[muspimerol]

> the actual mechanics of what they are doing, the sensitivity of their work, the skills required for success, the markets/industries they are operating in

Surely these are all criteria that should determine your level. What's the point of levels if you're saying each level consists of arbitrary other levels?

I agree that a range should be public, but an employee's salary should remain within the range for their level. If they're demonstrably more valuable to the company, they should be promoted within a transparent structure.

[HelloMcFly]

All of these things can substantially vary within a single internal level (or external benchmark grade). Why would your physical location determine your level? Why would your career level change if you're doing the same type of work as someone, but using a technology or skillset that is more rare and thus commands a higher premium in the marketplace? Another example: two people doing the same type of accounting work, but one of them has to get national security clearance for the group they cover - same level, same job, but the barriers to entry for one of those jobs will create a substantial compensation variance (but the level doesn't change).

Organizational leveling criteria and compensation criteria are certainly related, but not interchangeable. Organizational leveling criteria is a reflection of your internal hierarchy of authority, decision making, and accountability. Compensation criteria considers that to a degree, but also accounts for more externalities, individual organizational differences, and at times a reflection of strategic priorities.