What happens if you look at the salary survey and see salaries in your laboratory specialty appear to have gone down? In short, nothing. And that's because all salary surveys have inherent flaws.

In fact, rarely should we interpret any survey data as 100 percent factual, said Victor P. Gaines, II, team lead, talent acquisition, McKesson Corp., San Francisco.

"It is prone to error by design, and the validity and reliability of the data depends on how the survey was structured and administered. Salary surveys are often compiled from data using the answers people self-report. In other words, an organization has asked a group of people to identify their positions, and to tell them how much money they earn," Gaines explained.

The compensation data companies rely on to help them structure an appropriately competitive pay structure comes from a variety of reliable sources, including similar sized organizations operating in the same industry and region, compensation associations, and even government data, he said.

"Hospitals vary so much in structure (for profit vs. non-profit), size, level of acuity managed, affiliation and other differentiators that pay can vary significantly between systems and facilities, especially in large metropolitan areas," Gaines said.

"Laboratorians, then, should consider salary survey data as a starting point, and adjust expectations up or down as appropriate. If you see data that says you should be earning $27/hour and you currently earn $26/hour, then consider your salary appropriate; however if you are earning $21/hour, then you may want to have a non-confrontational conversation with your manager to better understand your salary and your organization's compensation practices."

Survey data, he noted, is flawed by default, "so don't be surprised to see minor fluctuations in this data year-over-year. The results are dependent on who responds. Often people who respond to salary surveys are those who earn above-average salaries, because they are more comfortable sharing what they earn.

This creates discrepancies in the data that may not be explained in the summary. It's generally unlikely that a field would see a significant decrease in compensation for a position, otherwise all flow cytologists would be running for the hills!"

Glen McDaniel, a healthcare consultant based in Atlanta, added, "Two seeming anomalies that baffle and concern readers are salaries that tend to decrease over time, or are quoted as much higher than those observed in the reader's personal experience."

He said laboratorians who may have seen, at least based on the data, a decrease in salary from previous surveys should not be concerned. Survey results are dependent on the methodology used, the representativeness of the sample and the volume of respondents. Extremes (very high or very low salaries) will always skew a sample average or mean. Very often these extremes account for apparent oddities or large variations from year to year.

Not to be overlooked, especially when considering a job based on salary, is total compensation. Some employers with a flat or depressed salary scale will offer more attractive perks like laboratory organization dues, conference pay, lower premiums for health insurance or bonuses based on organizational performance.

"On the contrary, a salary higher than what you are used to might not be worth it if these perks are not provided by a prospective employer," McDaniel noted.

Matthew T. Patton (mpatton@advanceweb.com) is editor of ADVANCE.