Skip to content
Development
Skill

/algo-hr-compensation

\"Conduct compensation benchmarking analysis to position salaries against market data. Use this skill when the user needs to assess pay competitiveness, build salary bands, or analyze pay equity — even if they say 'are we paying market rate', 'salary benchmarking', or

From plugin
awesome-agent-skill
26200 skills4 commands
Install
$ npx -y skills add charlieviettq/awesome-agent-skill --skill algo-hr-compensation --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/algo-hr-compensation

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

\"Conduct compensation benchmarking analysis to position salaries against market data. Use this skill when the user needs to assess pay competitiveness, build salary bands, or analyze pay equity — even if they say 'are we paying market rate', 'salary benchmarking', or

SKILL.md

algo-hr-compensation.SKILL.md
name: "\"algo-hr-compensation\""
description: "\"Conduct compensation benchmarking analysis to position salaries against market data. Use this skill when the user needs to assess pay competitiveness, build salary bands, or analyze pay equity — even if they say 'are we paying market rate', 'salary benchmarking', or 'compensation analysis'.\"."
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep

Compensation Benchmarking

Overview

Compensation benchmarking compares internal pay levels against external market data to assess competitiveness. Uses compa-ratio (actual pay / market midpoint) and percentile positioning. Informs salary band design, pay adjustments, and equity analysis.

When to Use

**Trigger conditions:**

  • Evaluating whether current salaries are competitive with the market
  • Designing or updating salary bands and pay structures
  • Identifying pay equity gaps across demographics or roles

**When NOT to use:**

  • For individual performance-based pay decisions (use performance management)
  • When no market data is available (need at least survey benchmarks)

Algorithm

IRON LAW: Benchmarking Is Only Valid With COMPARABLE Jobs
Matching by job TITLE alone is unreliable — "Senior Engineer" means
vastly different things at different companies. Match by: job content
(duties, scope), level (IC vs manager, experience band), industry,
geography, and company size. Poor job matching produces misleading
market rates.

Phase 1: Input Validation

Collect: internal compensation data (base, bonus, equity), market survey data (P25, P50, P75 by role), job matching between internal roles and survey benchmarks. **Gate:** Jobs properly matched, survey data current (< 18 months).

Phase 2: Core Algorithm

1. Match internal jobs to market benchmarks by content, level, and scope 2. Age survey data to current date: apply projected market movement rate 3. Compute compa-ratio per employee: actual base / market P50 4. Compute percentile positioning: where does actual pay fall in market distribution 5. Analyze: by department, level, tenure, demographics for equity gaps

Phase 3: Verification

Check: compa-ratios cluster around 0.85-1.15 (normal range). Flag outliers (< 0.80 underpaid, > 1.20 overpaid). Test demographic equity. **Gate:** Distribution reasonable, equity analysis completed.

Phase 4: Output

Return benchmarking results with band recommendations.

Output Format

{
  "summary": {"avg_compa_ratio": 0.97, "below_band_pct": 12, "above_band_pct": 8},
  "by_role": [{"role": "Software Engineer", "market_p50": 1800000, "avg_actual": 1750000, "compa_ratio": 0.97}],
  "equity_flags": [{"dimension": "gender", "gap_pct": 3.2, "statistically_significant": true}],
  "metadata": {"employees": 500, "survey_source": "Mercer", "survey_date": "2025-H2"}
}

Examples

Sample I/O

**Input:** 50 engineers, market P50=NT$1.8M, actual range NT$1.5M-2.1M **Expected:** Avg compa-ratio ~0.97, some below-band employees flagged for adjustment.

Edge Cases

| Input | Expected | Why | |-------|----------|-----| | Hot market (tech boom) | Market data rapidly outdated | Apply higher aging factor | | Remote work mixed | Location-adjusted bands needed | SF vs Taipei market rates differ 2-3x | | Small company, no survey match | Use broader industry proxies | Imperfect but better than nothing |

Gotchas

  • **Total compensation**: Base salary benchmarking alone misses equity, bonuses, and benefits. Compare total comp for accurate positioning.
  • **Survey data lag**: Published surveys reflect data collected 6-18 months ago. In fast-moving markets, age the data forward.
  • **Internal equity vs external competitiveness**: Aligning with market may create internal inequities (new hire paid more than tenured employee). Balance both.
  • **Geographic differentials**: Remote work complicates location-based pay. Define a clear policy: pay by HQ location, employee location, or hybrid.
  • **Pay equity legal risk**: Unexplained demographic pay gaps expose legal liability. Conduct regression-based equity analysis controlling for legitimate factors (experience, performance, level).

References

  • For salary band design methodology, see `references/band-design.md`
  • For pay equity regression analysis, see `references/pay-equity.md`
Read more
Ships withawesome-agent-skill

Curated skill pack for LLM agents in engineer and science workflow (Cursor & Claude ready).

Get the whole plugin

Other skills on awesome-agent-skill.