Spryntify
Your question
I handed in my notice and my company came back with a 25% raise to keep me. Do I take the counteroffer?
Open the 3D explorer
Across the lenses

3 patterns to sit with.

What the lenses had in common. Sharpest when a pattern names a tension you hadn’t fully named yourself — weakest when it summarises something you already know.

  1. 01 Warning

    The raise that needed a fire to appear

    Njinga and the lodgepole pine point at the same signal: the salary was findable all along and only surfaced when you threatened to leave. That's not a reward, it's a retention reflex — and it predicts that every future raise will require the same manufactured crisis. A relationship where your worth is only recognised at the moment of loss rarely improves after you agree to stay.

    From Njinga Refuses the Floor The Lodgepole Pine

  2. 02 Warning

    Money moves; the reason you left doesn't

    Odysseus and the premortem are the same warning from two angles. The reasons you started applying — the manager, the ceiling, the work — are about to be drowned out by a number, and the documented counteroffer failure mode is that none of them change. Write the reasons down before you answer, and write the resignation note you'd send in nine months. If both still ring true, the number was never the question.

    From Odysseus and the Sirens The Pre-Mortem

  3. 03 Opportunity

    Decide it as a stranger would

    Grove's exit question is the cleanest tool here: a stranger with your skills, handed both offers with no history, picks on the merits alone. If staying only wins once you add back loyalty and familiarity, you've found the loyalty tax — and you can now choose it deliberately rather than be steered by it. The honest version of staying names exactly what changes beyond the salary; the honest version of leaving thanks them and goes.

    From Intel Walks Away From Memory

The substance

The five lenses themselves.

Often the sharpest provocation lives inside a single lens, not in the synthesis above. Skim them; one tends to land harder than the others.

Odysseus and the Sirens

Bind yourself in advance to the decision you'll later wish to break.

Read this lens

What this lens reveals

The number is the siren song. The version of you that started applying for jobs knew something the version of you holding a 25% offer is about to forget. That earlier you wasn't tempted by money — they were trying to escape something. Bind that knowledge down now, before the raise drowns it out, because the moment you say yes the reasons you left will feel like they were always solvable.

Try this soon

Write down, today, the three reasons you decided to leave — before you respond to the offer. Seal them in an email to yourself dated three months out. The raise is allowed to change your mind; it is not allowed to erase the list.

Go deeper three provocations to sit with
  1. Before the counteroffer existed, what was the sentence you used to describe why you were leaving? Is that sentence less true today, or just quieter?
  2. If the raise had arrived six months ago, unprompted, would you have started looking at all?
  3. What will the counteroffer NOT change — the manager, the ceiling, the work itself — and how long until that thing is loud again?
About this lens what made this interesting to humanity

-800 · Odysseus

Odysseus wanted to hear the Sirens' song without dying for it. He had his crew plug their ears with beeswax and lashed himself to the mast, ordering them not to release him no matter how he begged. When the song reached him he did beg — desperately — and the crew, deaf and faithful, refused. The Greeks gave us a word for this kind of bound future-self compact: an Ulysses pact.

The principle: The version of you that has to make a hard choice in the moment is not the version best placed to make it. Tie present-you's hands now, on behalf of future-you, before the temptation arrives.

Njinga Refuses the Floor

Refuse the framing before you negotiate it — reset the terms in the room.

Read this lens

What this lens reveals

A counteroffer resets the room so that you are now the person being managed back into your seat. The raise is real, but the framing is: 'we will pay to keep things as they were.' That is a retention transaction, not a promotion. Notice that the money only became findable the moment you threatened to leave — which tells you exactly how the next raise will have to be extracted.

Try this soon

Reframe the conversation out loud: ask not 'will you match the offer' but 'what changes about my trajectory here, beyond the number.' Their answer to the second question is the real counteroffer. Judge the decision on that, not the digits.

Go deeper three provocations to sit with
  1. Why was this salary not on the table until you forced it? What does the answer tell you about how you'll be valued once the threat is gone?
  2. Are you negotiating your future, or are you being negotiated back into your past at a higher price?
  3. If staying means every future raise requires another resignation letter, is that a relationship or a hostage exchange?
About this lens what made this interesting to humanity

Angola, 1622 · Queen Njinga of Ndongo, Portuguese governor of Luanda

In 1622, Queen Njinga of Ndongo arrived to negotiate with the Portuguese governor of Luanda, who offered her a floor cushion instead of a chair — signalling subordinate status before the talks even began. Njinga had her attendant kneel on hands and knees; she sat on his back as her throne. The negotiation proceeded with the framing reset in front of every witness in the room.

The principle: The terms of a negotiation are usually set before the first word is spoken. The room's furniture, the order of speakers, who introduces whom — these are pre-negotiations and they predict the outcome. If the framing being offered diminishes you, refuse it before you talk substance. Reset the terms while you're still in the room, in a way the witnesses can see.

Intel Walks Away From Memory

If we got fired, what would the new guy do? Then do it.

Read this lens

What this lens reveals

Grove's question strips the loyalty out: if a stranger with your exact skills were handed both offers cold — stay here at +25%, or take the new role — with no history, no relationships, no sunk cost in this team, which would they pick? The fact that the choice feels hard mostly because of loyalty and familiarity is precisely the signal Grove was hunting for.

Try this soon

Describe both options in ten minutes to someone who has never met your colleagues — a friend in another industry. Watch which one they're surprised you're hesitating over. The unfamiliar ear hears the loyalty tax you've stopped noticing.

Go deeper three provocations to sit with
  1. Strip away every relationship you've built here. On the merits alone — growth, the work, the people you'd report to — which job wins?
  2. If you'd never worked at your current company and both were external offers today, would the +25% even be competitive?
  3. What are you actually being paid the extra 25% to tolerate?
About this lens what made this interesting to humanity

1985 · Andy Grove, Gordon Moore, Intel

By 1985 Japanese manufacturers had destroyed Intel's margins in memory chips — the business Intel had been founded on. Grove and Moore asked: if the board fired us and brought in new management, what would the new guy do? Walk out the door and walk back in as a microprocessor company. They did it themselves. Microprocessors became Intel.

The principle: The hardest move is the one your loyalty to your own history prevents you from making. Imagining your replacement frees you from the loyalty — and from the sunk cost of every decision that made you who you are.

The Pre-Mortem

Imagine the project has already failed. Now write the obituary.

Read this lens

What this lens reveals

Move the question from 'should I stay?' to 'it's nine months from now, I took the counteroffer, and I'm updating my CV again — what happened?' The most vivid answer is usually the one already running quietly in your head. Counteroffers have a known failure pattern: the raise arrives, the underlying friction doesn't move, and within a year you're back where you started but now marked as a flight risk.

Try this soon

Write the short resignation note you'd send nine months from now if the counteroffer didn't fix things. Don't send it. Notice whether writing it feels like fiction or like memory. Either one is data.

Go deeper three provocations to sit with
  1. In the world where the counteroffer was a mistake, what specifically went wrong — the same manager, the same ceiling, the same work, or a new coldness from people who know you almost left?
  2. Once your team knows you tried to leave, what conversations and opportunities quietly route around you?
  3. Which of the failure modes you can picture would feel like 'I should have seen this coming'?
About this lens what made this interesting to humanity

timeless · Gary Klein, Daniel Kahneman

Klein's pre-mortem inverts retrospective analysis: before a decision is committed, the team imagines themselves a year in the future, with the project having ended in disaster. Each person privately writes down why it failed. Because the premise is settled — failure happened — people who hesitated to voice doubts feel safe to articulate them. The technique reliably surfaces 30% more failure modes than open 'what could go wrong' brainstorming.

The principle: Pessimism phrased as fact is heard more cleanly than pessimism phrased as opinion. Move the question from 'might it fail' to 'why did it fail' and the silent worries become visible.

The Lodgepole Pine

Some seeds only open in the fire.

Read this lens

What this lens reveals

Lodgepole cones are sealed by resin and only open in fire. Your raise opened the same way — it needed the heat of a resignation to crack. That's worth sitting with: the organisation was capable of paying you this the whole time and chose not to until it was forced. Stability that only renews under threat of loss isn't stability; it's a system that requires you to repeatedly threaten its survival to get what you're worth.

Try this soon

Set yourself a real review date — six months out — and write down what would have to be true by then for staying to have been right (scope, manager, trajectory, not just salary). If you can't name those conditions, the fire was the only thing that ever moved this.

Go deeper three provocations to sit with
  1. Is this raise a renewal, or a one-time fire you can't safely set again without actually meaning to leave?
  2. What's protected here only by 'we still have time' — your growth, your skills staying current, your market value?
  3. If the only way to grow your compensation is to manufacture a fire each time, how many fires before the forest doesn't grow back?
About this lens what made this interesting to humanity

timeless · Pinus contorta

The lodgepole pine produces serotinous cones — cones sealed by resin that only opens when wildfire heats them past 45°C. The species depends on periodic fires to reproduce. Fire suppression in lodgepole forests doesn't preserve them; it slowly sterilises them. The disaster is the reset.

The principle: Some systems require periodic catastrophe to renew. Smoothing every shock keeps the system functioning in the short term and atrophies it in the long term. The shock is part of the cycle, not an interruption of it.

Also considered

Lenses ranked relevant but kept off the exploration — the runner-up reading. Each links to the lens itself, not an applied reading of your question.

  • Statecraft

    Chanakya's Mandala

    Map every actor as friend, enemy, or neutral — and act accordingly.

  • Method

    BATNA — The Door You'll Walk Out Of

    Your strength is the door you're willing to walk out of.

  • Science

    The Ultimatum Game

    People will burn the money rather than accept an insulting split.

Explore in 3D

drag · scroll to zoom · click anything

Explore another question