Here’s a bit of tough love for compensation professionals everywhere: nobody outside our world cares about midpoint progression or how many grades exist in your structure.

These concepts, so central to how we build frameworks, are invisible to the people who actually use and experience the pay system.

What people care about is whether the structure works. Whether it’s fair, competitive, clear, and aligned to reality. The internal mechanics we obsess over matter only insofar as they support that experience. When they don’t, all the mathematical elegance in the world won’t save you.

What Employees Actually Experience

Employees don’t sit around debating midpoint math or grade counts. They don’t experience grades.

They experience ranges.

When you sit down with an employee and show them their pay range, they don’t ask “Wait a second, how many grades are there?”. They ask:

• Is my pay fair and competitive?
• Where do I fall within my range, and what does that mean?
• How do I move forward over time?

That’s it. If they walk away confused, your structure has failed, no matter how immaculate the underlying math might be.

The number of grades is invisible to them. It’s backstage scaffolding, not the main performance.

What Leaders Actually Need

Leaders don’t experience midpoint progression or the number of grades, either.

They experience decision friction.

They want a structure that helps them make efficient, fair decisions without needing a 60-minute consult with HR every time.

A structure works for leaders when it answers:

• What is a competitive pay range for this role?
• What’s reasonable to pay for this level of performance?
• How do I stay within budget while keeping talent happy?

Whether a job is in Grade 12 or 27, can the leader make a fast, fair offer before the candidate takes another job?

Leaders want clarity and speed. If your structure is hard to use - even if it’s mathematically beautiful - they’ll see it as a barrier, not a tool.

The Comp Professional Trap

Compensation people love symmetry, consistency, and tidy math. We love a clean midpoint progression and a grade count that feels “just right.” But that perfectionism often drifts into overengineering.

We start treating the method as the value. We believe that if the model behind the scenes is perfect, the outcomes will be perfect too. But structures live and die by outcomes, not formulas.

We hate to break it to you, but your method is invisible.

• Your midpoint progression? Invisible.
• Your number of grades? Invisible.
• Your regression line? Invisible.

The only people who ever see those things are… comp folks. And maybe a consultant.

Everyone else sees the outcome.

Think Like a Product Designer, Not a Mathematician

A good compensation structure is more like a well-designed product than a flawless spreadsheet. Apple doesn’t advertise the algorithm behind Face ID, they focus on the user experience. The code matters, but only because it makes the experience seamless.

Your pay structure works the same way. The math and architecture are internal code.

Instead of obsessing about grade counts, obsess about:

• Employee experience: Is the range clear, fair, and confidence-building?
• Leader experience: Is the structure intuitive and practical at the moment of decision?
• Comp experience: Is it defendable, aligned to market, and maintainable?

If these three experiences work, the underlying math can be a little messy. Nobody will notice.

A Final Word 

Instead of chasing structural elegance, focus on what truly matters:

• Competitiveness: Are you aligned to the market?
• Clarity: Do employees understand their pay?
• Practicality: Can leaders use the system consistently and efficiently?
• Scalability: Can you manage and sustain the structure without drowning in complexity?

Comp folks love tidy systems, and that’s fine. Just don’t confuse internal craft with external value. A slightly messy system that works is far better than a pristine system nobody understands or uses.

Because at the end of the day:

Nobody cares how many grades you have.
They care whether the structure works.