Traditional vs. Nontraditional Survey Sources for Employee Salary Data
When it comes to obtaining competitive employee salary data, organizations have traditionally relied on validated survey sources such as industry reports and specialized research firms. This includes large annual compensation surveys conducted by consulting firms such as Willis Towers Watson and Mercer, or specialized surveys for specific industries, locations, or job functions.
However, with the advent of technology and the abundance of online information, nontraditional sources like Google searches and job postings have emerged as alternative means of gathering salary data. Each approach comes with its own set of advantages and drawbacks, which should be carefully considered before making decisions.
|
PROS |
CONS |
|
Reliability and Accuracy: Traditional sources are often conducted by reputable research firms using standardized methodologies. This can lead to more reliable and accurate data. |
Cost: Accessing traditional survey data often requires purchasing expensive reports or subscriptions, which may not be feasible for smaller organizations with limited budgets. |
|
Comprehensive Coverage: Traditional surveys typically cover a wide range of industries, job roles, and geographic regions, providing a comprehensive view of salary trends. |
Time Lag: Traditional surveys are conducted periodically, which means the data may not always reflect the most current market conditions, especially when the market moves quickly. |
|
Benchmarking: Organizations can use traditional survey data for benchmarking their own salary structures against industry standards, helping to ensure competitiveness in the labor market. |
Limited Customization: While traditional surveys offer broad industry data, they may not always capture specific nuances or niche roles within an organization. |
|
PROS |
CONS |
|
Real-Time Data: Nontraditional survey sources provide access to real-time salary information, reflecting the most current market conditions and trends. |
Quality Control: Nontraditional sources may lack the quality control measures, leading to potential inaccuracies or biases in the data. Similar job titles in the marketplace may represent significantly different job duties, which are not accounted for in searches by job title. |
|
Cost-Effectiveness: Many nontraditional sources are freely available or require minimal investment, making them a more cost-effective option, especially for smaller organizations. |
Limited Coverage: While nontraditional sources may provide real-time data, they may not cover all industries or job roles, leading to gaps in the information. Further, the data provided may reflect a small number of organizations, leading to more variability in the data. |
|
Granular Detail: Job postings and online forums often contain detailed information about specific job roles, including salary ranges, benefits, and requirements. |
Anonymity and Reliability: Information obtained from online forums or job postings may be anonymous and difficult to verify, raising questions about its reliability and credibility. |
|
Diverse Perspectives: Nontraditional sources may offer insights from a wider range of industries, locations, and organizations, providing a more diverse perspective on salary trends. |
Potential Bias: Data from nontraditional sources may be influenced by factors such as self-reporting bias or the prevalence of certain industries or job types online. |
Both traditional and nontraditional sources have their own strengths and weaknesses when it comes to gathering employee salary data. Organizations should carefully consider their specific needs, budget constraints, and the level of granularity required when deciding which approach to use. In some cases, a combination of both traditional and nontraditional sources may provide the most comprehensive and accurate insights into salary trends in the labor market.
For more information on how to use salary data, please reach out to Beth Ostrem or Amy Ryan.