Compensation Bands
USV
LOU CONSULTING
THE PEOPLE DESIGN HOUSE
Focus Demographics
1-150 Employee Count
Series Seed - B
Novice
STEPS | DECISION |
DETERMINE DATA SOURCE | Where are we pulling the data from? |
DETERMINE MARKET COMPETITIVENESS | Who do we want to be competitive with? What % of market rate do we target to build our benchmarks around? Do we change target market rate based on the function? |
ESTABLISH JOB ARCHITECTURE (leveling structure) | How many levels do we have? Do we, if so, how, do managers and IC’s align? Which functions/roles do we provide benchmarks/levels for? |
CREATE COMPENSATION MIDPOINT AND RANGES (compensation bands) | What is the proper “distance” between levels (smoothing)? How do I calculate the low and high end of the band? |
DETERMINE LOCATION STRATEGY �(location discount) | Do I adjust compensation based on location? If so, by what amount? |
Creating Compensation Bands
KEY STEPS
DATA PLATFORM | SPECIALIZED | STRENGTHS | WEAKNESSES |
PAVE/OPTION IMPACT | | Real time, better tool experience, automated data submissions | Pave: Rates skew high |
RADFORD | | Largest data set, large job catalog | Not real time, poor tool experience, data submissions |
CARTA | | Equity is strong | Small data set |
| LEVELS.FYI | Actual offer data | Self reported |
| ERI DATA SOURCE | Labor market data | Not a source for setting comp benchmarks |
Where are we pulling the data from?
DETERMINE DATA SOURCE
OPEN COMP
Determine Job Architecture
HOW MANY LEVELS DO WE HAVE? DO WE, IF SO, HOW, DO MANAGERS AND IC’S ALIGN?
RADFORD | |||||
MANAGEMENT | | | |||
E9 | C-Level | | | | |
E8 | EVP | | | | |
E7 | VP | | | | |
M6 | Sr. Director | PROFESSIONAL | | | |
M5 | Director | P6 | Principal | | |
M4 | Sr. Manager | P5 | Expert | | |
M3 | Manager | P4 | Advanced | | |
M2 | Sr. Supervisor | P3 | Career | SUPPORT | |
M1 | Supervisor | P2 | Developing | S5 | Specialist |
| | P1 | Entry | S4 | Highly Skilled |
| | | | S3 | Senior |
| | | | S2 | Intermediate |
| | | | S1 | Entry |
OPTION IMPACT | |||||
MANAGEMENT | IND. CONTRIBUTOR | | |||
M6 | Director, Sr. Dir. | P6 | Advisory Team | | |
| | P5 | Expert Team | | |
M4 | Manager, Sr. Man. | P4 | Skilled Team | | |
| | P3 | Proficient Team | NON-EXEMPT | |
| | P2 | Developing Team | S2 | Senior |
| | P1 | Junior Team | S1 | Entry Level |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Determine Job Architecture
WHICH FUNCTIONS/ROLES DO WE PROVIDE BENCHMARK/LEVELS FOR?
0-300 | ||||||||
TECH | NON-TECH/G&A/BUSINESS OPERATIONS | SALES | ||||||
SWE | Data Science | PM | Design | TPM | Finance | HR | Legal | SDR |
300-500 | ||||||||
TECH 1 | TECH 2 | NON-TECH/G&A/BUSINESS OPERATIONS | SALES | |||||
SWE | Data Science | PM | Design | TPM | Finance | Legal | HR | SDR |
500+ | ||||||||
Front End | Back End | Mobile | PM | Design | Finance | Operations | Biz Develop. | SDR |
DEFINE YOUR
“TALENT MARKET”
CHOOSING MARKET PERCENTILES
Determining Market Competitiveness
Once you’ve established the talent market data you’ll need to choose a target percentile to build your benchmarks around (i.e. 50th %ile, 75th %ile, or top of market). The higher the target percentiles the higher the cost but the easier it is to attract talent
Some companies will use different percentiles for different functions (i.e. 75th %ile for tech, 60th %ile for non-tech)
Your talent market will be key to determine who and how you should be paying. �This is where you will be competing for candidates.
In order to target your companies talent market you’ll need to filter market data to best represent this group;
Creating Compensation Midpoints
After creating benchmarks evaluate against current employee base to evaluate outliers
1
2
3
4
5
Align market data with job architecture for benchmark creation
Set natural connections points between market data and job architecture
Create initial benchmarks making sure there is the proper “distance” between levels (smoothing)
Evaluate benchmarks with other groups to ensure differences between ladders fit business strategies.
COMP GRADE | IC LEVEL | MANAGER LEVEL |
… | … | … |
5 | P5 | M4 |
4 | P4 | M3 |
3 | P3 | M2 |
2 | P2 | |
1 | P1 | |
Focus Demographics
1-150 Employee Count
Novice
COMP GRADE
1 2 3 4 5…
SALARY RANGE
JOB FAMILY: SALARY RANGE BY COMP GRADE
1
2
3
First compensation benchmarks
Determine the width of your range (ex. 15%)� A) Compensation Philosophy� B) Level or Function
Apply to benchmarks
Creating Compensation Ranges
The Covid-19 pandemic has prompted companies to evaluate their work models. Companies have adopted fully remote or hybrid models depending on their lines of business. Successful location based pay strategies factor in the following considerations:
EXAMPLES OF LOCATION BASED PAY STRATEGIES BELOW:
TIER 1 | 100% |
100% | 90% | 80% |
NATIONAL RATE
TIERED MODEL
DIFFICULTY
SPECIFICITY
Locations Impacts on Comp Benchmarks
GEO SPECIFIC
COMPANY | # OF GEOS | GEOGRAPHIC PAY�DIFFERENTIALS | EXAMPLE LOCATIONS |
4 | 100% 90% 85% 75% | SF Bay Area, NYC SEA CHI, ATL SLC | |
4 | 100% 95% 90% 85% | SF Bay Area, NYC SEA, LA, DC SD, DEN, AUS Everywhere else | |
APPLE | 3 | 100% 90% 80% | SF Bay Area Major markets Everywhere else |
SPOTIFY | 1 | 100% | All Locations in-country |
1 | 100% | All Locations in-country | |
GITHUB | 4 | 100% 90% 85% 80% | SF Bay Area, NYC SEA, CHI, DC Texas Metro (AUS, DAL, HOU) Everywhere else |
What are other companies doing?
Questions?
Appendix
Creating Midpoints (exercise)
COMP GRADE | IC TITLE | MANAGER TITLE | 75TH PERCENTILE | SALARY BENCHMARK | CHANGE % |
… | … | … | … | … | … |
5 | STAFF SWE | SR. MGR | 210,000 | | |
4 | SR. SWE | MGR | 205,000 | | |
3 | SWE III | SUPERVISOR | 171,000 | | |
2 | SWE II | | 143,500 | | |
1 | SWE I | | 118,700 | | |
Creating Midpoints (exercise)
COMP GRADE | IC TITLE | MANAGER TITLE | 75TH PERCENTILE | SALARY BENCHMARK | CHANGE % |
… | … | … | … | … | … |
5 | STAFF SWE | SR. MGR | 210,000 | 220,000 | |
4 | SR. SWE | MGR | 205,000 | 195,000 | 13% |
3 | SWE III | SUPERVISOR | 171,000 | 170,000 | 15% |
2 | SWE II | | 143,500 | 145,000 | 17% |
1 | SWE I | | 118,700 | 120,000 | 21% |
Application of Benchmarks
GREAT!
You’ve created you’re first set of benchmarks.
Now, here is what you can do with them:
Create Compa-ratios (CR) = Salary / (Midpoint or Benchmark) which help normalize pay
Evaluate internal pay equity based on Compa-ratio
Have the basis for more advanced compensation planning. For example:
++
+
+
o
COMPA RATIO
PERFORMANCE
EX. MERIT MATRIX MODEL
1
2
3
Creating Benchmarks (Tips)
HOW CAN I CREATE BENCHMARKS WHEN MARKET DATA IS SUFFICIENT
| SCENARIO | APPROACH |
1 | Data is missing for a level but not all levels in a job family | Use the typical differences between levels to infer level progression. �SWE 1 market data is 100k SWE III is 135k but SWE 2 is missing. What could be a placeholder for SWE 2? |
2 | Data for a whole job family is missing | Find similar job family and extrapolate based on experience or company need. |
3 | Market data does not capture our specific problem properly | Strategic business decisions should drive compensation strategy unless it’s to the detriment of the compensation philosophy. For example if the company can’t hire ML engineers and it’s the reason the company won’t hit their targets then you should pay more than the market data for ML engineers. � Create a structure to systematically track how you’re intentionally deviating from market data. Ex. (ML engineers is x% higher than SWEs or we price ML engineers y% higher than their market data) |
Determine Target Market Percentiles
What % of market rate do we target to build our benchmarks around?
The higher the target percentiles the higher the cost but the easier it is to get talent
Least Expensive
Least Competitive
Most Expensive
Most Competitive
25%
50%
75%
90%
Creating Benchmarks (Tips)
HOW CAN I CREATE BENCHMARKS WHEN MARKET DATA IS SUFFICIENT
Create Compensation Ranges
How do I calculate the low and high end of the band?
| *Option 1: | Option 2: | Option 3: | Option 4: |
% +/- from midpoint | %ile of Market data | Set dollar amount +/- from midpoint | % +/- comp ratio from midpoint | |
15% | 50th, 75th, 90th | $15,000.00 | | |
Low | $136,000 | $150,000 | $145,000 | |
Mid | $160,000 | $160,000 | $160,000 | $160,000 |
High | $184,000 | $170,000 | $175,000 | |
| Pro - Less fluctuation Con *Most commonly used | Pro - Covering a wider percentile of market rate - Large variance in band size Con - Subject to greater fluctuation - Overlap (low, med, high) is inconsistent | Pro - Easy to communicate and understand Con - Reduced band size = less flexibility | Pro Con |