Mohit Aggarwal Salary Benchmarking
"Am I underpaid?" and "what should I ask for?" both need the same thing: a defensible number, not a guess or a single glassdoor figure. This builds that range by triangulating sources and adjusting for the factors that actually move pay — level, location, industry, skills, company size — then places you within the band and helps you frame it. (Making the ask itself is a separate negotiation skill.)
What This Skill Produces
- A research method — how to build a range from multiple sources (surveys, aggregators, postings, peers, recruiters) rather than one figure
- The adjusting factors — how level/seniority, location/cost-of-living, industry, in-demand skills, and company size/stage shift the number
- Your position in the band — a reasoned estimate of where you likely sit (and why), given your experience and value
- A defensible range — a low/target/high you can justify with the factors behind it
- Framing guidance — how to state the number and the evidence, without overclaiming
- A triangulation caveat — pay data is noisy and often stale; cross-check, and adjust for your specifics
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
- The role — title, level/seniority, and field
- Location — and whether the role is remote (which market applies)
- Your profile — years, key/in-demand skills, notable results
- Context — current pay, company size/industry, and the goal (raise, offer, new role)
- Sources seen — any numbers you already have
Framework: Triangulate, Adjust, Position
- Use multiple sources. No single site is truth — combine salary surveys, aggregators, live job postings, peer/recruiter input, and community data to form a range.
- Adjust for the real drivers. Level, location/cost-of-living, industry, scarce skills, and company size/stage can each shift pay substantially — apply them to the raw range.
- Place yourself honestly. Position within the band based on your actual experience, skills, and results — not aspiration or imposter-driven lowballing.
- Build a defensible range. Produce a low/target/high with the reasoning, so the number survives scrutiny.
- Frame with evidence, not entitlement. Present the number tied to market data and your value; avoid a single cherry-picked figure or an unbacked demand.
- Caveat the data. It's noisy and can lag the market — triangulate and adjust rather than trusting one source or a stale number.
Output Format
Salary benchmark: [role/level] · [location/remote] · [industry]
Research from: [surveys · aggregators · live postings · peers · recruiters]. Adjust for: level [x] · location/COL [y] · industry · scarce skills · company size/stage. Your position in the band: [where + why — experience/skills/results]. Defensible range: low [ ] · target [ ] · high [ ] — justified by [factors]. How to frame it: [number + evidence, tied to value].
Pay data is noisy and can be stale — triangulate multiple sources and adjust for your specifics. (Running the negotiation itself is a separate step.)
Quality Checks
- Builds the range from multiple sources, not one
- Adjusts for level, location, industry, skills, and company size
- Positions the person honestly within the band
- Produces a defensible low/target/high with reasoning
- Frames the number with evidence, not entitlement
- Caveats data noise/staleness and triangulation
Anti-Patterns
- A single-source number treated as truth.
- Ignoring location/level/industry adjustments.
- Aspirational or imposter-driven self-positioning.
- A number with no justification.
- Trusting stale data without triangulating.
Example Trigger Phrases
- "What should someone in my role actually be paid?"
- "Am I underpaid? Help me research the market."
- "How much should I ask for in this new role?"
- "Build me a defensible salary range for a mid-level [role] in [city]."
- "Is this job offer's salary fair for my experience?"