481 views19 Comments

VP, Global IT in Manufacturing, 1,001 - 5,000 employees
Salaries are rising so quickly and it’s something I struggle with. It creates an equity issue within your team, because that information always gets out. If we have a number of folks that make around $130K and the market dictates that the standard is now $170K for a senior analyst, that means I have to give the same increase to the existing folks. And in that situation, you're going to run out of money pretty soon from a budget perspective.
CIO / Managing Partner in Manufacturing, 2 - 10 employees
We do regular market adjustments because we’ve found that we have to. The company I'm working for is based in Toronto, which is such a competitive market that we need to make those market adjustments to get resources.
1 Reply
CIO Strategic Advisor in Services (non-Government), 2 - 10 employees

We did the same thing. It might be just a Silicon Valley phenomenon specifically, but the problem is that if you don't make market adjustments, there’s a higher chance that you’ll lose an individual. Because they will find out and if you can't respond quickly by adjusting the salary, they're off to the next thing. That’s why you have to find ways to create hooks beyond just compensation. When you get to lower roles and individual contributors, they are more financially-focused, especially as the salaries come down. You have to show value to those individuals around the culture of your organization, the value of the team, and what they get in terms of the balance.

CIO Strategic Advisor in Services (non-Government), 2 - 10 employees
You have to be within a degree of magnitude. Your salaries can't be wildly different. You can’t have someone at $130K and another one at $200K when the person making $130K has been there for five years and gets great performance reports. If you bring in someone green at $190K or $200K because that's what the market dictates, it's not going to fly with the rest of your team.

It’s a dynamic that is harder to swallow in this climate, but just because someone is asking for $190K or $200K doesn't necessarily mean you should offer that. For example, I know that at a past organization in Silicon Valley, I was competing with the Facebooks and the Googles of the world, but I didn't have the budget to be able to match the salaries they offer. I brought folks in by laying out all the benefits that they’d get from working with us. I was transparent about the fact that I can't compete with those salaries; if that's what they're motivated by, they should go for it. You can’t offer higher salaries just because that’s what the market demands, because then you end up with a spike that leaves you no overhead for bonuses or incentives.
Director, Security Operations in Telecommunication, 501 - 1,000 employees
On the tech side, we've been through this cycle (at least I have) a few times over the years and what I've found to be the best approach is sort of a stair step.  You have to pay new hires market in order to get them to accept, then you need to set an graduated approach for existing employees, since most businesses simply aren't in the financial position to grant across the board raises to everyone.  Mid-year and end-of-year bumps help flatten the curve a bit.  Of course this is all very dependent upon the concept of "Compensation is 100%  confidential" at a company.  I mention this as well since I feel there's a trend for more openness in the area, which really serves no one.
CIO/CISO in Healthcare and Biotech, 11 - 50 employees
This is a challenge, however having to adjust salaries can be mitigated with other compensating benefits (title, flexibility of remote work etc.) We try to be as equitable as possible in adjusting annual amounts but our current situation sometime dictates we use compensating efforts to approach a more fair distribution.
Head of IT and Security in Finance (non-banking), 51 - 200 employees
Not well to be honest. It seems we've reached our cap while other industries are paying IT better. Retention is becoming hard and I guess we will have to review the salary ranges by the end of the year.
Director, Information Security Engineering and Operations in Manufacturing, 5,001 - 10,000 employees
Adjustments based on market demands where needed. 
Director of Information Security in Energy and Utilities, 1,001 - 5,000 employees
At least some of you have the flexibility to adjust your team's salary as the market changes.  As a local government agency, we don't have that option.  My approach to this problem is to bring on more junior staff and train them up recognizing that I probably get 2-3 year on average from each of them. 
Director of Information Security Operations in Consumer Goods, 1,001 - 5,000 employees
standing still, no dramatic changes
Director, Strategic Security Initiatives in Software, 10,001+ employees
It's a combination of fair pay, work culture, WLB, boss, team! Salary is important, but job satisfaction comes from the factors I listed.

Content you might like




596 views1 Upvote1 Comment

CTO in Software, 201 - 500 employees
Without a doubt - Technical Debt! It's a ball and chain that creates an ever increasing drag on any organization, stifles innovation, and prevents transformation.
Read More Comments
42.2k views131 Upvotes319 Comments

Director Of Information Technology in Manufacturing, 501 - 1,000 employees
Following - interested in this question also.

4.9k views6 Upvotes1 Comment

CIO in Education, 1,001 - 5,000 employees
We've basically had to absorb the cost and figure out how to defer other less important initiatives.
Read More Comments
2.3k views1 Upvote2 Comments