15 Rules for Negotiating a Job Offer

15 Rules for Negotiating a Job Offer

by Deepak Malhotra

Job-offer negotiations are rarely easy. Consider three typical scenarios:

You’re in a third-round interview for a job at a company you like, but a firm you admire even more just invited you in. Suddenly the first hiring manager cuts to the chase: “As you know, we’re considering many candidates. We like you, and we hope the feeling is mutual. If we make you a competitive offer, will you accept it?”

You’ve received an offer for a job you’ll enjoy, but the salary is lower than you think you deserve. You ask your potential boss whether she has any flexibility. “We typically don’t hire people with your background, and we have a different culture here,” she responds. “This job isn’t just about the money. Are you saying you won’t take it unless we increase the pay?”

You’ve been working happily at your company for three years, but a recruiter has been calling, insisting that you could earn much more elsewhere. You don’t want to quit, but you expect to be compensated fairly, so you’d like to ask for a raise. Unfortunately, budgets are tight, and your boss doesn’t react well when people try to leverage outside offers. What do you do?

Each of these situations is difficult in its own way—and emblematic of how complex job negotiations can be. At many companies, compensation increasingly comes in the form of stock, options, and bonuses linked to both personal and group performance. In MBA recruitment, more companies are using “exploding” offers or sliding-scale signing bonuses based on when a candidate accepts the job, complicating attempts to compare offers. With executive mobility on the rise, people vying for similar positions often have vastly different backgrounds, strengths, and salary histories, making it hard for employers to set benchmarks or create standard packages.

In some industries a weak labor market has also left candidates with fewer options and less leverage, and employers better positioned to dictate terms. Those who are unemployed, or whose current job seems shaky, have seen their bargaining power further reduced.

But job market complexity creates opportunities for people who can skillfully negotiate the terms and conditions of employment. After all, negotiation matters most when there is a broad range of possible outcomes.

As a professor who studies and teaches the subject, I frequently advise current and former students on navigating this terrain. For several years I have been offering a presentation on the topic to current students. (To see a video of this talk, go to www.NegotiateYourOffer.com.) Every situation is unique, but some strategies, tactics, and principles can help you address many of the issues people face in negotiating with employers. Here are 15 rules to guide you in these discussions.

The RulesDon’t underestimate the importance of likability. This sounds basic, but it’s crucial: People are going to fight for you only if they like you. Anything you do in a negotiation that makes you less likable reduces the chances that the other side will work to get you a better offer. This is about more than being polite; it’s about managing some inevitable tensions in negotiation, such as asking for what you deserve without seeming greedy, pointing out deficiencies in the offer without seeming petty, and being persistent without being a nuisance. Negotiators can typically avoid these pitfalls by evaluating (for example, in practice interviews with friends) how others are likely to perceive their approach.

Miscalculation. Failure. Escalation – Why Putin Shot Down MH-17

While investigations continue, at this point most people accept that the missile that shot down Malaysian Airlines flight MH-17 was supplied by Russia, came from an area that its separatists controlled and involved training—if not outright participation—from the Russian military.

It has also become clear that the person most responsible for the tragedy is Vladimir Putin.  None of this could have happened without not only his approval, but his active support.  Sophisticated military assets simply do not get up and walk across borders by themselves.

Moreover, the downing of MH-17 is just the latest escalation in a cynical war being waged against the former Soviet republic of Ukraine.  From the killing of innocent civilians in the Maidan, to the stealth invasion and subsequent annexation of Crimea to the current military actions that led to a missile taking down a civilian airline, Putin has chosen to escalate at every juncture.

These facts should be clear to anyone who has followed the crisis over the past months.  The big question is why.  Why would the leader of a powerful country in reasonably good standing want to risk everything by putting himself in the same league with Muammar Gaddafi?

Many say that it is all part of Putin’s master plan, that he has been scheming for years to create a greater Russia and that he has been skillfully moving his chess pieces around the board in order to attain that objective.  Yet most Kremlin experts say otherwise.  They insist that he is a talented tactician with little taste for broad strategic thinking.

Events would seem to bear this out.  Since the crisis began, he has been taking on ever greater risk—not to mention serious damage to the Russian economy—with negative return.  Before the crisis began, Ukraine was slowly moving towards Europe, now it is actively running away from Russia.  European public opinion, even before MH-17, has turned decidedly against Putin.  Russia’s most talented citizens are leaving in droves.

So it appears that Putin is not only a poor chess player, he is an exceeding bad poker player, constantly raising the stakes while facing a decreasing expected return.  If he ever could return Ukraine to the fold—an exceedingly unlikely prospect—he would accomplish no more than a return to the status quo ante.

While, in many aspects, tension has been growing for a decade or so, the most proximate cause to the current crisis is the protests that erupted after Putin’s last election.  While there is much to find fault with Putin’s government, he did preside over a period of prosperity unequalled in Russia’s long history.  So it’s easy to imagine how unnerved he was at the uprising.

After all, it was those who benefitted most from Russia’s newfound prosperity—the middle class—who were taking to the streets.  It was the same people who found good jobs, took expensive vacations abroad and attained a comfortable lifestyle that were protesting.  Putin, by all accounts, was incensed.

Further, he most probably believed, although it’s impossible to confirm, that the CIA was fomenting discontent in order to weaken him.  As anybody who’s lived in Moscow knows, the American CIA plays a larger than life role in Russian lore, capable of masterminding incredible deceits while skillfully covering it’s tracks.  Conspiracy theories abound.  If you don’t see American spies at work, then they truly must be lurking in the shadows!

Putin’s response to his political problems was a throwback to old Russian tactics.  He cracked down on civil society, curtailing the rights of NGO’s, independent media and other institutions.  He also used his propaganda machine to portray Russia as besieged by enemies—the LGBT community, fifth columnists and other “foreign agents”—working towards its downfall.  Finally, he moved to assert dominance over Russia’s “near abroad.”

It was this last tactic that led to the current crisis.  It led him to create the Eurasian Economic Union, a prelude to a greater Russian empire, for which he desperately needed Ukraine’s participation.  So Putin bullied its feckless President, Viktor Yanukovych, into backing out of the EU Association Agreement that he had promised to sign.

That, of course, led to the Euromaidan protests in Ukraine and the fall of the Yanukovych regime, which then led to the annexation of Crimea and the fomenting of the separatists movement in Eastern Ukraine.

The pattern of events shows a dangerous pattern.  At almost every stage, Putin miscalculates and then raises the ante.  He clearly did not expect the protests that broke out against the scrapping of the EU Association agreement, nor did he foresee that the crackdown would bring even more people to the streets.

Miscalculation.  Failure.  Escalation.  The pattern continued with the separatist movement.  While it gained some traction in Donetsk and Luhansk, it went nowhere in most of the industrial East.  Russian actions were quickly put down in Kharkiv, Zaporizhia, Dnipropetrovsk and Odessa, where most of Ukraine’s high level industry—not to mention a good bit of Russia’s military industry—is located.

After the election of Petro Poroshenko to Ukraine’s Presidency came more setbacks.  The rebel strongholds of Slaviansk and Kramatorskwere retaken by Ukrainian anti-terrorist troops and they began moving toward Donetsk and Luhansk.  So Putin escalated again, sending heavy artillery and more sophisticated weapons, including the one that shot down MH-17.

Miscalculation.  Failure.  Escalation.  The downing of MH-17 is a logical consequence of the pattern.  Putin took the actions that lead to the downing of MH-17 because he believes that he has no other choice.  He’s stuck, for lack of a better term and it’s not at all clear that he sees a way out.  He must either continue to escalate or betray his own ambitions.

Incredibly, even after the intense global condemnation following the unspeakable act of shooting a civilian airliner out of the sky, the pattern persists and Putin continues to escalate.  Now, as the Ukrainian Army continues to close in on Donetsk and Luhansk,there is hard evidence that the Russian military is shooting rockets at Ukrainian positions from Russia itself.

As I previously wrote, there are 3 keys to understanding the Ukrainian crisis.  First, as should be clear from the reasons stated above, Putin will not be deterred.  He’s chosen his course and he’s unlikely to change his mind.  Neither sanctions nor diplomacy nor even probably military action will dissuade him.

The second is more subtle, but no less important.  Everyday, old Soviets die and new Ukrainians are born.  The new generation is well educated, technologically sophisticated and well travelled.  Many work for multinational corporations directly or through online platforms like Elance and Toptal.  They look to the future, not the past, and their model is Poland, not Russia.

Finally, the price of oil is much more likely to go down than in the next few years.  Barron’s recently predicted that it will reach as low as $75, down from it’s current price of just under $110 in the near to medium term.  That, along with the sanctions, will devastate the Russian economy and significantly curtail Putin’s capacity to act.

The unfortunate but undeniable conclusion is that this crisis will continue for the foreseeable future.  Unless Putin faces a substantial internal revolt, which is unlikely, he will continue to escalate after every failure.  Eventually, we will have to manage the fallout from his inevitable downfall or face far greater problems than we do today.

So why did Putin shoot down MH-17?  Most probably, because he didn’t feel that he had any other choice.  And that is probably the most disturbing part of the story.


It’s About Time: Walmart Unexpectedly Fires U.S. CEO Bill Simon

It is about time. Poor domestic results demand a change of management at Walmart. I anticipate another disappointing quarter and I believe the responsible party is at the top. Bill Simon, (54), an affable person, is no merchant. While he has learned the retail language and is a dynamic leader, he was not schooled in the fundamentals of a discount retailer. He has risen through the management ranks at various companies and was a political appointee in Florida. He served 25 years in the Navy and Naval Reserves. Recent decisions to be more aggressive in pricing for back to school shows that again the company has lost sales momentum in their domestic Walmart stores. Dough McMillon, the recently appointed President and CEO of the company is impatient and has made sweeping changes, including senior management changes in Canada.

I think many Walmart stores are mature and management has focused on driving traffic with greater attention to consumables. The superstores have aggressive food prices to attract traffic. However, there is an over reliance on sharp prices on recognizable brands while customer services are lacking, and there is no emphasis on current family fashions. Most recently some stores, like the one in Waterford CT., seemed to be notably out of stock in basics and cosmetics – possibly suggesting that the company is holding back on new deliveries until the next fiscal quarter in order to assure Wall Street analysts of very tight inventory control. One can suspect that Bill Simon wanted to have a good showing at the end of the quarter. Of course, that is wrong. Sam Walton would never have broken the pencil of any merchant in order to stop deliveries of wanted merchandise for the purpose of pleasing analysts. Acting that way may have cost the company more than just lost sales; it may have affected customer loyalty.

I wonder about Greg Foran, (53), the new President and CEO of Walmart US. As Bill Simon’s successor he has a huge challenge in front of him to produce better results. He joined Walmart in 2011, became president of Walmart China in 2012 and was promoted this year to head up Walmart Asia. Prior to joining Walmart he was managing Australia’s Woolworth’s supermarkets, liquor and gasoline stores. Earlier he was general manager of Big W, the discount arm of Woolworth. He started his career as general manager of Dick Smith Electronics. Nothing in his background suggests any knowledge of fashion trends and innovative ways to attract young people to the store. He will have to learn quickly the American way of life and the sales cycles US consumers are accustomed to.

Business is currently lousy for all retailers. Customers have been reluctant to spend – earlier this year they were hampered by the harsh winter weather. More recently, in the second quarter, economic concerns have held them back from spending aggressively. They are saving more. From The Container Store to Macy’s to Walmart, I sense a deep concern. Inventories are higher than planned and I see promotions stepping up. Clearances, “lowest prices of the season” and “price breaks” abound. Designer apparel and accessories are being cleared aggressively to make way for fall fashions.

Next week is the height of the back to school season. Many states have a tax holiday to encourage shopping (see my next blog to be published next week) and primary schools in the Southwest will start soon. Schools in the Northeast are the last to open. The incentives offered by stores during these tax-free days have historically been successful at stimulating sales. This should prove to be a help to stores like Walmart, J.C.Penney, Kohl’s and Macy’s.

However, my worries about Walmart persist. There are some profound questions that need to be answered. Is Walmart too mature and too bureaucratic to be molded into a new model? Can store associates be retrained? Can stores become leaders again through innovative creative store managers? Greg Foran has an opportunity to show he is an inspired leader with creative skills. But the opportunity will not last long as Walmart, and all of todays leading retailers, are being challenged by new entrants into the market place and by the Internet. These challengers are relentless in their drive to offer great values, timely relevant fashions, and speedy, free shipping.

Bank Of America Sale Book For Los Angeles Clippers Fouls Out

I sure hope Steve Ballmer isn’t relying on the information in the Bank of America BAC +0.48% Merrill Lynch sale book on the Los Angeles Clippers for his $2 billion offer for the NBA team. Their book fouls out in my opinion (thank you, ESPN , for publishing the document).

For starters, the investment bank seems to have no understanding of the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement. The CBA stipulates that half of the increase in national television money must go to the players. Yet figures in the sale book show revenue from the league’s next broadcasting deal tripling to $90 million per team with no increase in player salaries? Huh?

Speaking of television, I wonder if real bankers put this document together or it was a bunch of interns. On the first page of the document it says the league’s tv deal is expected to increase by 200%, but later on the same page say the deal will double. Those who follow my work can attest to the fact that I am no genius. But last I checked, 100% would be a doubling of rights while 200% would be tripling in value.

Los Angeles Clippers, Washington Wizards

Los Angeles Clippers, Washington Wizards (Photo credit: Keith Allison)

Then there’s the Clippers local cable deal, which paid the team $25.8 million during the 2013-14 season but expires after the 2015-16 season. The Bank of America book says the Clippers could get $125 million a year for the next cable deal. Sports media rights experts have been telling me the team could get $75 million.

Moreover, sports bankers say that a previous version of the sale document put out by Bank of America had estimated the team’s cable deal would increase to $75 million. So almost overnight the Clippers local tv rights have increased 67% according to BOA.

No wonder the investment bank document has the Clippers operating income (in the sense of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) increasing to $119 million from $19 million. Call me skeptical.


Holy Burrito! Chipotle Crushes Earnings, Stock Soars To New High

Chipotle’s still hotter than hot sauce.

The fast casual restaurant that just won’t quit blew by analyst expectations for its second quarter earnings report on Monday. Chipotle registered sales of $1.05 billion and earnings per share of $3.50, beating Wall Street’s predictions of $990 million and $3.08, respectively.

Even better news for Chipotle: their same store sales just keep growing. They’re up over 17% from the same period last year. Chipotle also added 45 new locations, bringing the total count to 1,681.

The results show that Chipotle is successfully combating high food prices for beef, cheese, and avocado. The chain has been raising prices on its burritos to make up some of the gap, but customers clearly haven’t been discouraged.

“We’re pleased that we continued to drive excellent results in the second quarter, including one of our strongest sales comps as a public company. These extraordinary results are made possible by our special food culture, innovative people culture, and strong business model that are not only creating significant shareholder value, but also helping us realize our vision to change the way people think about and eat fast food,” Chipotle Chairman and CEO Steve Ells said in a statement.

Chipotle’s continued surge only highlights the growing gap between fast casual’s success and the struggles of traditional fast food chains. McDonald’s and Yum! (parent company of KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell) both sank during trading on Monday after they became mired in a food safety scandal in China.

Chipotle shares soared over 10% in after hours trading. The stock was already up 11% in 2014, but if the after hours surge holds, CMG shares will open on Tuesday morning at a record price over $640 a piec

The Best-Kept Secret in Retirement Plans

If there was a way of dramatically boosting returns with little effort on your part, wouldn’t you jump at it?

It’s no secret that by switching from managed mutual funds to passive index exchange-traded funds (ETFs) you could save a fortune on fees. That automatically translates into higher returns.

But did you know that the biggest mutual fund houses are in the midst of a fee-pricing war? Although this development rarely gets the coverage it deserves in the mainstream media, it’s a huge secret that almost no retirement plan sponsors are taking advantage of it. Here’s the latest, according to the trade publication Employee Benefit News:

“Having recently gained momentum in the investment world, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) carry a large amount of excitement. They commonly offer lower expense ratios and higher liquidity when compared to mutual funds while still providing diversification through broad exposure to all asset classes.

Although mutual funds have historically been the core investment vehicle associated with 401(k) plans, various financial companies are beginning to offer the option of 401(k) plans comprised solely of ETFs. The transition to ETF-based 401(k) plans will not occur overnight due to the established popularity of mutual funds, but ETFs are positioned to develop a strong presence with such plans in the coming years.”

What does this mean? Retirement plan sponsors are like rocks that you try to push uphill. They are slow to change, even though a move into ETFs will benefit all of their employees in the plan — immediately. The savings can be huge, according to EBN, which will build nest eggs at a faster rate:

“The average actively managed mutual fund charges an annual fee of 1.39%, while the average ETF charges just 0.21%. As 401(k) funds accumulate for several decades, the expense ratios have an immense impact on the total net returns of the portfolio.

Also, ETFs track steady indices instead of gambling on the stock choices of fund managers. Funds that are actively managed include management fees and often underperform the market, while ETFs can offer greater performance at a nominal cost to the investor.”

Many retirement plan trustees are aware of these facts, yet are lagging snails in acting upon this profitable information. Meanwhile, the biggest players in the ETF world are fighting a war over lowering ETF fees even more.

BlackRock (iShares) and the Vanguard Group are the Yankees and Boston Red Sox of ETFs and money management. They both want to grab more market share and have been slashing fund fees to get new customers. To date, they’ve been successful; individual and institutional investors love the idea of paying rock-bottom rates for fund management in the form of expense ratios.

The price war is getting crazy, but that’s a good thing for investors.

For example, BlackRock recently cut the expenses of its iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV)  from 0.40 percent annually to 0.12%. Imagine a car company cutting the price of one of its models by two-thirds. Do you think they’d sell more cars? Vanguard, which has always been cheap on expense ratios,  sports average ETF expenses of 0.14%, compared to 0.58% for the industry and 0.32% for BlackRock.

For investors, the math is looking pretty marvelous. At 0.14% annually, you’re paying $14 for every $10,000 invested, compared to $139 for an actively managed mutual fund. This is one reason why I invest with Vanguard and iShares in my retirement accounts.

How do you take advantage of these bargain-basement expenses? Tell your employer you want an ETF-based retirement plan, pronto. If not, you can set them up on your own directly through the fund companies or in an individual retirement account.

While I don’t know if these great prices will last — they probably will — don’t waste any time in taking advantage of them. Your money will compound much faster if you are paying less to have it managed for you.

See my new book on timeless lessons on building long-term wealth.

Hospitals See Troubles In Red States That Snubbed Obamacare’s Medicaid Deal

While record numbers of Americans sign up for the larger Medicaidhealth insurance program for the poor, financial issues are emerging for medical care providers in the two dozen states that didn’t go along with the expansion under the Affordable Care Act.

Reports out in the last week indicate the gap between those with health care coverage is widening between states that agreed to go along with the health law’s Medicaid expansion and those generally led by Republican legislatures and GOP governors that are balking at the expansion.

The moves against expansion are “beginning to hurt hospitals in states that opted out,” a report last week from Fitch Ratings said. The U.S. Department of Health and Human services has said Medicaid enrollment in the 26 states and the District of Columbia that agreed to go along with and implemented the expansion by the end of May “rose by 17 percent, while states that have not expanded reported only a 3 percent increase,” HHS said in an enrollment update for the Medicaid program.

“We expect providers in states that have chosen not to participate in expanded Medicaid eligibility to face increasing financial challenges in 2014 and beyond,” Fitch said in its July 16 report. “Nonprofit hospitals and healthcare systems in states that have expanded their Medicaid coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act have begun to realize the benefit from increased insurance coverage.”

Already, the financial ratings agency said it has downgraded 10 health care entities so far this year and five of those were in states that have not gone along with the Medicaid expansion. Fitch didn’t specify the entities that have been hurt financially.

“Several of those downgrades were driven by operating performance declines related to funding and reimbursement pressures, which may have been lessened by Medicaid expansion,” the Fitch report said. “Conversely, of the nine upgrades since Jan. 1, eight were hospitals in states that have expanded Medicaid.”

The federal government traditionally picks up a little more than half of the cost of Medicaid. But funding under the health law is unlike past efforts to expand Medicaid in that the federal government will pick up the full tab for the first three years. The state gradually has to pick up some costs in 2017, but by 2020, the federal government is still picking up 90 percent or more of the Medicaid tab.

It’s an important issue for the health care industry. While the Fitch report examined nonprofit hospitals, for-profit hospitals, too, aren’t seeing growth in states where Medicaid hasn’t expanded.

Health plans, too, are seeing an uneven impact to their enrollment growth. An increasing number of state Medicaid programs are contracting with private health insurance companies like Aetna AET -0.78% (AET), Centene (CNC) Humana HUM -0.14%(HUM), Molina (MOH) and UnitedHealth Group UNH -1.1% (UNH).

“UnitedHealthcare is seeing significant and accelerating growth in Medicaid,” UnitedHealth president and chief executive officer Stephen Hemsley told analysts and investors last week on the company’s second quarter earnings call. “380,000 more people in the quarter and 635,000 through the first half of the year. Coming from expanded access to Medicaid in about half the states we serve, the launch of Florida’s planned Medicaid expansion, and core program growth from already established markets and programs.”

A report last week from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute described the coverage difference as a “gulf in percentage of people without health insurance” that is growing larger between states that expanded Medicaid and those that did not.

As of June, the report said 60 percent of the nation’s uninsured residents live in states that did not expand Medicaid. That figure was up from 49.7 percent in September of last year.

Analysts expect that gap to only worsen. Unlike private coverage under the health law that is generally purchased during a specified open enrollment period, Americans can sign up for Medicaid at anytime.

“In states that expanded Medicaid, an estimated 71 percent of the uninsured likely qualify for some type of financial assistance for health insurance, compared with 44 percent of the uninsured in the states that did not expand Medicaid,” the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Urban Institute report said.

Wondering how Obamacare will affect your health care? The Forbes eBook Inside Obamacare: The Fix For America’s Ailing Health Care System answers that question and more. Available now at Amazon and Apple.

The Best Jobs For Work-Life Balance

Much discussed and rarely achieved in full, work-life balance is an elusive prize in modern professional culture. While it can depend greatly on the priorities and values of an individual and their manager, some jobs provide strong opportunities for those looking to combine a fulfilling career with a thriving personal life.

To determine some of the best jobs for work-life balance, Forbes worked with job and salary comparison site Glassdoor.com, which gathered employee feedback on work-life balance in various occupations over the past year. The list includes a broad range of professions–everything from law clerk to equity trader to game designer–indicating how many varied careers can provide a healthy relationship between work and home life.

“Work-life balance is not a situation anymore where you’re at work and then you’re at home, it’s more this balancing between the two,” said Lauren Griffin, senior vice president of Adecco Staffing U.S. “It’s a common trend, generationally–people all want the flexibility, but the reasons they want it might be different.””

Griffin said that while Millennial employees are more accustomed to being constantly connected to the office and will accommodate after-hours communication and requests, they also want the freedom to take a long lunch, employ flexible scheduling, or work during off-hours. Baby Boomers and members of Gen X, meanwhile, are more likely to require flexibility to deal with personal responsibilities associated with child rearing, or caring for an aging parent.


Topping the list of jobs that provide strong work-life balance is data scientist. According to IBM, “A data scientist represents an evolution from the business or data analyst role.” IBM notes that while the formal training in computer science and applications, modeling, statistics, analytics and math for these jobs is similar, “What sets the data scientist apart is strong business acumen, coupled with the ability to communicate findings to both business and IT leaders in a way that can influence how an organization approaches a business challenge.”

Stan Ahalt, director of the Renaissance Computing Institute at UNC Chapel Hill, said that the strong demand for data scientists, coupled with the anemic supply of these professionals currently available in talent pipelines, is likely creating a situation where companies will go above and beyond to attract the right talent.

“The demand for people who are able to analyze massive amounts of data and extract actionable decisions has really blossomed,” said Ahalt. “The people who are being hired are being highly sought-after, so I suspect they’re getting relatively good offers, and offers that include flexibility in their hours and locations simply because there are many more jobs than there are people.”

And while the usual in-demand tech and content jobs are strongly represented–SEO specialist and social media manager also crack the top five–the list is also diverse and representative of a broad spectrum of occupations, with part-time and seasonal jobs like lifeguard and substitute teacher holding spots, as well as corporate jobs and skilled trades.

So how do firefighter and equity trader end up on the same workplace quality roster? Griffin said that when it comes to work-life balance, it’s more about how a group of professionals are managed than the individual job itself.

In pictures: The 20 Best Jobs For Work-Life Balance

“The employer can say, ‘I’m Adecco, and we promote work-life balance,’ but that manager that you work for has to really believe in it and live it. If they’re not also encouraging their employees and modeling that behavior, it’s difficult for the employee to create it—that’s common across all professions.”

And for job-seekers or those planning a career change who want to prioritize work-life balance in their next role, Griffin said the most important step is identifying your greatest personal commitment so you can target a job that’s accommodating by nature, or an employer that will work with you to reach a solution.

“You need to define what’s non-negotiable for you,” said Griffin. “What’s that specific thing that you know you need some balance for, is it dropping your kids off, or taking your mother to a doctor’s appointment twice a month? What are those key points for you? Because then you can have a more open conversation with your employer.”

Follow me on Forbes and Twitter.

Johnson & Johnson Profit Jumps 13% As Hepatitis Drugs Shine

Johnson & Johnson handily beat Wall Street’s expectations with the release of its second quarter earnings results Tuesday morning: the world’s largest maker of healthcare products reported a 9% jump in revenue and a 13% boost in profit thanks to success in sales of household names like Tylenol and Motrin as well as newer drugs like Olysio, which is used to treat hepatitis C.

Johnson & Johnson recorded $19.5 billion in revenue for the second quarter of 2014, a 9.1% increase over the prior-year period and a figure that beats the $18.9 billion analyst consensus. Net income came in at $4.3 billion, up 12.9% compared to the year-ago quarter and resulting in earnings of $1.51 per share. Excluding special items — including a $400 million litigation expense — the company’s net earnings came in at $4.8 billion, or $1.66 per share, a figure that easily cleared the $1.66 per share Street estimate.

“Our strong second-quarter results reflect the continued success of our new product launches and the progress we have made in achieving our near-term priorities,” Alex Gorsky, Johnson & Johnson chairman and CEO, said in a statement Tuesday morning. “Significant advancements are being made in the treatment options and access to care for patients and customers around the world. Our diversified business model, focus on long-term growth drivers and talented colleagues position us well in this evolving and dynamic global health care market.”

As a whole, domestic sales increased 14.9% during the quarter, and international sales increased 4.4%, the company said. Positive contributors to Johnson & Johnson’s consumer segment — which, worldwide, saw sales increase 2.4% compared to this time in 2013 — included  pain relievers Tylenol and Motrin, skin care products Neutrogena and Aveno as well as sales of mouthwash Listerine. Worldwide pharmaceutical sales increased 21% to $8.5 billion, a boost that Johnson & Johnson partially attributed to Olysio and Sovarid, two new drugs being used to fight hepatitis C. Olysio was approved by the FDA just this past November.

Given these strong results, Johnson & Johnson said Tuesday that it is increasing its full-year earnings per share guidance from the prior range of $5.80 to $5.90 in full-year earnings per share to a new range of $5.85 to $5.92 per share, excluding special items.

Following the release of the earnings results, shares of Johnson & Johnson increased modestly in Tuesday’s pre-market trading session, gaining just 0.2% before the opening bell. Year-to-date, the stock is up more than 15%.