Has anyone actually held the line on title requests that push people up a grade?

We separated the retention tool from the grade. If someone has a competing offer, the manager can request a retention payment or a market adjustment within the range, but a regrade only happens in the two promotion windows and goes through the same panel as everyone else. Off-cycle regrades are simply not a form that exists.

Removing the form sounds tidy, but in India the title is often the whole offer. A within-range adjustment does not answer 'they are calling me Lead'. We lost good people that way in Bengaluru before we allowed a small set of working titles that do not change the grade.

Combining the two previous points is what held for us, at a company of about 2,200. Regrades only in the two windows, through the panel, no exceptions. Outside the windows, managers have two things they can offer: a market adjustment inside the range, and a working title from an approved list of nine that carries no grade. The list was agreed with the VP of Engineering, which is why he defends it.

We also set a grade-mix guideline per function, reviewed annually. The share at grade 6 and above came back from 41% to 36% over two cycles, through hiring mix rather than any downgrade.

A caution on working titles: watch that the approved list does not become a shadow ladder. Ours grew from 9 to 23 in two years. We now review it annually and retire any title with fewer than five holders.

This gives me something to take to the VP. Going with windows-only regrades, a short approved list of working titles, and a quarterly distribution report to function heads. I will build the annual review of the title list in from the start.