Aging survey data when the market moves faster than your survey cycle

Our main survey publishes once a year with an April effective date. By the time we run our structure review in January, the data is nine months old and our aging factor is essentially a guess.

Has anyone moved to differentiated aging factors by job family?

Benchmarking Survey Data

7 helpful · 3 replies · 121 views

Edit

3 replies

In the order they were posted

Marcus OyelaranCRP4w ago
Total Rewards Manager, Northwind Logistics
We moved to differentiated aging two cycles ago. Technology and data roles get a separate factor sourced from a quarterly pulse survey; everything else stays on the annual.
Quote
Edit

Compensation

203 members · 32 posts

Base pay, salary structures, market pricing, and job evaluation. The busiest space in the community.

About the author

Dana WhitfieldDirector, Global Compensation, Meridian Health Systems

Profile Message

Related discussions

On the same subject, wherever it was asked.

What ageing factor are you using in India for data that is seven months old by April?

Hannah MüllerGRS, CRP3w ago

Global Job Architecture Lead, Steinbach Industrie

The argument that landed with our finance team was cost of a bad hire versus cost of the adjustment. Framing it as risk rather than generosity changed the conversation.

Quote

Edit

Priya RaghunathanGRS, CSI3w ago

Head of People Analytics, Calibre Software

Worth being careful with a quarterly pulse — small samples move a lot. We apply a floor and ceiling so one noisy quarter cannot swing a structure.

Quote

Edit

2 replies

Two years after moving our structure review from annual to biennial: what happened3 replies

Aging survey data when the market moves faster than your survey cycle

3 replies

More in Compensation