The overview rosetta provides orientation for comparing gradar grades with grades from reward and pay surveys of the following providers as well as from following labour agreements:
- AON/Hewitt
- Birches Group
- Culpepper
- Hay
- H.E.R.A.
- salary.com IPAS
- Landolt & Mächler JobTax
- Lurse
- Pearl Meyer
- Paterson
- PEROMNES
- Sedlak & Sedlak
- Radford
- Willis Towers Watson
- Western Management Group
- CATS (Netherlands)
- FWG (Netherlands)
- Labour agreement banking (Germany)
- Labour agreement chemical industry Nordrhein (Germany)
- Labour agreement whole sale and international trade NRW (Germany)
- Labour agreement metal and electronic industries (ERA) (Germany)
- Public services and municipal utilities (Germany)
job matching
easily done
How can I reliably and consistently match my business’s positions to benchmark levels of various compensation surveys?
As an answer to this question a table called “Rosetta Stone” has been around since the 2000-years.It contains a read across of job levelling approaches of various studies.
Since this overview was not managed by a central facility and since then has been added to by several suppliers of compensation surveys, there are now numerous versions around which massively differ in scope, up-to-dateness and content.
With rosetta, QPM’s edition of the Rosetta Stone, we publish a free, fully revised and extended new release of this tool – rosetta is our investment in more quality in the survey landscape.
Participation in compensation surveys typically is done by matching the own business’s positions to
- benchmark positions
or to - a survey level in combination with the functional match of a job family and possibly sub-family or discipline.
To find the common ground between the various providers, we have evaluated their levelling methodologies with our job evaluation system gradar the job evaluation engine. This is how we can provide a reliable read across table.
On especially the level of top management, however, it is not possible to deliver accurate comparisons, since here the evaluation criteria differ strongly (from analytical job evaluations to hybrid forms to scaling according to financial KPIs of organisations).