When a job seeker receives an employment offer, they often use it as leverage to negotiate better terms with another prospective employer. This counter-offer strategy is common in competitive talent markets and can lead to significant improvements in compensation and benefits. Seeking verification, the hiring company often asks the candidate to provide physical proof of the competing offer letter. This request forces the job seeker to make a strategic decision about disclosing proprietary information. Navigating this situation requires understanding the company’s motivations and the consequences of compliance or refusal.
Why Companies Request Other Offer Letters
Hiring organizations often request physical documentation of a competing offer to confirm the proposed compensation aligns with current market rates. This verification helps the company ensure its own offer is competitive and accurately reflects the candidate’s value. The information is also used for internal benchmarking, allowing talent acquisition teams to compare their compensation structures directly against rivals.
The documentation assists internal stakeholders, such as Human Resources and finance departments, in justifying a higher-than-average salary budget. A formal competitor offer provides concrete data that supports the need for an exception or an adjustment to the standard salary band.
The request is also a means of assessing the candidate’s leverage and commitment level to the competing organization. By viewing the terms, the company can gauge the likelihood of securing the candidate’s acceptance. They can also identify specific non-salary components, like equity or sign-on bonuses, that they may need to match or exceed to secure the talent.
The Legal and Confidentiality Landscape
Companies generally operate within their rights when they ask a job candidate to share a competing offer letter. Asking for documentation is not typically illegal, as it is considered part of the negotiation and due diligence process. However, a candidate is almost never under a legal obligation to comply with this request. The decision to share or withhold the document is purely a matter of professional strategy, not legal compliance.
A significant concern involves potential confidentiality agreements attached to the competing offer. Many offer letters classify the terms as proprietary or confidential information. Disclosing this information could constitute a breach of a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) or a confidentiality clause. Even without a formal NDA, sharing a competitor’s compensation structure is generally considered an ethically questionable practice.
Sharing specific compensation data, equity grants, or bonus structures exposes sensitive business information to a rival. The candidate must weigh the immediate benefit of using the letter for leverage against the professional risk of disregarding confidentiality. Protecting the terms of the competing offer maintains a professional boundary and prevents the candidate from damaging their reputation with either prospective employer.
Risks and Benefits of Sharing Documentation
Providing a physical offer letter carries several strategic risks that can undermine the candidate’s negotiating position. If the documented offer is lower than the hiring company’s initial internal budget, the company may use that figure to set a salary ceiling. This prevents the candidate from securing a higher offer, as the company loses the incentive to exceed the verified competitor amount. Sharing the document essentially hands the company a benchmark that may be lower than what they were originally willing to pay.
Another significant risk is the hiring company perceiving the candidate as non-committal or primarily motivated by money. If the company senses the candidate is shopping the offer terms or is too eager to disclose confidential data, they might question the candidate’s loyalty and professional judgment. In rare instances, this perception can lead to the company rescinding their own offer, especially if the competing offer is from a direct rival.
If the competing offer includes a low base salary but high equity or bonus components, the hiring company may focus only on the low base figure. They might then lowball their counteroffer, failing to account for the full value of the total compensation package documented in the letter.
The primary benefit of sharing the physical letter is solely confirming the existence of the competing offer, adding weight to the candidate’s stated leverage. However, this benefit is often outweighed by the loss of control over the negotiation narrative and strategic information asymmetry.
Effective Negotiation Strategies Without Sharing the Letter
Candidates can maximize leverage and maintain professionalism by firmly but politely declining the request to share the physical offer letter. The most effective approach involves providing the specific compensation details verbally or in writing, without attaching the formal document. For instance, the candidate can state the base salary, target bonus, and amount of restricted stock units included in the competing offer.
This tactic gives the hiring company the necessary data points for internal justification while protecting the proprietary nature of the competitor’s document. If the request for the physical letter persists, the candidate should pivot the conversation back to the hiring company’s value proposition. They can professionally push back by stating they are more interested in this specific role, but the compensation gap needs to be closed.
Reframing the Discussion
Shifting the focus requires the candidate to articulate clearly why the hiring company is the preferred choice. They should focus on elements like career growth, team fit, or project alignment. This reframing changes the dynamic from a comparison of two documents to a discussion of the candidate’s desire to join the preferred team.
The candidate must consistently reiterate that they cannot share the document due to professional courtesy and confidentiality. By providing the specific numbers and refocusing the dialogue on the current opportunity, the candidate demonstrates confidence and respects professional boundaries. This approach strengthens the negotiating position and protects the candidate’s long-term professional reputation.