« Putting Employees in Charge of Reward Communication: An Intriguing Success Story | Main | Recognize and Reward Those Who "Keep the Light On" »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I believe the "point in range" formula is
(employee salary - range minimum)/(range maximum - range minimum)

We refer to it as "range penetration." It shows the relative pay compared to the range, and we use it where I work to (A) keep people from focusing/obsessing on the midpoint, and as you discussed, (B) use portions of the range as target levels for certain categories.

It might be interesting to see if others believe the focus simply moves from "I need to be at the target/midpoint" to "I need to get all the way to the 100% mark."


Thanks for calling out the correction (this is what I get for composing posts late into the evening) - how great to have my compensation savvy readers backing me up.

Excellent point about the focus shift which may occur when using one statistic over the other: Moving away from "I need to be at midpoint" = good. Replacing it with "I need to be at maximum" = not so good. It may indeed be exchanging one communication challenge for another.

Any other readers with experience in one versus the other (compa-ratio versus point in range or range penetration)?

The comments to this entry are closed.

About The Author

  • More Info Here
    Compensation consultant Ann Bares is the Managing Partner of Altura Consulting Group. Ann has more than 20 years of experience consulting with organizations in the areas of compensation and performance management.

Compensation Force Spot Survey

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Search This Site


  • Get this widget from Widgetbox