Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
This use case describes a typical, end-to-end client journey rather than a single project. It illustrates how organisations move from designing a job architecture, through building a pay transparency roadmap, to delivering pay range and gender pay gap analytics in preparation for the EU Pay Transparency Directive.
Clients are typically organisations professionalising their reward and performance practices, often operating internationally, and preparing for pay transparency requirements. A consistent observation across these engagements is that around 90% of clients ask for a job architecture rather than traditional job evaluation – they want a usable structure for organising roles, not only an evaluation exercise.
The approach is applied across organisations of very different sizes, from small to large:
Small: approximately 50-100 employees, EUR 10-50m revenue
Medium: approximately 200-1,000 employees, EUR 100m+ revenue
Large: approximately 1,000-20,000 employees, EUR 1bn+ revenue
Organisations on this journey are typically working to address some combination of:
The absence of a common foundation for defining job families, grades and roles consistently
No defensible basis for ensuring equal treatment and identifying work of equal value
Unclear or inconsistent pay ranges and compensation practices
Limited readiness for the EU Pay Transparency Directive, including governance, communication and analytics
An inability to confidently answer questions such as:
What do we base our pay decisions on?
How do we define work of equal value?
How do we prove that no inequalities exist?
The principal trigger is the EU Pay Transparency Directive, which requires organisations to compare work of equal value, define justifiable reasons for pay differences, structure pay ranges and be able to explain pay decisions. The Directive affects both employers (reviewing compensation and hiring practices) and people managers (making objective pay decisions, communicating about pay and managing fair recruitment). Beyond compliance, the work is framed as both the right thing to do and a strategic business advantage that builds trust, engagement and employer brand.
The journey is structured in three connected stages:
Step 1 – Job architecture design
Define job families, grades and roles according to company needs
Create a common foundation and a tool for the employer to evaluate roles and ensure equal treatment
Step 2 – Pay transparency roadmap
Assess current transparency practices
Define levels of transparency and align them with the legal, cultural and organisational context
Develop a phased roadmap covering the next 6-18 months
Step 3 – Pay analytics
Assess current compensation practices
Define pay ranges
Analyse gender pay gaps
Job architecture (Step 1)
The architecture is built on the gradar methodology, which produces a job grade structure ranging from 1 to 25 that can be applied to any type of organisation. Work typically starts by identifying grades for C-level roles and the most common operational roles, benchmarked against what is seen in comparable organisations. The architecture is developed by workshopping with HR and interviewing function leaders, and consists of:
Job grades (the level structure)
Job families (for example Marketing, Finance, Software Development)
Benchmark roles identified within the company
Deliverables include generic grade descriptions (describing role level, independence, problem solving and typical education and experience) and example role descriptions, drafted from client input.
Pay transparency roadmap (Step 2)
Ready-made materials are brought on Directive content and what it means for companies, together with benchmarks on what other organisations are doing. The roadmap recommends prioritised "development streams" such as rewards processes, communication, analytics and talent management, and clarifies what pay transparency means for both the employer and people managers.
Pay analytics (Step 3)
Current pay is analysed against the job grades, pay ranges and compensation structure guidelines are defined, and gender pay gaps are analysed – including identifying male- and female-dominated roles, grades and job families.
Input from HR workshops and interviews with function leaders (for the architecture)
Existing roles, grades and job descriptions
Current compensation data, analysed against job grades
Employee demographic data for gender pay gap analysis
Benchmark and market reference data
Whether to follow minimum transparency criteria under the Directive or go further
How to define "category of work" and what constitutes a justifiable reason for pay differences
Who owns pay transparency, and how responsibility is shared between global and local levels
How pay ranges are defined and maintained per country
How outliers are managed, particularly roles positioned below range
What level of access to pay structures employees, managers and HR should have
How the organisation will respond to any gender pay gaps identified
Architecture versus evaluation expectations. Most clients ask for a job architecture rather than job evaluation, so expectations and methodology need to be aligned early.
Global versus local responsibility. Pay transparency must be managed at country level to meet national legislation, while global structures provide consistency – striking this balance requires clear governance.
More than pay. Pay transparency touches hiring, communication, manager capability and culture, not just pay structures, so the scope is broader than clients sometimes expect.
Difficult conversations. People managers need support to make objective pay decisions and to communicate about pay openly.
The architecture is built collaboratively through HR workshops and interviews with function leaders. Governance proposals assign responsibility for each development area across global and local levels, with the Country People & Culture Manager responsible for complying with national legislation. Managers and employees are equipped through training and awareness to make and understand fair pay decisions.
A company-specific job architecture (job grades, job families and benchmark roles) on the gradar 1-25 grade structure
Grade descriptions and example role descriptions
A phased pay transparency roadmap (6-18 months) with prioritised development streams and a governance model
Pay ranges and compensation structure guidelines
Gender pay gap analysis against job grades, including identification of male- and female-dominated roles, grades and families
Training and communication material for managers and employees
A common, objective foundation for organising and comparing roles
Pay structures that are transparent and consistent across roles
A clear, prioritised path towards compliance with the EU Pay Transparency Directive
A defensible basis for identifying work of equal value and for explaining pay decisions
Stronger manager capability and clearer communication with employees
A grade structure spanning 25 grades (gradar methodology)
A phased roadmap covering 6-18 months
Job architectures built around defined job families and benchmark roles
Gender pay gap analysis conducted by role, grade and job family
(As this describes a typical journey rather than a single project, specific client outcome figures are not stated.)
Organisations should first clarify the difference between job architecture and evaluation, since most need a usable job architecture in place before anything else, and this should be agreed before work begins. The work then needs to be sequenced: job architecture provides the objective foundation, the transparency roadmap sets direction, and pay analytics builds on both.
Transparency should also be treated as more than a matter of pay, because hiring, communication, manager capability and culture all need attention. Governance decisions should be made early, defining which responsibilities sit globally and which locally, particularly where national legislation applies at country level.
Finally, data and managers need preparation: gender pay gap analysis depends on sound grading and clean data, and managers need support to hold open conversations about pay. Once in place, the approach should be maintained through an annual process to calibrate and validate grades and keep pay ranges current.
Organisations of any size preparing for the EU Pay Transparency Directive
Companies that need a job architecture to organise roles consistently
Multinationals balancing global structures with country-level compliance
Organisations professionalising reward, performance and pay governance
Companies seeking to connect job architecture, pay ranges and gender pay gap analysis into a single, defensible approach
Job evaluation assesses the relative value of individual roles. A job architecture is the broader structure – job grades, job families and benchmark roles – that organises roles consistently and gives employers a tool to evaluate roles and ensure equal treatment. In practice, most organisations ask for a job architecture, built on an objective evaluation methodology.
List item
A job architecture based on an objective methodology provides a defensible basis for comparing work of equal value, defining pay ranges, explaining pay decisions and conducting gender pay gap analysis – all central to the EU Pay Transparency Directive.
Typically a phased roadmap of 6-18 months, with priorities defined according to the organisation's legal, cultural and organisational context.
Pay transparency must be managed at country level to comply with national legislation, while global structures and ways of working provide consistency. Clear governance defining global versus local responsibility is essential.
Among other things, to review compensation and hiring practices, define what constitutes work of equal value, identify justifiable reasons for pay differences, structure pay ranges and be able to demonstrate that unjustified inequalities do not exist.
Current pay is analysed against job grades, and gaps are examined by role, grade and job family, including the identification of male- and female-dominated roles. Reliable analysis depends on a sound, objective grading foundation.
Yes. The same methodology applies across organisations from around 50 employees to many thousands; the depth and phasing of the work scale with size, complexity and risk.
Job architecture insights are delivered through the gradar platform - connecting job evaluation, compensation analysis and pay transparency in one consistent framework.
Job evaluation
Compensation
Pay transparency