What Counts when it Comes to Salary? A Qualitative Analysis of the Arguments Dutch Citizens Use when Distributing Salary
Jael Bootsma (Foundation for job evaluation in Healthcare)
Irene van de Glind (Foundation for job evaluation in Healthcare)
Roos Mulder (Universiteit Utrecht)
Agnes Akkerman (Universiteit van Amsterdam)
Evelyn Finnema (University Medical Center Groningen)
Lex Heerma van Voss (Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen)
Tom Geijsen (Populytics)
Niek Mouter (TU Delft - Technology, Policy and Management, Populytics)
Geertje van de Ven (Foundation for job evaluation in Healthcare)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
This study examines to what extent job evaluation systems align with public views on fair pay. Using a Participatory Value Evaluation, over 3,700 Dutch citizens distributed extra salary among various jobs and explained their choices. The arguments were compared to criteria used in job evaluation systems. The dimensions prioritized by participants, such as required education, job complexity, and working conditions, are already well represented in current formal job evaluation systems. However, participants also stressed aspects often absent from such systems, including a job’s societal contribution and labour market scarcity. While job evaluation systems remain broadly consistent with public reasoning, we recommend initiating broader public and institutional discussions on the evolving values that underpin fair compensation.
Files
File under embargo until 23-09-2026