Re: Re[2]: Salaries in Chicago & where ever

["Huber, Mike" <mrhuber -at- SOFTWARE -dot- ROCKWELL -dot- COM>]

There are other possible reasons for the bias.

For example, there is a great deal of gray area where a person may or
may not be a TC, particularly at the top and bottom of the pay scales.
If you ask a trainee and HR whether the trainee is a technical
communicator, the answer might be different. Same with a new manager.

Surveys are tricky things, and the results can be deceptive even if each
respondent is honest. And when the respondents have a vested interest in
the results, as they do here, honesty is tested rather hard. If you are
on the wrong side of the mean (an HR person who's company pays high, or
a low-paid TC) you can skew the results just by refusing to answer. And
who can say that an overworked individual saying "I'm too busy for
surveys" is being dishonest? I rarely respond to surveys, but if one
crossed my screen right after a good raise, I might be tempted to brag.

---
Office:mike -dot- huber -at- software -dot- rockwell -dot- com
Home:nax -at- execpc -dot- com


>-----Original Message-----
>From:  Walker, Arlen P [SMTP:Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- COM]
>
>No specific knowledge about this particular one, but in my experience there
>are two types of salary surveys:
>
>1) The workers are surveyed. These surveys are almost always biased high.
>
>2) The HR departments are surveyed. These surveys are almost always biased
>low.
>
>The reason for both biases? IMHO, lack of honesty among participants. Each
>survey group shades the numbers.
>