I'm an engineer/inventor who is in salary negotiations with a non-profit and I hold the patent for a mission critical technology. I have some questions about how to secure the best offer.
I am dealing with some rather unconventional compensation negotiations. Here is the story:
I am working with a group of folks at a non-profit that, according to the business plan, will be able to produce its own capital. The revenue stream for this organization is generated by multiple installations of an engineering technology that I have patented, developed, and have extensive, unique experience implementing on a small scale. The revenue is directly related to the number of installations. The proceeds will then be used to fund other, less profitable projects thus the non profit status.
The patented technology is the only revenue stream for this venture. however, the patent itself is only enforcible in the US, so they don't really need to license it from me. At the same time, the technology that is needed for this project is far enough from the one in the patent that they can't just get rid of me and deploy the technology. It will require at least another year of development under my supervision before it is ready. Because I am so familiar with the technology it would likely take someone else quite a bit longer than that.
My job in this venture will be to direct R&D to improve the technology to the point that it can be deployed on the proposed scale (hundreds). My responsibility will be to continue the R&D, and develop the construction management and maintenance operations. Essentially everything except for the finances, legal and regulatory matters.
I am now engaged in compensation negotiations and am looking for ways to present my case in a logical fashion that relies on existing precedents.
About the work
-The job will require me to spend more than half the year living in a decidedly third world country.
-This will be an incredibly high stress job due to the headaches that come with working in the third world and with developing a new technology.
-External factors are forcing us to do this in an accelerated fashion. The milestones are very ambitious and they border on unrealistic. Trying to meet them is going to be a major struggle.
-This single project should have annual proceeds on the order of a few million for a period of 10 years.
-The job will have me managing a work force of a few hundred people
About me
-In the context of these negotiations, I consider myself an inventor, in addition to being an engineer. I do have a BS and MS in the field. Beyond the patent, I have received a couple of national awards for my inventions including the one in question.
-I have 5 years of experience working in the country where the project will take place. Essentially doing the same work on a smaller scale
-After doing this job for about 3 years, the protocols should be advanced enough that they can be managed by someone less qualified than myself. These protocols can be used to duplicate the project elsewhere without my assistance. Ideally, I would work this job for 3 years and be done.
-Due to my experience, I would be very hard to replace. Any suitable replacement would require quite a bit of training.
-At present, this venture has little money and I have been working for them for free with the understanding that I would be paid in the future for that time. There will likely not be any money for at least another few months. If the business doesn't pan out, I stand to loose the value of that time.
-I am not a philanthropist, however, many of the people I'm negotiating with are. This may complicate things.
My questions
1. As I understand, people at nonprofits typically get paid less than their counterparts in other sectors for the same job. Is this because nonprofits usually rely on donations, and donors prefer to see relatively low employee salaries? Am I correct in reasoning that this shouldn't apply in my case, since the org will fund itself through it's business activities?
2. My work will play a crucial role in making the org hundreds of millions of dollars if all goes well and they replicate the project. I think it is reasonable that they give me some percentage of the gross revenue generated by the first project. Is this reasonable? Does anyone have any idea of what this percentage should be?
I know this is a somewhat unconventional situation, but if someone has any numbers from a related situation, I'd love to hear them. Any info on what kinds of percentages inventors get when they help start a for-profit company using venture capital would be helpful. I realize that this is not a question that has an easy answer, I'm just looking for some data points so I can try to triangulate.
3. I will have to live and work on the other side of the planet, in a developing nation, and when I'm there, the work will pretty much be non-stop. I am trying to negotiate a schedule that is similar to that of someone who works on an offshore oil rig. IE a a few weeks at sea, a few weeks off. Does any one have ideas on how to go about drawing an equivalence between normal working schedules/salaries and "oil-rig" schedules/salaries?
Maybe something like "a person with X qualifications could be employed on an oil rig for Y or in a US office for Z"? (It doesn't have to be an off shore oil-rig, that was just the first thing that popped into my head)
Somewhat related, I've heard hearsay that the engineers who work for companies like Haliburton in places like Iraq make pretty large salaries (250k) due to the location and associated risks. Is there any truth to this?
4. Based on what I've said, what would you consider to be appropriate compensation for this work?
5. Any ideas on how to state my case in my counter offer? I'm planning on writing a 3-5 page document that explains my reasoning as to why I believe my counter offer is fair. I'd like to populate this document with some numbers and citations.
Any other relevant advice would be greatly appreciated.
Sorry for the length, and thanks in advance for your help!
-I am not a philanthropist, however, many of the people I'm negotiating with are. This may complicate things.
-As I understand, people at nonprofits typically get paid less than their counterparts in other sectors for the same job. Is this because nonprofits usually rely on donations, and donors prefer to see relatively low employee salaries? Am I correct in reasoning that this shouldn't apply in my case, since the org will fund itself through its business activities?
For many people, working in a non-profit is a way of combining work and personal passion, and they're willing to give up some salary for this benefit. For many non-profits, paying less is the only way to function, due to cash flow issues, or it's important for getting donations to have a low overhead. But it doesn't have to be this way, and if you don't want to purchase the opportunity to combine work and passion, you don't have to. And if the organization can pay you full market value, it doesn't have to offer you less just because it's a non-profit. So, put these together, and you should get full market value for your work, and the fact that the organization is a non-profit shouldn't change that.
Determining market value is a whole other story, and I can't help you with that. But good luck, and be safe.
posted by Capri at 11:27 AM on April 10