Julia Quintero· Reward Partner, Kestrel Aerospace
Asked in Compensation ·
I have just joined a research institute in Denmark as its first dedicated reward manager. About 900 employees, roughly 180 distinct job titles, and a grading system that amounts to whatever was agreed at hiring.
Leadership wants a proper structure within a year. One camp wants a points-factor job evaluation scheme for defensibility. The other wants to market-price everything and slot the rest.
With one person and a modest budget, which would you choose, and what would you do about the scientific roles where survey data is thin?
6 helpful · 1 insightful · 3 replies · 312 views · 4 following
Compensation Manager, Fairlead Shipping
At that size I would market-price the 60 or 70 jobs you can benchmark and use a simple level guide, not a full points scheme, to slot the others. Six or seven levels described in plain language: scope, autonomy, complexity. You get a defensible logic without maintaining a points manual on your own.
VP, Total Rewards, Tidewater Utilities
I would not skip analytical evaluation in a European public or semi-public setting. When equal pay questions come, 'we slotted it by judgement' is a weak answer. A light points scheme with five factors took us four months for 150 jobs and has saved us repeatedly since.
Global Mobility Manager, Northwind Logistics
For the scientific roles, see whether peer institutes will share anonymised data through a small club survey. We set one up among seven organisations in the Nordics. The data is not perfect, but it is far better than forcing researchers into industry R&D matches.
