retrospect, of course, he was concealing the fact that the percentage was negligible. At the time, though, insecure in my knowledge of business, I walked away thinking that I was a pathetic noob for having the idea that percentage was a meaningful metric. (This guy was good at what he did, which was deceive smart but gullible people.) That experience is one reason I like your job post. I totally agree with the commenter who said that they hate the jockeying of the negotiation process and would find it a relief to just know up front.
Anyway, I find your post to be an interesting experiment and I think many of us would like to see a follow-up report on it someday.
Suppose you pay your top guys $100k, and a candidate comes along with about the same level of skill and experience that you really want to hire. But he won't join for less than $120k. At this point you either have to pass, or you have to bump everyone else's salary. If you have ten guys, instead of paying extra $20k, you suddenly have to pay extra $220k - a massive difference. Same goes for stock options.
I haven't heard a good argument in favor of hiding stock option percentages - I can't think of any other than concealing the fact that your share is negligible.
why would you have to bump everyone else's salary? its a market, not some kind of government job
Engineer IV.