When Aditi started her career, a senior colleague mentioned that “7-8 lakhs is a great starting salary in our industry.” Aditi was earning 5.5. She negotiated her next role to 8.2 and felt triumphant. The triumph was real. The ceiling was also set. For the next six years, every negotiation orbited that original anchor. Increments of 15-20% from a base that was determined by a casual comment in a cafeteria in 2018.
Anchoring bias, first documented by Tversky and Kahneman, shows that the first number presented in any negotiation disproportionately influences the final outcome, even when the number is arbitrary. In salary negotiations, the first figure mentioned becomes the gravitational centre. All subsequent numbers adjust from it rather than being calculated independently.
The career impact is compound. A 15% raise on an anchored base is worth less than a 10% raise on a properly calibrated one. Over a decade, the gap between an anchored salary trajectory and a market-calibrated one can be 30-40% of cumulative earnings. Aditi’s casual cafeteria anchor has cost her, conservatively, several lakhs per year in unrealised compensation.
You didn’t choose your salary ceiling. Someone mentioned a number in your first year and your brain adopted it as the boundary of what’s reasonable. Every negotiation since has been adjusting from that boundary rather than questioning it.
The anchor operates in two directions. Below: you accept offers near the anchor because they feel “about right.” Above: you feel uncomfortable asking for numbers significantly above the anchor because they feel unreasonable, even when market data supports them. The discomfort isn’t about the number. It’s about the distance from the anchor.
Indian salary culture has specific anchoring mechanisms. The practice of requiring previous salary disclosure gives your last employer’s anchor to your next employer. The “percentage increase” framing ensures that every new salary is calculated as a deviation from the previous one rather than as a market-rate assessment. The system is structurally designed to preserve anchors rather than reset them.
Aditi eventually reset her anchor by asking a different question. Not “what percentage increase should I seek?” but “what does the market pay for this role regardless of what I currently earn?” The answer was 40% above her current salary. She negotiated to that number. The discomfort of asking for it lasted one meeting. The impact lasted the rest of her career.
When was the last time you evaluated your compensation against the market rate rather than against your last salary?
Aditi’s anchor was set in a cafeteria in 2018. It cost her six years of ceiling. Where was yours set? careers.deliberx.com