1. Shows you separate entries (pseudo-anonymized) instead of showing statistical numbers like averages and spreads.
2. By requiring users to share their wage information at signup. The idea is that to see salaries of others you need to share yours first. It’s possible to delete wage entry later, but also that makes the user lose access to others, until they either: add wage entry again or upgrade to paid account plan.
3. Yes, I agree that certain folks will have no motivation to share, because they don’t care to know what others ("below" their level) earn. What could be interesting for them is what others of the same or similar level earn. So maybe something like peer-to-peer sharing may be interesting to these folk.
4. We’re going to implement an algorithm that will try to detect "suspicious" data entries, and devise some a more advanced validation mechanism. Such entries will be hidden from other users in the meantime.
So there are two fields: core wage (this is what you get no matter what), and other benefits estimate (here you just bundle everything else, and for non-deterministic stuff, make your best estimate, of what it’s worth).
"More than 50% come from bonus or stock, or others" is actually not quite true in every culture or country. For what I’ve seen here in Germany and in few other countries, 90% or even more is the base salary.
> By requiring users to share their wage information at signup
This seems like a bad idea. Aren't you concerned this will lower the quality and accuracy of submissions? I know when some website forces me to put in details I don't think it needs I put in garbage.
Also you're asking people to submit data when they have no idea what data you already have. Are they first to submit?
This reminds me of Auto generated pages with no content or no answer yet that's not clear from a Google SERP. You get the "helpful" message like "be the first to post X". I actually wish Google would downrank questions with no answers and empty wiki pages.
It smacks of clickbait is what I'm getting at. If you measure it you'll probably find your bounce rate is really high.
Yes, we don’t have too much data yet. All the data is crowdsourced.
I validate the information (current job title, company name and location) via user’s LinkedIn profile manually.
I don’t validate the "numbers", but I plan to implement an algorithm that’ll mark "suspicious" entries, and will hide them or delete them from the system. Additionally, owners of such records will be prompted to update them when they log in into the system next time.
2. By requiring users to share their wage information at signup. The idea is that to see salaries of others you need to share yours first. It’s possible to delete wage entry later, but also that makes the user lose access to others, until they either: add wage entry again or upgrade to paid account plan.
3. Yes, I agree that certain folks will have no motivation to share, because they don’t care to know what others ("below" their level) earn. What could be interesting for them is what others of the same or similar level earn. So maybe something like peer-to-peer sharing may be interesting to these folk.
4. We’re going to implement an algorithm that will try to detect "suspicious" data entries, and devise some a more advanced validation mechanism. Such entries will be hidden from other users in the meantime.
So there are two fields: core wage (this is what you get no matter what), and other benefits estimate (here you just bundle everything else, and for non-deterministic stuff, make your best estimate, of what it’s worth).
"More than 50% come from bonus or stock, or others" is actually not quite true in every culture or country. For what I’ve seen here in Germany and in few other countries, 90% or even more is the base salary.