It depends on the performance/success criteria you got defined, and the degree to which you've over-performed. You'll need data that establishes that your responsibilities and performance are at "market" levels. Finally, you have to have concrete data about your impact on the company, i.e., strategically, financially, operationally. Did you resolve quickly, or avoid, a lawsuit that would have affected the company strategically, or in huge financial terms? Did you come up with a creative solution to an impasse on an IP licensing issue that enabled the company to enter a new market advantageously? Did you arrange innovative ways to improve outside counsel performance and reduce legal expense? How well have you aligned yourself with the company's line-of-business executives, who recognize your impact and value and will go to bat for you? A lawyer I trained while he was in private practice is now GC of an energy company. He said that every $1 million he spends equals a penny per share, and that 3 cents a share causes market movement, so he doesn't view his legal budget as his to spend, but his to manage for value. When you're making a difference, and there's evidence to back that up, that's when you want to be evaluated, whether it's in 18 months, 5 years, or whatever. The final consideration is timing. If your company's share prices are being gutted and the CEO is on the hot seat for the financials, or you just lost a major customer, or a competitor just released a market-changing product, that's not an optimal time to ask for money, no matter how justified it might otherwise be. You can't expect to do better than your company'd doing.

Whisperer, I like your reasoning, and tone. However, as you point out, GC jobs are rare, this lawyer has no GC experience, so he has no leverage. When you have no leverage, you never want to negotiate. Don't risk compromising the honeymoon that you'll need to make good. Instead, first learn the relative strength of your position. Instead, to preserve today's optimism on the company's part, I'd position the conversation to give yourself a chance for Chris to volunteer an appropriate increase without you having to justify anything. Something more along these lines: “I am so excited and appreciative about the opportunity to become the company’s General Counsel. I can't wait to begin justifying your confidence in my ability to succeed in my increased responsibilities. So, tell me: What enabled you to choose me despite my not having any GC experience?" Now, Chris is telling you your value, eliminating "no experience" from any further discussion. "Thanks for that, Chris. When we initially discussed the promotion, we didn't talk about how my compensation should be adjusted to reflect my new executive position. Given our shared confidence about my new role, and my trust in your innate fairness, I'm not concerned. What are your thoughts?" You're assuming that it's reasonable for you to get an increase, even if it's only a gesture amount. However, you don't know how much capital Chris already expended on your behalf to convince others to appoint a rookie GC, especially if those others had experienced candidates they tried to advance. What if they agreed only reluctantly, and there's a "make good" component that's all on Chris? Maybe getting you the job was the limit, that more money was a deal-breaker. You always want to discuss the foundation for any number before either party quotes one. If Chris points out that he has every confidence in you, but that you have no GC experience, you'll agree. You want to get all the factors on the table, then ask him to be fair. The bottom line is that you're not going to decline, so maintain perspective. The best you can do it appeal to Chris's stated confidence in you, and his essential fairness. "OK, Chris. We're both looking at the situation the same way. Given what you've explained, what do think is fair compensation?" Because it's grounded in objective criteria, the number Chris offers you is going to be the right one unless he's fundamentally unfair. If that's the case, you need to know that now. If he's fair, and it still feels low to you, request an accelerated review. "OK, Chris. I hear you, and I understand your reasoning. However, I'd like a chance to outperform our expectations. Under what conditions would you be comfortable giving me a salary review in six months instead of a year?" Chris will give you your performance criteria. Now, go perform.