So, what does the hive mind say about a potential new management position that may be compensated in ownership of the privately held company?
Lead with questions.
Ask questions about why the equity grant is there, and how pervasive it is across the company:
- Is it viewed as a sign-on incentive because this is a hard position to fill?
- Is it otherwise is taking away what would be a higher base salary because they feel you would want that and it's cheaper for them to do stock than dollars?
- Is it a requirement of managers will own part of the company to create a behavior incentive?.
If every other manager has it and you are saying no, you may be self-selecting against getting the job. You may be okay with that, but it should be an informed decision, not just an "index funds or else" perspective.
At upper level management in various companies I've worked in, the requirement to keep company stock was a "you must own $X in company stock by the Yth anniversary of your promotion to Z rank".
It was a condition of employment. X and Y were dependent upon Z, but X was usually 1X, 2X, 3X or 5X yearly base salary... so they had their management team putting pretty major skin in the game... considering the base salaries were easily into 6 digits. That was intentional to drive behavior of those people... Y was often 5, and usually a portion of the salary was held back to put the person on the path to the necessary level of ownership...