Specifying a Salary range
When specifying a range, employers will, most of the time, match their offer with the lower limit you've set...
Anticipate this move and make sure your lower limit is about 7% higher than what your are really willing to except.
Yes, you are right, and still, it is a range, not a specific number one should write in the cover letter or questionnaire given. From my experience, prospective employees specify their salary demands in the cover letter attached to the CV, but there are numerous cases in which they are being asked in a questionnaire during the second interview. Now good luck to you all!
Section of post does not conform with Monster TOU
I tend to disagree with your premise. Most employers are trying to attract the best talent possible, which means that to always offer the lowest salary possible isn't the way to attract the best people. The general idea behind proposing a salary range is to leave room for both parties, the employer and the candidate, to negotiate a salary that's a realistic reflection of just how well the candidate's qualifications for the job match the requirements of the job. Putting in an arbitrary 7% "inflation" factor may be too low in some instances, and too high in others - depends on the job and what the candidate is bringing to it.
Paul W. Barada
The Negotiation Expert
Employers will try to attract the best talent, this is true. The best talent is separated from the rest by digging through resumes and conducting interviews. Once the best talent has been identified, it becomes an entire new ball game. Now this talent has to be hired against the lowest cost possible. If you don't agree please read next paragraph, if you do, just skip to the one following it.
Lets look at how you'd buy a house (or rather how I would ). Assuming I already know my target area, first I do some research; I scan the internet, visit with real estate agents, visit the area, to look and find out what is for sale and what I might possibly be interested in (Resumes). Second I'm going to visit each of the possibilities, take a close look at them first hand, maybe have an inspection done (Interviews). I now have a short list of property that each could be my new home (talent). Now the negotiation part starts, If I knew what the current owners lower limit was, then my starting bid would be lower than that, so that when we go back and forth a bit we'd end up approximately there. I would do this especially if I knew that there are no other potential buyers... (sound familiar? "Are you currently working?" or "Are you currently negotiating other deals?"). Unfortunately I do not know what the owners lower limit it, but also, the owner does not know what my upper limit is. So this equals out and is fair.
Negotiating is a lot like poker, you do not show all your cards, you bluff, you probe. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. It's all in the game. Question is how well do you know the game, when do you raise, and when do you check or fold. In other threads it has already been discussed that, answering the employers question regarding salary, with "How much can you offer?", doesn't work most of the times. They really want an answer or else they'll not even consider you... the best talent right? This is how they try to make us show our cards and take the advantage in the game. Our counter is to specify a range and it is a good strategy as long as you do not show all of your cards. So, do not make your lower limit equal to the lower limit of the range you specify. This will allow you to accept an offer below the specified minimum, and if possible even negotiate some extra perks if this so happens, and not feel grouchy about it.
So yet again, employers will try to attract the best talent, but only against acceptable cost. This factor "cost", specified for and dictated to the Hiring Manager, is hard but it is also a range. Your mission, should you choose to accept, is to seek the boundaries of this range. Remember: you've made it through the resume and the interview rounds, you are a talent.
The house buying analogy just doesn't hold water and here's why.
First, you would have to assume that you have 10-20 homes that are very well suited for your needs. Chances are in reality that you may find one or two that you could negotiate on but not 10-20.
Second, the chances of knowing a sellers lower limit are slim. Houses are put on the market at their upper limit and negotiated downward. If there is a lower limit, it is usually rock bottom (e.g. enough to pay off the mortgage) so you won't be able to go below that amount.
While some employers will offer the bottom of your range, I contend that the bottom of your range MUST be within their pre-set range for the position, especially if you have more than one person in the same or similar jobs.
Let's say you have a four clerical positions and need a 5th. These clerical positions pay between $25-28K. Someone applies and says his range is $20-25K. Your assumption is that he gets hired or $20K. What then happens is the five clerical people have lunch and #5 realizes he gets paid at least 20% below everyone else. He's mad, starts complaining, then leaves for a better job and you back to hiring another person. Why would an employer put themselves through that?