| Course | HR435 Total Rewards and Compensation Strategy |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 5 |
| Paper type | Compa-ratio calculation set |
| Length | About 1,030 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration (Human Resources) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HR435 Unit 5
Comfortable Under the Old Grade, Short Under the New: A Unit 5 Compa-Ratio Calculation Set
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HR435: Total Rewards and Compensation Strategy
Unit 5 Compa-Ratio Calculation Set
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Ironweed Pest Services, its ten grade-four employees and every salary are composite and illustrative, carried from the Unit 4 structure; the sources cited are real.
The Grade and the Two Measures
Grade four, from the Unit 4 design, runs from a minimum of $57,083 to a maximum of $79,917 around a midpoint of $68,500. Its width, maximum less minimum, is $22,834.
Two measures place each employee in that range. Compa-ratio sets a person's salary over the grade midpoint, so 1.000 means paid exactly at the rate the structure targets and 0.900 means ten percent short of it. Range penetration measures how far a salary has traveled from the floor of the range toward its ceiling, expressed as a share of the width; zero means at the minimum, one hundred percent means at the maximum, and a negative figure means below the floor. Milkovich et al. (2020) treat the two as complements: the first compares pay with the market target, the second shows how much room is left for growth.
The Ten Incumbents
Rows are sorted by tenure within each job, so a pattern in either direction shows at a glance.
Specialist, 1 year, $56,900. Compa-ratio 0.831. Penetration negative 0.8 percent.
Specialist, 3 years, $54,800. Compa-ratio 0.800. Penetration negative 10.0 percent.
Specialist, 4 years, $58,700. Compa-ratio 0.857. Penetration 7.1 percent.
Specialist, 6 years, $56,800. Compa-ratio 0.829. Penetration negative 1.2 percent.
Specialist, 9 years, $57,000. Compa-ratio 0.832. Penetration negative 0.4 percent.
Specialist, 12 years, $59,000. Compa-ratio 0.861. Penetration 8.4 percent.
Scheduler, 1 year, $56,300. Compa-ratio 0.822. Penetration negative 3.4 percent.
Scheduler, 2 years, $56,800. Compa-ratio 0.829. Penetration negative 1.2 percent.
Scheduler, 5 years, $57,900. Compa-ratio 0.845. Penetration 3.6 percent.
Scheduler, 15 years, $66,200. Compa-ratio 0.966. Penetration 39.9 percent.
The six specialists average $57,200, the figure the Unit 2 job evaluation and the Unit 3 market study both used, so this table reconciles with the earlier units.
The Group Ratio, Twice
The group compa-ratio divides total pay by total midpoints rather than averaging the ten individual ratios, so higher earners carry their proper weight. Total pay is $580,400. Ten midpoints of $68,500 total $685,000. The group ratio is 0.847.
Against the old grade, which had a midpoint of $53,800 and had not been moved in four years, the same $580,400 produced a group ratio of 1.079. By that measure every one of these employees looked paid above target, and nobody raised an alarm.
The employees did not fall behind; the old ranges stood still while the market kept moving, so a ratio of 1.079 measured the age of the structure, not the health of the pay.
Reading the Results by Group
Sorted by where they stand against the range, the ten form three groups with different needs.
Below the new minimum. Six people: the specialists with one, three, six and nine years and the schedulers with one and two years. Their penetration figures are negative. A range minimum is the lowest rate the company says the job is worth, so leaving anyone under it contradicts the structure the company has just adopted.
Inside the range but below midpoint. Four people: the specialists with four and twelve years and the schedulers with five and fifteen years. They are paid inside the range, but every one of them is below the market target. The merit matrix in the next unit is the right tool for this group, because it can give larger percentages to people low in the range.
Above midpoint. Nobody. That fact matters for budgeting: no one in grade four needs to be slowed down or frozen, so every dollar spent here moves people toward the target.
Pricing the First Response
Bringing the six people below minimum up to $57,083 costs $3,898 a year in base pay. The individual gaps run from $83 for the nine-year specialist to $2,283 for the three-year specialist. The amount is small because most of the six sit just under the new floor.
Moving all ten to midpoint at once would cost $104,600, about eighteen percent of the group's payroll. That figure is shown only to explain why the plan below is phased; no company of Ironweed's size could absorb it in one cycle on one grade.
The Specialist Question
Grade four's midpoint is the line's value for the band, not any one job's market rate. The specialists' own composite market rate from Unit 3 was $67,002, so even at midpoint they would sit slightly above their job's market. The real gap is the one Unit 3 found: an average of $57,200 against a market of $67,002. Bringing every specialist to a compa-ratio of 0.900, or $61,650, would cost $26,700 a year, and the company has failed two recruiting searches for the role in the past year. Gerhart and Rynes (2003) note that pay gaps of this kind tend to show up first in hiring and turnover for hard-to-fill roles, which is what the failed searches suggest.
The Tenure Anomaly
One row does not fit. The specialist hired a year ago earns $56,900, which is $100 more than the specialist with six years of service at $56,800. The likely cause is that the new hire was recruited at a market-driven offer while the six-year employee moved only with general increases. Card et al. (2012) found that employees who learned they earned less than peers in similar jobs reported lower satisfaction and a higher intention to search for other work, so an inversion like this one is worth fixing before it is discovered. It goes to the merit cycle as a named question rather than being corrected silently here.
Phased Plan
January. Move the six people below minimum to $57,083, at a cost of $3,898.
Merit cycle. Use the matrix to give the four people below midpoint larger percentages and resolve the tenure inversion.
Two cycles. Fund a targeted specialist adjustment of $26,700, split across two years, so the licensed role reaches a compa-ratio near 0.900 before the next market study.
References
Card, D., Mas, A., Moretti, E., & Saez, E. (2012). Inequality at work: The effect of peer salaries on job satisfaction. American Economic Review, 102(6), 2981-3003. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.6.2981
Gerhart, B., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Compensation: Theory, evidence, and strategic implications. Sage.
Milkovich, G. T., Newman, J. M., & Gerhart, B. (2020). Compensation (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
HR435 Unit 5 instructions, in plain terms
In Unit 5 you place a group of employees in the new pay structure and calculate where each one stands. Define compa-ratio and range penetration once, with their formulas, then compute both for every person. A group compa-ratio is also expected, built from total pay over total midpoints rather than an average of individual ratios. The prompt then turns from arithmetic to interpretation: sort the employees into those below minimum, those inside the range but under midpoint, and those above it, and propose a different response for each group. Cost the responses you recommend, and show what a more expensive option would cost so the reader understands why you chose a phased approach. Flag any individual anomaly, such as a newer employee earning more than a longer-serving one in the same job, and say whether it should be fixed now or referred to a later decision.
How the HR 435 Unit 5 example is put together
The set opens with grade four's limits and width, then defines the two measures in words with a margin note. Ten rows follow, sorted by tenure within each job: compa-ratios run from 0.800 for a three-year specialist to 0.966 for a fifteen-year scheduler, and six penetration figures are negative. The specialists' average of $57,200 is reconciled with Units 2 and 3. The group ratio is computed twice, 0.847 against the new midpoint and 1.079 against the old, and the highlighted line explains why the old figure misled leadership. Three groups are separated, minimum adjustments are priced at $3,898, and the $104,600 cost of moving everyone to midpoint explains the phased plan. A specialist section prices a $26,700 targeted adjustment and cites Gerhart and Rynes. Card and colleagues support the tenure-inversion section, and a three-step plan closes the set.
HR435 Unit 5 rubric: what earns full points
This HR435 calculation set earns most of its points on accuracy and interpretation in roughly equal measure. Every compa-ratio and penetration figure should be correct to three places, and the group ratio must be computed by the method the course teaches. Errors repeated across ten rows cost more than a single slip, so check one row by hand before trusting the rest. Interpretation earns the remaining credit: explaining why the group ratio changed between structures, sorting employees by their position and giving each group a response, and pricing those responses. Students who identify the tenure inversion and handle it deliberately show attention to equity. A phased plan with costs is stronger than a recommendation without them. APA 7 citations for the compensation text and the research on peer pay are expected, and every figure in the summary should match the table above it.
HR435 Unit 5 help: mistakes that cost points
Calculation sets often go wrong on penetration, either by dividing by the maximum rather than the range width or by reporting negative figures as zero. Another error is averaging the ten individual compa-ratios to get the group figure, which gives low earners as much weight as high earners. Some students compute everything correctly and then stop, leaving the instructor to work out what 0.847 means. Others recommend moving everyone to midpoint without pricing it. Do not blame the managers for low ratios when the structure itself just moved; say what changed. If one employee's pay looks out of line with tenure, mention it and explain where the decision belongs. Keep every rounded figure consistent between the table and the text. If you have a list of salaries and a range but are not sure how to interpret the results, send them and our writers can walk through each group with you.
Get an HR435 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 5 incumbent list and range figures as the case gives them, with the rubric. The sample computes every ratio, states the formulas, and reads each result for what it implies about the structure and the budget. Turnaround is 24-48h, and a first sample is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HR435 papers and BS in Business Administration (Human Resources) samples
- HR435 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- HR435 Unit 2: Job Evaluation Exercise
- HR435 Unit 3: Market Pricing Analysis
- HR435 Unit 4: Pay Structure Design
- HR435 Unit 6: Merit Increase Matrix
- HR435 Unit 7: Incentive Plan Proposal
- HR435 Unit 8: Seminar Reflection
- HR435 Unit 9: Benefits Cost Analysis
- HR435 Unit 10: Total Rewards Strategy
- HR420 Unit 5: Wage and Hour Review
- HR410 Unit 5: Program Design Outline
- HR400 Unit 5: Selection Criteria Matrix
HR435 Unit 5 questions, answered
How does range penetration differ from compa-ratio?
Range penetration shows how far through a range an employee's pay sits, from zero at the minimum to one hundred percent at the maximum. Compa-ratio compares pay only to the midpoint. The two answer different questions: compa-ratio gives position relative to the market reference point, penetration gives how much room remains. The example reports both for every incumbent.
What does green-circled mean?
It describes an employee paid below the minimum of the range. The usual response is an adjustment to the minimum, sometimes phased if the cost is large. The opposite case, pay above the maximum, is called red-circled and usually means increases arrive as lump sums until the range catches up. The example has green circles only, and your data may show both.
Where can I find a free HR435 Unit 5 sample paper?
This page holds a complete HR435 Unit 5 compa-ratio calculation set for ten grade-four employees at a composite pest control company, with penetration figures, costs and margin notes.
Why did the old structure show a group ratio of 1.079?
Because the old grade's midpoint of $53,800 had not moved in four years. The same $580,400 payroll looked above target against it and short of target against the new $68,500 midpoint, so the change measured the structure's age, not the employees' pay.
What does a negative range penetration mean?
It means the employee is paid below the range minimum. In the sample, six of the ten have negative penetration, from negative 0.4 percent for a nine-year specialist to negative 10.0 percent for a three-year specialist.