Stories with Tag negotiation

• "Do you not like money?"

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-26 13:47:33

  Verbose tl;dr

  The blog post "Do you not like money?" argues that many open-source maintainers undervalue their work and fail to seek appropriate compensation. It points out the discrepancy between the significant value open-source software provides to companies and the often negligible or non-existent financial support offered to the individuals creating and maintaining it. The author urges maintainers to recognize their worth and explore various avenues for monetization, such as accepting donations, offering commercial licenses, or finding sponsorships, emphasizing that getting paid for essential work is not greedy but rather a sustainable way to ensure the health and longevity of vital projects.

  The author, Ruben, in a post titled "Do you not like money?", delves into a nuanced exploration of the complexities surrounding financial motivations within the software development industry. He begins by positing the seemingly straightforward question of whether developers prioritize monetary compensation, framing it within the context of job searching and career decisions. He observes that while financial stability is undeniably important, the pursuit of wealth shouldn't be the sole driving force behind one's professional choices.

  Ruben then proceeds to dissect the multifaceted nature of job satisfaction, arguing that focusing exclusively on maximizing income can lead to neglecting other crucial aspects of a fulfilling career. He elaborates on the significance of factors such as work-life balance, the intellectual stimulation derived from challenging projects, the opportunity for personal and professional growth, and the positive impact a particular role might have on the wider world. He suggests that a singular focus on monetary gain can, paradoxically, lead to diminished overall happiness and professional fulfillment in the long run.

  Further expanding his argument, Ruben highlights the importance of aligning one's work with their personal values and passions. He contends that true job satisfaction stems from finding a role that resonates with one's intrinsic motivations, enabling a sense of purpose and meaning beyond mere financial compensation. He emphasizes that pursuing a career solely for monetary reasons can lead to a sense of disconnect and ultimately diminish the joy and engagement one derives from their work.

  He acknowledges the practical realities of needing to earn a living and the validity of considering financial security when making career choices. However, he cautions against allowing the pursuit of wealth to eclipse other equally important considerations, such as the overall quality of the work environment, the opportunities for intellectual growth, and the alignment of the role with one's personal values. In essence, Ruben advocates for a holistic approach to career decision-making, where financial considerations are balanced against a broader set of criteria that contribute to long-term job satisfaction and overall well-being. He concludes by encouraging developers to introspectively examine their motivations and strive for a balanced perspective that integrates financial stability with a genuine passion for their craft and a commitment to finding fulfilling and meaningful work.

  • Freelancing
  • consulting
  • Pricing
  • value
  • negotiation
  • Sales
  • Business
  • money
  • career
  • getting paid
  • worth
  • self-employment

  Summary of Comments ( 20 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43183568

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users generally agreed with the premise of the article – that many open-source maintainers are leaving due to burnout and lack of compensation – and shared similar experiences. Several commenters pointed out the difficulty in monetizing open source projects, especially those used by hobbyists or small companies, and the pressure to keep projects free even when facing increasing maintenance burdens. Some discussed the efficacy of various monetization strategies like GitHub Sponsors and dual licensing, with mixed opinions on their success. Others highlighted the broader issue of valuing free labor and the unrealistic expectation that maintainers should dedicate their time without compensation. A few commenters offered practical advice for maintainers, such as setting clear boundaries and communicating expectations to users.

  The Hacker News post "Do you not like money?" with ID 43183568, referencing the article "Do you not like money?" on rubenerd.com, has generated several comments discussing the nuances of valuing money and work-life balance.

  A significant number of commenters agree with the author's premise that relentlessly pursuing increased income isn't the only path to happiness. They argue that prioritizing personal time, hobbies, and mental well-being can be equally, if not more, valuable. Some share personal anecdotes of downshifting their careers, accepting lower salaries for reduced stress and increased free time, and finding greater fulfillment as a result. These comments often emphasize the importance of defining one's own values and pursuing a life that aligns with them, rather than blindly chasing societal expectations of financial success.

  Several commenters discuss the concept of "enough," highlighting the diminishing returns of wealth beyond a certain point. They argue that past a certain income level, the additional money contributes less to overall happiness and may even come at the cost of increased stress and responsibility. Some suggest that focusing on optimizing for time and flexibility, rather than maximizing income, can lead to a richer and more fulfilling life.

  Some dissenting voices express skepticism about the feasibility of downshifting, citing financial obligations, family responsibilities, and the competitive nature of the job market. These comments raise practical concerns about the privilege inherent in being able to choose lower-paying jobs and acknowledge that not everyone has the luxury of prioritizing personal time over financial stability. They argue that while the author's points are valid for some, they don't necessarily apply universally.

  Another thread of discussion revolves around the definition of "rich." Some commenters argue that true wealth encompasses more than just financial assets, including factors like health, relationships, and personal fulfillment. They suggest that focusing solely on monetary wealth can lead to a narrow and ultimately unsatisfying definition of success.

  Finally, a few commenters offer alternative perspectives on the value of work, suggesting that challenging and meaningful work can be a source of fulfillment in itself, regardless of the salary. They argue that finding work that aligns with one's passions and skills can contribute significantly to overall well-being.

  Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post offer a diverse range of perspectives on the relationship between money, work, and happiness. While many agree with the author's core message about prioritizing personal well-being over maximizing income, others raise important counterpoints about the practical realities and individual circumstances that influence these decisions. The discussion highlights the complexity of navigating these choices and underscores the importance of defining one's own values and pursuing a life that aligns with them.

• Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-22 23:55:57

  Verbose tl;dr

  The blog post "Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)" argues that when seeking agreement or buy-in, framing requests negatively—asking for objections rather than approval—can be more effective. This "opt-out" approach lowers the barrier to engagement, making it easier for people to voice concerns they might otherwise keep to themselves. By explicitly inviting dissent, you gather valuable feedback, uncover hidden obstacles, and ultimately increase the likelihood of genuine agreement and successful implementation down the line. This proactive approach to identifying and addressing potential problems can lead to more robust solutions and stronger commitment from all involved parties.

  In a blog post titled "Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)," published on mooreds.com, the author, Simon Willison, elaborates on a nuanced approach to decision-making, particularly in collaborative environments. He argues that instead of framing requests in a way that seeks affirmation or agreement ("yes"), a more effective strategy is to present a proposal and explicitly invite objections or reasons why it shouldn't proceed ("no"). This inverts the typical dynamic where implicit approval is assumed unless actively challenged.

  Willison explains that the "ask for no" approach diminishes the social pressure to conform, thereby encouraging more candid feedback. People are often hesitant to voice concerns when faced with a direct request for a "yes," either due to politeness, a desire to avoid conflict, or the perceived expectation of agreement. By explicitly soliciting reasons against a proposal, the author posits that it lowers the barrier for expressing dissent and surfaces potential problems early on. This preemptive identification of issues allows for more thorough consideration and potentially strengthens the eventual implementation of the proposed idea.

  The author further emphasizes the importance of psychological safety within a team or group setting. He contends that "asking for no" cultivates a safer environment for critical thinking by explicitly signaling that disagreement is not only acceptable but also actively encouraged. This can be particularly beneficial when dealing with complex decisions where diverse perspectives are crucial. By framing the request as a search for potential flaws or downsides, the author suggests that individuals are more likely to engage in constructive criticism without fear of negative repercussions.

  Willison also highlights the potential for this approach to save time and resources in the long run. By proactively seeking out potential pitfalls, the "ask for no" framework can prevent projects from progressing down a flawed path, ultimately avoiding wasted effort and potentially costly revisions later on. This preemptive problem-solving can be particularly valuable in dynamic environments where adaptability is key.

  Finally, the author acknowledges that the "ask for no" strategy isn't universally applicable. In situations requiring rapid action or involving established procedures, seeking explicit confirmation may be more appropriate. However, he maintains that for many decision-making scenarios, especially those involving collaborative problem-solving and innovative thinking, "asking for no" presents a powerful alternative that fosters a more robust and productive discussion.

  • Sales
  • negotiation
  • Psychology
  • persuasion
  • Marketing
  • Business
  • Communication
  • influence
  • objection handling
  • reverse psychology
  • decision making

  Summary of Comments ( 254 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43144611

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discuss the nuances of the "ask for no" strategy. Several commenters point out that it's not about literally asking for "no," but rather framing the request in a way that makes it easy for someone to decline without feeling guilty or pressured. This approach is seen as particularly useful in sales, negotiations, and managing teams, fostering better relationships by respecting autonomy. Some argue it's a form of manipulation, while others defend it as a way to create psychological safety. The discussion also touches on cultural differences, noting that the directness of "asking for no" might not translate well in all environments. A few users share personal anecdotes of how this strategy has led to better outcomes, emphasizing the importance of sincerity and genuine respect for the other party's decision.

  The Hacker News post "Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)" has generated several comments discussing the core idea of framing requests in a way that allows the other party to easily decline. Many commenters agree with the premise, finding it a useful strategy for various situations.

  One compelling comment highlights the effectiveness of this approach in sales, pointing out that by giving prospects an easy out, it lowers their defenses and paradoxically makes them more receptive to the offer. This comment also mentions that this technique is taught in sales training, reinforcing its practical value.

  Another commenter emphasizes the importance of sincerity when using this method. They argue that feigning disinterest while secretly hoping for a "yes" can be manipulative and ultimately counterproductive. Genuine respect for the other person's autonomy is crucial for the approach to work effectively.

  Several commenters share anecdotes illustrating the principle in action. One describes successfully negotiating a lower price by explicitly stating their willingness to walk away. Another recounts using this technique to get valuable feedback, framing the request in a way that made it easy for the recipient to decline without feeling guilty.

  The discussion also touches upon the psychological underpinnings of the "ask for no" strategy. One commenter suggests it leverages reactance theory, whereby people tend to resist perceived limitations on their freedom. By explicitly acknowledging their right to say no, you reduce this reactance and increase the likelihood of a positive response.

  Some commenters also offer alternative perspectives, suggesting that the effectiveness of this technique can depend on the specific context and the relationship between the parties involved. For instance, it might be less suitable in situations where a strong, assertive approach is expected.

  Overall, the comments generally support the article's main point, with many users sharing personal experiences and insights that further illuminate the benefits and nuances of "asking for no." The discussion emphasizes the importance of sincerity and respect, highlighting that this strategy is not about manipulation, but about creating a more comfortable and open environment for communication.

• Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-20 18:02:23

  Verbose tl;dr

  Mastering the art of saying "no" as a product manager is crucial for focusing on impactful work and avoiding feature creep. It involves strategically prioritizing tasks, aligning with overall product vision, and gracefully declining requests that don't contribute to that vision. This requires clear communication, explaining the rationale behind decisions, and offering alternative solutions when possible. Ultimately, saying "no" effectively allows product managers to protect their roadmap, manage stakeholder expectations, and deliver a more valuable product.

  The hypothetical blog post entitled "Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'" presumably explores the critical, yet often challenging, skill of declining requests and proposals within the product management domain. This nuanced art of saying "no" is not merely about rejection, but rather about strategic prioritization and resource allocation in the pursuit of a well-defined product vision. The post likely delves into the complexities of navigating the constant influx of feature requests, ideas, and pressures from various stakeholders, including executives, sales teams, customers, and engineers. It likely emphasizes the importance of a clear product strategy as the guiding principle for making informed decisions about what to pursue and, more importantly, what to decline.

  The post hypothetically articulates various strategies and techniques for delivering a "no" that is not only effective but also constructive and respectful. It possibly covers the importance of transparent communication, explaining the rationale behind a decision in a way that fosters understanding and alignment, rather than resentment or confusion. The post might also explore different approaches to saying "no" depending on the specific audience and context, recognizing that a nuanced response to an executive might differ considerably from one given to a customer. Furthermore, the hypothetical content could address the importance of offering alternative solutions or compromises where appropriate, turning a negative response into an opportunity for collaborative problem-solving.

  The post likely underscores the long-term benefits of mastering the art of saying "no." It likely connects this ability to a more focused product roadmap, more efficient use of resources, and ultimately, a more successful product that delivers genuine value to its target users. By strategically declining requests that do not align with the overarching product vision, product managers can avoid feature creep, maintain a cohesive user experience, and maximize the impact of their efforts. In essence, the hypothetical post positions the ability to say "no" not as a sign of negativity, but as a crucial skill for effective product leadership and a key driver of successful product development.

  • product management
  • saying no
  • prioritization
  • strategy
  • decision making
  • leadership
  • Communication
  • negotiation
  • stakeholder management
  • product development
  • roadmap planning
  • focus
  • time management
  • resource allocation
  • product vision

  Summary of Comments ( 34 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42771310

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise of strategically saying "no" as a product manager. Several share personal anecdotes reinforcing the importance of protecting engineering resources and focusing on core value propositions. Some discuss the nuances of saying "no," emphasizing the need to explain the reasoning clearly and offer alternative solutions where possible. A few commenters caution against overusing "no," highlighting the importance of maintaining positive relationships and remaining open to new ideas. The most compelling comments focus on the strategic framing of "no" as a tool for prioritization and resource allocation, not simply rejection. They emphasize using data and clear communication to justify decisions and build consensus. One commenter aptly summarizes this as "saying 'no' to the idea, but 'yes' to the person."

  The Hacker News post "Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'" with the ID 42771310 generated a moderate amount of discussion with a mix of perspectives on the article's topic of saying no as a product manager.

  Several commenters agreed with the core premise of the article, emphasizing the importance of a product manager's ability to prioritize and push back against feature requests. One commenter highlighted the difficulty of saying no, particularly to powerful stakeholders, while another pointed out that effectively saying no is crucial for avoiding feature creep and maintaining a focused product roadmap. The "sandwich method" of delivering negative feedback—starting with positive reinforcement, then delivering the negative news, and concluding with more positive reinforcement—was also mentioned as a useful technique.

  Some commenters delved into the nuances of saying no, suggesting that it's not always about outright rejection but rather about strategic deferral. One commenter suggested categorizing requests and communicating the rationale behind prioritization decisions, transforming a "no" into a "not now." Another highlighted the importance of understanding the underlying need behind a request, as this can open up opportunities for alternative solutions that address the user's problem more effectively than the initially proposed feature. This approach allows the product manager to collaborate with stakeholders and find creative solutions while still maintaining control over the product roadmap.

  A few commenters offered different perspectives. One argued that constantly saying "no" can be detrimental to a product manager's relationships with stakeholders, advocating for a more collaborative approach that involves seeking compromise and finding win-win solutions. This commenter stressed the importance of building trust and maintaining positive working relationships. Another comment focused on the importance of data-driven decision making, emphasizing that saying "no" should always be backed by solid evidence and reasoning.

  While generally agreeing with the article's message, some commenters expressed concerns about its tone and potential misinterpretations. They felt the article could be perceived as promoting a confrontational approach and suggested that framing "no" as a collaborative decision is more effective.

  In summary, the comments section largely affirmed the importance of saying no as a product manager but also emphasized the need for nuance, strategic communication, and a collaborative approach to maintain positive relationships with stakeholders and build a successful product.