06Performance Management and Reward

Compensation and Reward Framework

Explain reward choices using clear principles and distinct evidence about jobs, markets, contribution and affordability.

المحتوى التفصيلي والرسم وملف PDF متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية. يمكنك متابعة استخدام التنقل العربي.

Clear reasons for reward decisions
Evidence types kept distinct
Consistent review of exceptions
CRFReward Decisions Model

Start with your situation

When this framework helps.

  • Pay exceptions have accumulated without a clear policy rationale.
  • Managers request adjustments for different reasons but treat them as the same problem.
  • The employment offer or reward approach needs a structured review.

The decisions it supports

  1. What is this reward decision intended to address?
  2. Is the issue job value, market position, contribution or funding?
  3. Which option is consistent with the policy and its wider implications?

The framework at a glance

Reward Decisions Model

Connect pay, recognition and reward with contribution and organisational priorities.

Explore the complete model
Compensation and Reward Framework: model structure and relationships
Compensation and Reward Framework · CRFOpen full-size framework ↗

The approach

The Reward Decisions Model

Reward decisions connect strategy, the value of work, labour-market conditions, employee contribution and the organisation’s ability to sustain its commitments. When those decisions accumulate without a clear policy, exceptions become difficult to explain and employees may struggle to understand how their employment deal works.

The HR Delivery Compensation and Reward Framework uses a Reward Decisions Model to structure six connected choices: Purpose, Value, Position, Mix, Movement and Stewardship. It helps leaders examine the existing system, compare options and establish a practical basis for consistent decisions. It can support a targeted policy review or a broader reward redesign.

This page describes a general consultancy methodology. It does not provide market pay rates or individual pay recommendations. Implementation requires qualified local review of employment law, contractual terms, tax, pensions, consultation and other applicable requirements.

Purpose

Define what the reward system is intended to support. Consider organisational priorities, the employment proposition, workforce needs and the behaviours leaders want to encourage. Make important trade-offs explicit, including simplicity, flexibility, affordability and consistency.

Agree a short set of reward principles that can guide actual decisions. A principle such as recognising contribution needs a clear account of what contribution means and which decisions it should affect. Record the agreed policy purpose, who can make decisions, what the review covers and how options will be judged.

Value

Establish a defensible view of the work. Check role descriptions, job families, responsibilities and the method used to evaluate relative job value. Keep the requirements of the job distinct from the characteristics or performance of its current holder.

The Job Evaluation Framework can provide the detailed methodology for this work. The reward framework uses its outputs alongside other evidence. The International Labour Organization’s guidance highlights the importance of gender-neutral job evaluation. Read the ILO guide.

Show how job families and evaluation evidence support the proposed reward structure.

Position

Decide how relevant external market evidence should inform policy. Specify the labour markets, role comparisons, geography, sector and reward components that matter to the organisation. Review survey dates, sample coverage, job matching and data limitations before interpreting any figure. Check whether comparisons concern base pay or total compensation, comparable working arrangements and the same currency and reference period. A familiar title is insufficient if the responsibilities differ.

A published percentile is a description of a particular dataset, not an automatic pay recommendation. Record uncertainty when the comparator is weak or the market is changing. Explain the proposed market position alongside internal fairness, affordability and the limits of the comparison.

Mix

Design the relationship between fixed pay, variable reward, benefits and recognition. Explain the purpose of each element, who is eligible, how it is earned or accessed and how it interacts with the others.

Where incentives are proposed, test the behaviours they may encourage, including unintended consequences for quality, collaboration, safety and longer-term results. Consider whether employees have meaningful influence over the measures. Document the reward elements, who is eligible, how they operate, cost assumptions and the risks to monitor.

CIPD’s total reward guidance recognises both tangible and intangible aspects of work that people value. Read the strategic reward guidance. Recognition and development should be considered alongside the financial offer without obscuring unresolved pay concerns.

Movement

Define how pay and reward can change. Distinguish progression within a role, promotion, market adjustments, structural corrections and performance-related awards. Each may require different evidence and authority.

Clarify eligibility, timing, decision criteria and how exceptions are handled. Review whether the performance evidence used is sufficiently relevant and consistent for the decision. Publish progression and review rules, including how managers check consistency, record decisions and respond to queries or challenges. Make the reason for movement explicit: a revised job, a market adjustment and recognition for contribution answer different questions and need different approvals.

Stewardship

Set the accountabilities that keep the system coherent. Define who proposes, reviews, approves, implements and audits reward decisions. Establish controls for access to sensitive pay data, conflicts of interest, exceptions, communication and periodic review.

Prepare managers to explain the policy accurately and escalate difficult cases. An exception should have a reason, authorised decision-maker and review trigger. Agree who maintains the policy, how decisions are explained and when the system will be reviewed after launch.

What you can take forward

Useful work. Clear next steps.

01

Reward policy mandate

Agreed principles, scope and decision authority that clarify what the reward system should support.

02

Evidence and option review

Separate analysis of internal job value, external market evidence, contribution and available funding.

03

Implementation and review plan

Eligibility, communication, exception handling and review arrangements that make decisions explainable.

01

CRF · In practice

Keep four evidence types distinct

Internal job value concerns the requirements and relative value of the work. Market evidence concerns relevant external comparisons. Contribution evidence concerns demonstrated outcomes, behaviours or capabilities under the organisation’s agreed policy. Funding evidence concerns the cost and sustainability of proposed commitments.

These inputs inform a decision, but they answer different questions. A market premium does not automatically change job value. A strong performance rating does not establish the appropriate market rate. Budget availability does not demonstrate fairness. Document how each input has been used instead of blending them into an unexplained total score.

02

CRF · In practice

Start with an evidence-led diagnostic

Agree the workforce scope, jurisdictions, decision authority and purpose of the review. Reconcile relevant records with payroll and policy documentation, while limiting access to personal data. Review the accuracy of job information, reward eligibility and the treatment of exceptions.

Map the current system against the six decisions. Identify where policy is clear, where practice varies and where evidence is missing. Listen to employees and managers about understanding, access and perceived fairness without treating perception as a substitute for objective review.

Examine distributions and differences with appropriately qualified analysts. An observed pay gap requires investigation of its context and possible causes; an aggregate average cannot establish that individual decisions are fair. Agree the necessary local legal and specialist review before drawing implementation conclusions.

03

CRF · In practice

Develop and test options

Create a small set of options that address the diagnosed problem. Show the policy rationale, populations affected, implementation dependencies, transition issues and recurring cost. Test sensitivity to assumptions such as workforce growth or different progression patterns.

Evaluate options against fairness, affordability, explainability and practical operation. Use representative scenarios to check whether managers would reach consistent decisions and whether exceptional cases have an appropriate route. Seek required approvals and consultation before implementation. A pilot or shadow calculation can expose operating problems without prematurely changing employees’ pay. A shadow calculation applies proposed rules to authorised test records while the existing rules remain in operation. Check payroll and manager decisions against the same worked cases before launch.

04

From insight to action

Practical engagement outputs

The agreed scope can include:

  • A reward principles and policy mandate
  • A job-value and market-evidence review
  • Reward structure and mix options with cost scenarios
  • Progression, review and exception rules
  • A fairness review and implementation risk register
  • Decision rights, manager guidance and employee communication
  • A monitoring plan with clear review triggers

These are engagement outputs developed around the organisation’s circumstances. Their depth depends on the decision being made and the quality of available evidence.

05

CRF · In practice

Govern fairness throughout implementation

Review the accessibility of benefits, the consistency of eligibility rules and the distribution of awards. Keep individual pay information within authorised channels and use proportionate reporting. Provide a credible correction and challenge process.

Human decision-makers remain accountable for reward decisions. AI may support appropriate administrative or analytical tasks under controlled conditions, but unexplained automated recommendations should not determine pay, progression or access to benefits. Local specialists should review the design and its operation, including Saudi and GCC requirements where relevant.

06

CRF · In practice

Review the system after launch

Monitor payroll accuracy, exception volume, understanding of policy, benefit access and the operation of review and challenge routes. Revisit fairness findings, costs and incentive behaviour at agreed intervals and when material changes occur.

Recruitment, retention and performance outcomes can provide context, but they are affected by many other conditions. Evaluate the contribution of reward changes carefully; do not promise a universal return on investment or assume that higher spending necessarily delivers a better employment experience.

07

Your questions, answered

Frequently asked questions

Does this framework set salary levels?

No. It structures the evidence and decisions required. Salary levels depend on verified local data, policy, role context, affordability and qualified review.

Must every organisation introduce variable pay?

No. The appropriate mix depends on the work and intended behaviour. Simpler arrangements may be more suitable where measures are weak or individual influence is limited.

Can an existing job evaluation scheme be retained?

Yes, subject to its suitability, evidence quality and fair operation. The reward review should connect to reliable job architecture rather than automatically replacing it.

08

An illustrative application

Separate the reasons behind pay-adjustment requests

Illustrative scenario.

The situation

A manager requests a higher grade and pay for a scarce technical specialist after recruitment becomes difficult. The role itself has not yet been shown to have changed, and the proposed adjustment may affect comparable employees.

Explore the evidence

Use Value to verify the required work and its existing evaluation. Use Position to test the quality and relevance of external comparisons. Review contribution and funding evidence separately. A recruitment difficulty may justify a market response, but it does not alone establish a different internal job value.

Agree the next step

Compare policy options with their eligibility, effects on similar roles, transition implications and recurring cost. If a market-related exception is justified, Stewardship should identify its authority, rationale and review trigger. Explain how it differs from promotion or a contribution award without exposing other employees’ pay.

Review what changes

Check payroll operation, exception patterns, recruitment context and fairness findings. Revisit the decision when the evidence changes, using the agreed Movement and Stewardship rules. Review outcomes in context rather than assuming that the adjustment caused improved retention or recruitment.

Put the framework to work

Discuss your reward priorities

HR Delivery can help clarify a difficult reward question, evaluate the evidence and develop an explainable route to implementation.

Discuss the Compensation and Reward Framework.

Discuss your priorities ↗