Pave

Last week, we were thrilled to connect with the total rewards community in San Francisco at our first Pave Compensation Forum of 2025. Now, we’re looking ahead to our next event: New York City, get ready! Our NYC Compensation Forum will take place on May 28 at Convene Rockefeller Plaza in Midtown. This half-day event is perfect for total rewards and compensation leaders looking for thoughtful conversations, real-time market data, and the latest compensation trends—all packed into a convenient morning agenda (with coffee and breakfast to start things off right). We hope you'll join us there! Register now to save your seat: https://lnkd.in/g8asjteE #Pave #Compensation

Business leaders put so much time and energy into building their equity programs, but oftentimes, equity feels like a black box to employees—confusing, intimidating, and even mistrusted. It’s a big challenge. For equity to actually motivate and engage, it needs to be understood. How do you turn your equity compensation plan from a hidden benefit into a compelling story of shared ownership? In our latest guest article from partner Infinite Equity, Robyn Shutak, CEP, FGE, NDEF dives into key tactics to improve how you communicate equity to your team. If you’re a compensation leader, a founder, or work in HR or Finance, this one is a must-read! https://lnkd.in/gspdFZCR #Pave #Compensation #Equity

Every compensation team talks about rewarding performance. But when it comes down to raise and promotion decisions, how much does performance really factor in? Our latest report uncovers the truth behind pay for performance: how often top performers are promoted, what kinds of raises employees with “Meets Expectations” ratings actually get, how equity grants factor in, and more. If you’ve ever wondered what “good” looks like, this is your benchmark. Download your free copy of Pave’s Pay for Performance Report to get the details: https://lnkd.in/giwcKg4W #Pave #Compensation #PayForPerformance

Next Wednesday we're back with our second annual Merit Cycle State of the Union, digging into all of the trends we saw coming out of H1 merit cycles, including: - Merit cycle spend: median budget increases, promotion rates, and salary adjustments - Performance ratings: standard rating scales, and attrition after cycles - Pay for performance: trends in cycles relative to performance, both short and long-term incentives - Equity innovation: burn rates and participation experiments and more! Join Matt Schulman (Pave) and Octavio Cardenas (Alpine Rewards) for this live breakdown. Save your seat now: https://lnkd.in/eyNRkVFU

To Cliff or Not to Cliff? 88% of private company new hire grants still use cliffs in 2025, while public companies have largely abandoned them—only 20% still have them. Equity program design is a multi-variable optimization equation around equity burn, SBC as a % of revenue, employee retention, ability to attract scarce + leveraged talent, etc. To name a few equity program design levers at hand: –options vs. RSUs vs. other –vesting schedule length –front-weighted vs. back-weighted vesting –quarterly vs. monthly vesting –new hire and ongoing eligibility by level, location, job family, and performance –𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗳 𝘃𝘀. 𝗻𝗼 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗳 Today, let’s take a look at the last lever–cliffs. _______________ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀: Pave’s data science team took a look at 897,000+ new hire grants and 1,200,000+ ongoing (refresh) grants in our dataset over the past few years at both private and public companies. Specifically, what percentage of grants have a cliff vs. don’t have a cliff? The results were then broken down by year to show the time series trend. Caveat: many of the ~100 public customers included in this analysis skew more towards the “innovative public company” archetype which may act as a confounding factor related to the general adoption of more innovative equity program practices in this study among the public companies. _______________ 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗛𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀: ↘️ 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀. Only 20% of public company new hire grants have a cliff in 2025. And the trend is distinctly downwards. ➡️ 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀. 88% of private company new hire grants given in 2025 have a cliff. And the trend is relatively flat year-over-year. 20% (public) vs. 88% (pre-IPO) is a stark contrast worth calling out. _______________ 𝗢𝗻𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 (𝗥𝗲𝗳𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵) 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀: ↘️ 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀. Only 4% of public company ongoing grants given in 2025 have a cliff. And the trend is somewhat down year-over-year. ↘️ 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀. Only 21% of private company ongoing grants given in 2025 have a cliff. And the trend is somewhat down year-over-year if you look at things on a six year time horizon. _______________ 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀: 1️⃣ Public companies are rapidly removing cliffs from grants–both new hire and ongoing (refresh) grants. 2️⃣ Private companies, meanwhile, are largely still keeping the cliff in their new hire grants. 3️⃣ Both public and private companies are increasingly NOT having a cliff in ongoing (refresh) grants. _______________ 𝗧𝘄𝗼 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗤𝘀: I would recommend considering the nuance of these two questions as you apply today’s insights to the evolution of your company’s equity program design. –Q1: Why are public companies much more aggressive in removing cliffs from new hire grants? –Q2: Why, in general, are ongoing (refresh) grants less likely to have cliffs compared to new hire grants?

What is the optimal width for your salary ranges? Like many questions in the world of compensation, “it depends”. Today, let’s take a look at some of the market benchmarks related to salary range widths and then zoom out for an analysis of how to make the right decision for your company. And as a disclaimer, we analyzed this same question 6 months ago. But for today, let’s take a fresh look with slightly improved methodology and updated real-time benchmarks from Pave’s April 2025 data release. ________________ First, the breakdown of which salary range widths companies most commonly adopt. Methodology: for this analysis, the formula for determining a company's most common band width is (max-min)/min. E.g. a range of $170k to $200k = $30k/$170k = 17.6% which is rounded to 20%. ✅ [𝗡𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁] 20% Salary Range Width => 16% of analyzed companies ✅ 30% Width => 11% of companies ✅ 40% Width => 30% of companies ✅ 50% Width => 30% of companies ✅ [𝗪𝗶𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁] 60% Width => 10% of companies Summary: A ~40-50% salary range width is most common. ________________ Second, how does a company’s salary range width impact range adherence? ✅ [𝗡𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁] 20% Salary Range Width => median of 58% of employees in range ✅ 30% Width => 80% of employees in range ✅ 40% Width => 86% employees in range ✅ 50% Width => 91% employees in range ✅ [𝗪𝗶𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁] 60% Width => 88% employees in range ________________ So, what is the optimal salary range width for your company? Let’s think about this question under the lens of 4 consideration dimensions: 1️⃣ 𝗣𝗮𝘆 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 – wider ranges mean less control over potential pay parity issues, a topic that is becoming increasingly top of mind for companies with European offices in particular. 2️⃣ 𝗣𝗮𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 – wider ranges perhaps unlock more flexibility to reward top performers and give them room to grow within their current range without feeling the need to knee jerk a promotion as the main way to increase their comp once they approach the high end of a range. 3️⃣ 𝗣𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 – wider ranges (for salary at least) ultimately will make their way into JDs given the new legislative waves. There are pros and cons to consider from a candidate-facing comms and trust-building perspective as it pertains to wider ranges. Also, on a related note–I would call out that I observe some companies who report min-to-max for their JD ranges whereas other companies do min-to-max. 4️⃣ 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘆 – there are pros and cons either way, but I’d generally suggest that wider ranges give you more wiggle room for special cases. Not to mention more congruence with pay grade style job architectures (e.g. lumping SWEs and AI/ML engineers together in the same job family). On the other hand, narrower ranges give you more control and precision over budget + cost forecasting. There are no right or wrong answers here; just tradeoffs in all directions.

The flurry of merit season has passed. Budgets are finalized. Decisions made. But...what actually happened? We’re back with our annual Merit Cycle State of the Union, having analyzed hundreds of merit cycles across the Pave community to uncover how compensation teams approached raises, equity, and budget allocation. We’re breaking it all down on April 30 at 10 AM PT / 1 PM ET. Registration link in the comments ⬇️

Rewards Letters so nice, even your employees will rave about them! 💸 And, did we mention no mail merges? ✨ Learn how Pave can make your next cycle a breeze: https://lnkd.in/gpkJhKky

Pay transparency is a crucial component of any good compensation strategy, and the impact of getting it right can be huge. But there’s a lot of room between zero and full transparency… As a compensation leader, how do you decide the best level of transparency for your organization? In this article from Pave partner White & Gale Consulting Inc., Hannah Wells dives into the key considerations around determining your approach to pay transparency—from compliance to company culture to pay equity and beyond. Get the details on the blog: https://lnkd.in/gvP6ccu3 #Pave #Compensation #PayTransparency

It’s not too early to make fall plans. And if you’re a total rewards or compensation leader, you should make a plan to be in San Francisco this September 9-10. Total Rewards Live 2025 will be here before you know it! This event is tailor-made for the compensation community, featuring the topics and trends that matter to you. Get ready to block your calendar, book the travel, and set that away message for a day and a half of learning and networking with your peers. Registration opens this week, so join the waitlist now to be the first to get notifications: https://lnkd.in/gVZCXMGX #Pave #Compensation #TRL2025