---
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