Ask where your team sits against the salary band for a role and get a written read with an inline chart: min, mid, max, and your current team average, with anyone below the band floor called out. A snapshot on demand, grounded in your own comp data.
Using our comp data, summarize the salary bands for [Senior Software Engineer] in the [US], and show where our current team sits against the band.
An illustrative example. Your output will reflect your own sources, data, and prompts.
Reading your internal comp bands and current salaries, here is the US Senior Software Engineer band with your current team of seven set against it. The team average is close to midpoint, but two people sit below the band floor, both flagged below.
Here is the Senior Software Engineer band for the US, read from your comp data in the Knowledge Center. The band runs from a floor of $145,000 to a midpoint of $172,000 and a ceiling of $205,000. Your seven current engineers in this role average $166,000, which sits about 4% under the midpoint.
Senior Software Engineer, US band vs current team average
At the team level this reads as healthy. An average of $166,000 against a $172,000 midpoint is a normal, defensible spot to be in — slightly below mid, with room to move people up as they grow rather than everyone already pinned to the ceiling. The band itself is wide enough ($145,000 to $205,000) to reward range without breaking structure.
The average hides the real issue, though. Two of the seven engineers sit below the $145,000 floor of their own band. Here is where a sample of the team lands against it.
| Engineer | Current salary | Band position |
|---|---|---|
| Engineer A | $158k | Mid-band, below midpoint |
| Engineer B | $141k | Below band minimum — flag |
| Engineer C | $189k | Upper band |
| Engineer D | $143k | Below band minimum — flag |
| Engineer E | $170k | At midpoint |
Engineer C at $189,000 is comfortably in the upper band, Engineer E at $170,000 is right at midpoint, and Engineer A at $158,000 is a touch under mid but well inside the range. Engineer B at $141,000 and Engineer D at $143,000 are the exceptions: both are paid less than the minimum the company itself set for the role. That is textbook salary compression, and it is a concrete retention risk — the two people most likely to notice they are underpaid are the two easiest to poach.
Net: the team average is reasonable, but two engineers below the band floor is a specific, fixable equity gap to put on the agenda for the next comp cycle. Worth flagging that this read is grounded in your own internal bands and current salaries, not an external market survey — if you want to test the band against outside pay data, that data would need to be added to the Knowledge Center first.
Want me to widen this to all engineering levels, or pull a list of everyone currently below their band minimum across roles?
The Salary Benchmarking recipe reads your internal comp bands and current salaries on demand and returns a written analysis with one inline chart: the band's min, mid, and max for a role next to your current team average, with anyone below the band floor flagged. It's produced when you ask, not a board that runs on its own.
Give Joy read-only access to your HRIS or add an export of your salary bands and current salaries, by role and location, to the Knowledge Center.
Ask Joy to summarize the band for a role and location and show where your current team sits against it. Joy reads the data at ask time and lines up each person to the right band.
Joy returns a short written read with one inline chart of min, mid, max, and team average, plus a table of who sits where and anyone below the floor flagged. The figures in the prose match the chart.
Copy the read and numbers into your compensation review or manager conversation. Joy drafts the analysis; you act on it. Nothing is exported or scheduled for you.
Save this ask as a custom command on the assistant your team already uses, so anyone can run it in one step.
Calls out anyone paid below their own band minimum, the clearest compression and retention risk.
A single inline chart puts min, mid, and max next to your team average, so the gap is unmistakable.
The example lists people as Engineer A, B, C so you can share the shape without naming names.
Follow up to widen the read to every level, or list below-floor cases across all roles.
Widen the read from one role to every engineering level to see band health end to end.
Compare the same role's team against the band in each geo, using your location differentials.
Ask for everyone across the company currently paid below their band floor, in one list.
Run it ahead of the review to size the raises needed to bring the below-floor cases back into band.
It's your own data, not an external feed. This read is produced on demand and grounded in your internal comp bands and current salaries in the Knowledge Center or HRIS. Joy does not pull third-party market survey data unless you have added that survey to the Knowledge Center yourself; by default it tells you where your team sits against the bands your company already set.
No. It's a written analysis produced when you ask, with one inline chart and a table. When you ask, Joy reads your comp data and returns the read for that moment. There's no persistent board refreshing on its own.
Joy matches each person to the band for their role and location, then compares their current salary to that band's minimum, midpoint, and maximum. In the example, two engineers earning $141k and $143k fall below the $145,000 floor, so they're flagged as compression risks.
Always. The band figures in the prose are the same ones in the inline chart and tiles ($145,000 floor, $172,000 midpoint, $205,000 ceiling, $166,000 team average), so you can quote either in your comp review without reconciling them.
No. Joy drafts the analysis in chat; you copy it into your comp review or a manager conversation and act on it yourself. Joy is read-only, so it doesn't change salaries, write back to your HRIS, or send anything on your behalf.
Join the waitlist and be first to try this workflow when JoySuite launches.