counteroffer-decoder

name

counteroffer-decoder

description

Decode a counteroffer after you resign — what the raise, promotion promise, or title bump really signals, the statistics-informed risks of staying, and a clear-eyed decision framework. Use when asked my company countered my resignation, should I accept a counteroffer, they offered me more to stay, or decode this retention offer. Produces a component-by-component decode with 🔴🟡🟢 severity, the questions that expose which promises are real, and the stay/go decision sheet.

Counteroffer Decoder Skill

A counteroffer is the price of your replacement, quoted in a panic. Sometimes it's also a genuine correction — a manager discovering what the market already knew. This skill decodes which one is on the table: what each component (cash now, promises later, title without scope) actually signals, what changes the day you accept, and the questions whose answers separate real commitments from retention theater.

What This Skill Produces

• Component-by-component decode — each element of the offer, what it signals, 🔴🟡🟢 severity
• The day-after analysis — what accepting changes about trust, the promotion queue, and the next layoff list, stated as risks not prophecies
• The verification questions — the asks that convert promises into commitments (in writing, with dates) or expose them
• The decision sheet — stay/go framed against why they resigned in the first place

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

• The counteroffer's exact contents — verbal or written; note which is which (it matters enormously)
• Why they resigned — money, growth, manager, mission, the new opportunity itself; the counter can only fix some of these
• The new offer they'd be declining — what gets given up if they stay
• History — had they raised these issues before? A raise that took a resignation is data about the next raise

Framework: Severity Scale

• 🔴 Retention theater — high risk — verbal-only promises ("promotion in the next cycle"), title bump with unchanged scope/pay path, "we were already planning to promote you" with no paper trail, urgency pressure ("we need your answer today"), a raise to exactly-match with visible resentment. Each signals buying time to de-risk their transition, not correcting yours.
• 🟡 Ambiguous — verify before weighing — real raise but silent on the original non-money reasons, promises with names but no dates, "things will change" about a manager or culture (ask: what specifically, starting when, visible how?).
• 🟢 Genuine-correction signals — written offer unprompted, addresses the stated reasons not just comp, concrete scope change with a start date, no urgency pressure, acknowledgment that the situation was mishandled. Rare, and worth taking seriously when the pattern is complete.

Decode against the resignation reason: money-only resignations are the only kind a counteroffer can fully fix. Growth, manager, and mission problems survive a raise — the counter resets the salary and keeps the reason.

Output Format

Counteroffer Decode: [current role vs. new offer]

The Verdict

[Genuine correction / retention theater / mixed — in two sentences, with the single strongest signal either way]

Component Decode

Component	What was offered	What it signals	Severity

The Day After You Accept

[Trust and flight-risk labeling, framed as risk-not-certainty · the promotion-queue question · what happens to leverage once the new offer expires]

Verification Questions (before deciding)

[3–5 asks that convert each 🟡 promise to writing-with-dates, and the polite phrasing — "could we document the scope change so it survives reorgs?"]

Decision Sheet

[The original resignation reason → does the counter fix it? · what's given up from the new offer · the honest recommendation with reasoning]

A career-decision reading, not financial or legal advice — equity, bonus, and notice terms in either offer are worth a professional's eyes before signing.

Quality Checks

• Every component decoded against what it signals, not just its face value
• The original resignation reason anchors the analysis throughout
• Day-after risks stated as risks with reasoning, never as certainties or folklore statistics
• Every promise has a verification question that would convert it to writing
• The decision sheet takes a position with reasoning

Anti-Patterns

• Do not cite "80% of counteroffer-acceptors leave within a year" folklore as fact — the honest version is the mechanism (unfixed reasons resurface), not a fake number
• Do not treat every counter as an insult — genuine corrections exist; decode, don't preach
• Do not let the flattery of being countered into the analysis — the offer prices your replacement cost, and it's the terms that carry information
• Do not weigh verbal promises as offer components — until written, they're 🔴 and weigh nothing
• Do not decide on comp alone when the resignation wasn't about comp — say so plainly