How much does skill differenciate in salaries? (employee, average, employer)

[buenos]

This is mainly about engineers, because in engineering you need to have a lot of technical knowledge to be able to the job. Skill is not just knowledge, but also the ability to deliver successfully without creating any disaster.

So, if Bob delivers 2 big projects fully complete in 1 year, while Ed only delivers one small project in a year, how much their salaries should differ?
How much do their salaries differ at different companies normally?

As I see at some places this above does not have anything to do with salaries, as Ed gets 20% more than Bob, because he is 15 years older. Or maybe Ed stays at work until 9PM every day to debug his disastrous creation. On paper Ed has more experience and seem to be working harder, although since he only delivers one small one in a year at some barely acceptable quality, it shows that he really has less skill/experience than Bob has.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by buenos

in engineering you need to have a lot of technical knowledge to be able to the job.

In just about any job.

Skill is not just knowledge, but also the ability to deliver successfully....

Which is what defines experience.

[Hemlock140]

It's not a question of salary. Doing the same work with the same title they should be getting the same unless subject to performance based raises. If Ed is not producing he should be disciplined and eventually fired if he can't do the same amount of work.

[davenj08]

This is a complicated issue. Being better skilled does not translate to more, better or higher standard of productivity. Same argument, a moderately skilled individual with much attention to detail and a lot of hard work can product at par, if not better, than a higher skilled worker. This is true for both white collar and blue collar professions.

What one gets paid for is a combination of productivity + skills + education/certification + quality + quantity + attitude + hard work + sincerity + flexibility + who you know in the organization + how your management perceives you. Too many factors. Based on the mix of above, salary can range as much as 15-20% above/below the salary of average Joe in the group.

[buenos]

OK, lets simplify this to the following key point: "So, if Bob delivers 2 big projects fully complete in 1 year, while Ed only delivers one small project in a year, how much their salaries should differ?"

[davenj08]

Originally Posted by buenos

OK, lets simplify this to the following key point: "So, if Bob delivers 2 big projects fully complete in 1 year, while Ed only delivers one small project in a year, how much their salaries should differ?"

You are not going to like my answer, again, but here it is - "Depends on a lot of factors. Did Bob deliver 2 big projects in a year that should have been done in 7 months given the large pool of resources and budget he had? Was the client happy with the quality of delivery? Did he overspend on the projects? Did Ed deliver only one small project, but it involved a very difficult client, very limited resources and Ed had to go beyond what was required to get it done within a year when it could have taken a good 15-18 months?"

But as a general statement, salary is not determined based on a single year performance. It depends a lot on past performance record and how eager the employer is to retain the employee. However, what the employer could do is give a sizeable bonus to an employee who has achieved significantly more than the rest.

[Hemlock140]

I still say you don't pay someone more because he does his job. You get rid of the guy that doesn't do his job.

[davenj08]

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

I still say you don't pay someone more because he does his job. You get rid of the guy that doesn't do his job.

Interesting! So you wouldnt want to understand why the guy didn't do his job well?
- Was it his fault or a fault or someone else? If someone else, did he raise the flag or inform whoever needed to be informed?
- Was he given the right resources and reasonable time to complete the job?
- Does he have the skills to do the job?
- Did the project scope change during the project? Was there enough time to react?
- How cooperative was the client/other teams whose input is required to do the job?
- Did the manager assess weekly/monthly progress?
- Did the manager assign a wrong person to the assignment?

The list goes on but I guess it is just easy to blame the guy and fire him!

[buenos]

Originally Posted by davenj08

- Was it his fault or a fault or someone else? If someone else, did he raise the flag or inform whoever needed to be informed?

His fault, skill and real experience issue.

Originally Posted by davenj08

- Was he given the right resources and reasonable time to complete the job?

He got the same resources as Bob.

Originally Posted by davenj08

- Does he have the skills to do the job?

That is the problem. That is why I posted this thread.

Originally Posted by davenj08

- How cooperative was the client/other teams whose input is required to do the job?
- Did the manager assess weekly/monthly progress?
- Did the manager assign a wrong person to the assignment?

Everyone was just as much cooperative with Ed as with Bob. There was regular assessments, failure was on the spot, but everyone kept pretending that the problems are coming from out of nowhere.

Originally Posted by davenj08

Did Bob deliver 2 big projects in a year that should have been done in 7 months given the large pool of resources and budget he had? Was the client happy with the quality of delivery? Did he overspend on the projects?

Bob's 2 projects were each as big and difficult as Ed's project. The client had to wait 2 months extra on Ed's project, but not on Bob's projects.

Originally Posted by davenj08

Did Ed deliver only one small project, but it involved a very difficult client, very limited resources and Ed had to go beyond what was required to get it done within a year when it could have taken a good 15-18 months?"

No Ed's project was not more difficult, neither the client. He just screws up everything possible then keeps fixing it. As I said the exact same level of challenge as Bob's projects, or even less.

This is not just at one company, but at several places.
I think the focus is not really on Ed's Fkup but on Bob's 2x performance. There is also Al and Dick, their work has similar to Ed's performance, and Rich who is a little better than them. Maybe it is the norm.