TOP

SALARY SURVEY/EARLY RESULTS

JC&A posted a salary survey, which went beyond the traditional questions about job title, years of experience and pay level. It probed the issue of how important compensation is in relation to changing jobs and whether values shift depending upon salary and years of experience. Here are highlights and interesting trends. Formal results will be posted toward the middle of the month on the web site.

There were several hundred replies with a strong showing from the East Coast and Texas, in addition to the West Coast contingent. Titles did not reflect compensation level. For example, a "PR Specialist" was earning in the $70-$90,000 range while a VP reported a figure between $55-70,000. Anticipated maximum increase, assuming the respondent was in-house, was generally 10% or less. I find that figure low considering how easy it is for excellent performers to better their salary by moving on.

Bonuses (more than stock options) were offered in over half the cases. Raises and adjustments happened either recently (due to a job change) or in most cases after a 6-month wait or longer. Not surprisingly, the more junior professionals were more volatile and money-focused. They were much more careful about monitoring the job market and their worth—and to ask for raises. Considering how difficult it is to retain candidates, it seems clear employers are lagging in creating compensation and benefits programs that convince successful performers to stay.

Here are several interesting comments: "I changed jobs for money twice and it was a mistake each time…Some colleagues are motivated solely by salary. I’m more interested in job satisfaction and working with people I can respect. Those conditions are much harder to find than money…I think salary becomes important, but it needs to (be) a component in the mix -- not the major issue. I like where I live and I like time off to do the things I want to do. These are just as important as money."

Another job-seeker in the under five-year category said he/she changed jobs because of compensation. "It’s a job seeker’s market. I’m a high performance employee. I expect to be paid according to the market." A 12-year upper management professional said, "PR is a hot field. I wanted and deserved a promotion, but they weren’t willing to oblige, so I found someone who was. Some employers seem under the illusion that if they’re nice, you’ll settle for much less than the market. Its called a job for a reason. I’m constantly amazed at what the market will pay now, but I’m not going to argue either." Someone with 18 years experience said, "Compensation was very important; it’s the most important factor. Yes (I changed jobs primarily for money) and it worked out beautifully."

Preliminary Conclusions

My preliminary conclusions are that respondents are focusing on base pay issues to determine if they are "competitive." This may be short-sighted. Employers are being faulted for poorly managed incentive and bonus programs. Employee achievements are not being recognized in a meaningful way. There is a glaring need to create employee-centric benefits as part of a coherent retention effort. Our industry is well behind major corporations who have developed comprehensive programs offering flexible benefits. There is interesting research about this issue done by The Family and Work Institute, N.Y. and Catalyst, which is posted on our web site under "Good Stuff" (www.jc-a.com/evolution.htm).

Please take a look at our updated web site and current job opportunities. We are working on several new searches in the Seattle area and expect to hear very shortly about corporate assignments in Portland and an agency search in Silicon Valley (for a Senior Vice President). That’s it until next month. BTW, circulation is up to 3900 subscribers.

TOP