"Can you tell me whether your last three pay decisions were fair?"
And if you can't, you're not alone.
New data from HiBob shows that an astounding 65% of People professionals say they can't ensure fair pay without a unified view of people and budget data — and in startups, where the data infrastructure is even thinner, that number is probably worse.
The fix doesn't always need tools.
It's creating one source of truth that connects who your people are, what they're paid, what the market says, and what you can afford.
Most startup People leaders have access to both data sets. The problem is they live in different tools with different owners.
People owns the HRIS. Finance owns the budget. And the gap between them is where unfair pay decisions get made.
Think about what happens when a manager comes to you and says "I need to give this person a raise or we'll lose them."
Without a unified view, you're evaluating that request in a vacuum.
You don't know if it's fair relative to their peers.
You don't know if the budget can absorb it.
You don't know if you approved something completely different for an identical role last quarter.
You're not making a decision. You're making a guess.
When people data and finance data sit in the same place, everything changes.
You can see what you pay, what you should pay, and what you can afford to pay — at the same time.
That means every comp decision runs through three filters before it's made:
Market justification — is this in line with the benchmark for the role?
Internal equity — is this fair relative to peers doing comparable work?
Budget impact — can we afford this without creating a problem somewhere else?
Most startups have one of these. Few have all three in one view. And that's the gap that turns good intentions into inconsistent outcomes.
But enough about the challenges I've seen. I want to hear from you. Is this an issue you've faced and how would you want.
PS. if you want to see the full report, check this out