<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

step 2: match internal jobs to market data based on job duties<\/h2>\n

our approach:<\/strong> beyond a large set of data, another key determinant in deciding on a salary compensation survey was looking for salary mapped to level of work<\/em> as opposed to title.<\/p>\n

titles at bay area companies fluctuate greatly. a vp at a large company with lots of hierarchy, etc., for example, may do very different work from a vp at a small company with a lot of funding\u2014and the two should be compensated differently. <\/p>\n

this difference was important to us. we didn\u2019t want to do a disservice to our employees and accidentally mismatch them to a salary that didn\u2019t capture the complexity of their work. <\/p>\n

you can see a quick example of the difference in salary for the same titled position at differently sized companies below: <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

step 3: create a set of examples that make level matching tangible to managers and employees<\/h2>\n

our approach:<\/strong> at this point, we have the salary tracks for each job family, as seen above. and we have a leveling chart with general examples, provided to us as part of the survey.<\/p>\n

however, the examples are very generic. they are enough to map to the right salaries, but they are not magoosh-specific, nor are they enough to create a performance path from. examples based on internal work here at magoosh are at the heart of what enables us to match internal roles to their equivalent market rate pay.<\/strong><\/p>\n

these examples have been painstakingly curated through thoughtful conversation between all of our team leads to determine what type of internal work matches the generic language that\u2019s provided. for instance, if a general example referred to \u201cdifficult conversation,\u201d we would determine what that language would refer to specifically at magoosh. <\/p>\n

here is an example of what this might look like:<\/p>\n

level 1<\/p>\n

the radford leveling chart language \u201csmaller problems\u201d refers to the following at magoosh:<\/p>\n

\n
• examples of smaller problems that don\u2019t require a lot of coordination:\n

   <\/p>\n

  \n
  • composing and scheduling emails to students<\/li>\n
  • planning a team dinner<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n

     <\/p>\n

    step 4: calibrate<\/h2>\n

    our approach:<\/strong> steps 1 through 3 encompass the steps that enabled us to create the basis of our framework.<\/p>\n

    market salary data → leveling structure tied to market data → company-specific examples tied to leveling structure → role-specific, non-negotiable salaries tied to market salary data<\/ul>\n

    calibration is a quarterly check on all departments to ensure that every manager is thinking about examples in the same way. it protects employees from managers who might be resistant to promotions while also helping to reign in others who may be too eager.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    deep dive into step 4: calibration process<\/h2>\n

    mid-quarter evaluation<\/strong>
    \nevery quarter, we have a recurring structured task for company-wide leveling\u2014what we call the system of performance increases at magoosh. <\/p>\n

    mid-quarter, managers write up notes and have holistic discussions with employees on where folks currently stand based on the scope of the work they are doing, the complexity of the projects, and the amount of supervision they require (or are providing, in the case of those on the manager track). managers and employees refer to both the salary track for that position as well as the examples for each section, as described above.<\/p>\n

    calibration notes<\/strong>
    \nif, based on an employee\u2019s progress, their pay should be matched with a higher level, their manager will write up specific examples of their team member\u2019s work. this write up includes:<\/p>\n

    \n
    1. how the employee has been doing the work,<\/li>\n
    2. the employee\u2019s goal setting,<\/li>\n
    3. the success of their projects, etc.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

       these examples\u2014as well as their ties to our leveling examples\u2014are shared as a proposal with all other managers.<\/p>\n

       calibration meeting<\/strong>
       \nall department managers comment on the proposal with questions, thoughts, and concerns. afterwards, they all meet to further discuss each proposed level change. <\/p>\n

       this process is arduous and, at times, reveals issues or areas in which our examples might be lacking. however, this is also a critical step that enables every situation to be provided its due time and thought. there are no rash changes, and every change has the buy in of folks from different departments. <\/p>\n

       if there is someone on a team whose work has increased in scope but their manager hasn\u2019t brought it up, another team lead involved in the project will ask about it. on the other hand, if a proposed change isn\u2019t in line with the examples at that level, that will be discussed as well.<\/p>\n

       it is in this step that we are able to deliberate and clarify what changes are being made. <\/p>\n

       having a process delineated enables us to be thorough and thoughtful each quarter. no steps are missed and there are no random raises that don\u2019t follow process.<\/p>\n

        <\/p>\n

       drawbacks to consider<\/h2>\n

       this evaluation process does have its drawbacks:<\/p>\n

       \n
       • it\u2019s time consuming\u2014we\u2019re still working on ways to scale it.<\/li>\n
       • at times of disagreement, it can be frustrating.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

         however, it is through these very conflicts and open dialogue that we are able to create clearer examples and better systems of thinking for the future.<\/em><\/p>\n

          <\/p>\n

         the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks<\/h2>\n

         all that said, the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. working on this salary structure will hopefully continue to promote compensation fairness and consistency between different roles, genders, backgrounds, departments, and more here at magoosh. <\/p>\n

         for example:<\/p>\n

         \n
         • with a purely market-based framework and a no-negotiations policy, the shyest introvert is afforded the same opportunity for raises as the most persuasive self-aggrandizer.<\/li>\n
         • if an employee is unsure whether their manager is reviewing their performance fairly\u2014 a situation they are encouraged to bring up\u2014they also know that their manager\u2019s evaluation is reviewed by others at the company.<\/li>\n
         • if a person in one department is worried that their peers in other departments are moving up more quickly, they can count on examples for different roles and departments all being calibrated against one another and similar examples being set at the same level.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

           it is our hope that building upon these structures will foster further pay equality as we grow as a company, increasing inclusion and diversity as a whole.<\/p>\n

            <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

           a star employee walks into your office with another job offer in hand, and asks for a raise. would you give them one? we wouldn’t. at magoosh, we make every effort to avoid a situation like the one above, but we don’t negotiate on salary. bhavin, our ceo, already wrote about our rationale here. now […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":45,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[486,6],"tags":[],"ppma_author":[498],"class_list":["post-5092","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-deib","category-magoosh-philosophy"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n