Our KnowHR Pay Transparency Survey got 609 responses. In addition to answering the four questions that we wrote about yesterday, we got several written responses to our questions, “If you opened the books on everyone’s pay and everyone knew what everyone else was paid, what problems would you anticipate?” and “Do you have any other comments about pay transparency?” We’re rolling those responses up into a little eBook. Meanwhile, I though you might like to see a few responses and get your reaction. (I wrote the headlines; the respondents wrote the…responses.)

Pay Transparency: Ripping Off the Band-Aid on Pay-for-Performance

I think the main problem is just the initial shock of it and the uncomfortable conversations that may occur when people realize what their peers are making. On the other hand, once you have done that, it should make conversations about pay for performance, ranges, etc., easier because people will have visibility into where they are in the range versus their skills and abilities. But, ripping off the band aid would hurt.

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won

People with less experience would expect the same pay rate as those more experienced. You’d spend a lot of time defending who got paid what and why. Potential for lawsuits is much greater.

How Much Does Bozo the Clown Make?

Loss of plausible deniability. There is a difference between knowing some bozo is making more than me and thinking some bozo is making more than me.

How About if My Peers Set My Pay Every Year?

Unless people have a full understanding of what each person’s role is; and just what they contribute to the organization, it could lead to a lot of loss time due to people lobbying for raises; comparing themselves to others; wasting time focusing on what they are worth rather then spending time working. The only way I could see it work would be if pay was dynamic- i.e. switched each year based on feedback from peer group. Otherwise people will sense inequities based on seniority, special skills sets, etc…

They Say You Want a Revolution

Have you heard of the psychological experiment where a professor asks a classroom of students what percentage of the general population is jerks? The consensus answer is say, something like 35%. Then the professor asks the class which of them are jerks and about 5% of the classroom self identifies? I think you can see where I’m going with this. This would open a Pandora’s box of problems based on the fact that everyone sees themselves as better than average. Context: I work in IT. I think this would apply to most professional environments.

I’m just dazzled with the responses. These are just five of many. I’m working now to put them in broad categories. I want you to be able to read all of them. Thanks a million to those of you who participated in the survey. If you response isn’t above, it’s coming soon. What would you like to say about pay transparency? Just click on that little comment ballon at the top right and let us know what you think.