Latest / Hiring & Firing with Fexingo: Recruitment, Performance, and Workforce Decisions / How a No-Negotiation Offer Policy Improved Hiring
Transcript
- Lucas: You know the drill. You make an offer. The candidate counters. You go back and forth. It takes three days of emails, sometimes a week. But what if you just said, 'This is the number. Take it or leave it.' That's exactly what one company did, and the results surprised them. Luna: I bet a lot of hiring managers would cringe at that. You're basically telling the candidate there's no wiggle room. Doesn't that risk losing people? Lucas: It does, on paper. But Veridian, a mid-sized tech company with about 400 employees, decided to test it. They had a problem: their hiring process was slow, and they suspected negotiations were adding days and introducing bias. So they flipped the script. Luna: What kind of bias are we talking about? Lucas: Well, research shows that women and underrepresented groups are less likely to negotiate, or when they do, they get pushback. So a no-negotiation policy levels the playing field. Everyone gets the same take it or leave it offer, based on the role, not on who can argue hardest. Luna: That makes sense. So what happened when they implemented it? Did acceptance rates drop? Lucas: Actually, they went up. Before the policy, Veridian's offer acceptance rate was around 78%. After six months of no-negotiation offers, it jumped to 93%. And time to hire dropped by an average of five days. The hiring team was stunned. Luna: That's a huge improvement. But I have to wonder — were they just attracting lower-caliber candidates who had fewer options? Lucas: That was the concern. But they tracked quality metrics — performance ratings after 90 days, manager satisfaction — and all held steady or improved. The senior engineer who joined said he turned down a higher offer from a competitor because Veridian's transparency felt more respectful. He didn't want to play the negotiation game. Luna: So the policy actually became a selling point. It signals that you value fairness and efficiency. Lucas: Exactly. And it forces the company to do their homework upfront. Veridian started benchmarking salaries more rigorously before making an offer. They couldn't rely on the candidate to tell them if the number was too low. So the offers were fair from the start. Luna: What about those candidates who walked away? Did they see patterns? Lucas: They did. About 7% of candidates declined, and most of them were what they called 'price shoppers' — people who seemed more focused on squeezing out the last dollar than on the role itself. Those people, frankly, were often not the best culture fits anyway. Luna: So in a way, the policy self-selects for people who care about the work and the company, not just the paycheck. Lucas: Right. And it also saved the HR team a ton of time. Instead of going back and forth, they could send the offer and move on to the next candidate. The whole process became faster and less stressful. Luna: I've read studies that show negotiation fatigue is real — candidates get worn down and sometimes accept other offers just to end the process. This removes that entirely. Lucas: And honestly, it's the kind of thinking that — you know, a lot of what we talk about here comes from your questions or experiences. If you've gotten something out of these conversations, supporting the show helps keep it ad-free and independent. Even a couple of dollars a month makes a difference — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, if you've found value in what we do. Luna: Yeah, and it's exactly that kind of straightforwardness that we're talking about with Veridian. The policy is about respecting the candidate's time and energy. Lucas: Exactly. So, back to Veridian. They also had to handle internal pushback. Some hiring managers worried they'd lose top talent, but after seeing the data, they came around. Luna: Were there any roles where the policy didn't work as well? Lucas: For very senior executive hires, they made exceptions — those roles often involve equity packages and complex negotiations. But for the bulk of hires, the policy held. They found that most candidates, especially in tech, appreciated not having to haggle. Luna: Makes sense. What's the takeaway for listeners who might want to try this? Lucas: First, do your market research. Know what the role is worth before you post it. Second, communicate the policy clearly in the job description — Veridian added a line like 'We offer competitive, non-negotiable salaries based on role and experience.' That sets expectations. Luna: That transparency upfront probably helps filter out people who aren't aligned. Lucas: Absolutely. And third, be prepared for some resistance from your own team. You'll need to train recruiters and hiring managers to explain why you're doing it. But if you can get buy-in, the numbers speak for themselves. Luna: I also like that it forces the company to internalize the compensation decision instead of offloading it to the candidate. Lucas: Right. It's a shift from 'let's see what they ask for' to 'here's what we believe you're worth.' And that's a powerful signal. Luna: So would you recommend this for every company? Lucas: Not every. If you're in an industry where negotiation is deeply embedded — sales commissions, for instance — it might be harder. But for knowledge-work roles, it's worth a pilot. Veridian's experiment shows it can improve both speed and perception. Luna: And it's a reminder that sometimes simplifying the process is the best upgrade you can make. Lucas: Exactly. Sometimes the best hiring move isn't a new assessment or a better job board — it's just deciding to be straightforward.