How to Conduct a Pay Equity Audit: A Step-by-Step Guide

Introduction

A pay equity audit is a comprehensive statistical analysis designed to identify unjustified compensation differences between employees based on protected characteristics such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, or disability. This guide walks through the complete audit process from planning to remediation.

When to Conduct an Audit

Regulatory Requirements

Mandatory: Iceland (certification), some US states, EU countries with equity provisions
Voluntary but Recommended: Jurisdictions with gap reporting where audits help explain findings
Proactive: Before discrimination complaints or litigation

Business Triggers

Pre-merger or acquisition due diligence
Preparation for IPO or major financing
Response to employee concerns or complaints
Periodic compliance review (annually or biennially)
Significant organizational changes (restructuring, new comp systems)

Risk Indicators

High turnover among women or minorities
Patterns in discrimination complaints
Large unexplained gender pay gap
Decentralized pay decisions without guidelines
Rapid growth without structured compensation

Planning the Audit

Step 1: Define Scope and Objectives

Geographic Scope

Single country vs. global
Legal entity structure considerations
Data privacy and transfer restrictions

Population Scope

All employees vs. specific groups (exempt, non-exempt)
Include contractors/contingent workers?
Active employees only or include recent terminations?

Protected Characteristics

Gender (minimum)
Race/ethnicity (if data available and legal)
Age
Disability
Other jurisdiction-specific characteristics

Objectives

Legal compliance certification
Risk assessment and mitigation
Process improvement insights
Benchmarking and tracking

Step 2: Assemble Team and Resources

Internal Team

Executive sponsor (CHRO or CEO)
Legal counsel
Compensation/HR analytics
HRIS data management
Communications
Finance (for remediation budgeting)

External Experts (Recommended)

Labor economists or compensation consultants
Employment law attorneys (for privilege)
Statistical analysts

Budget Considerations

External consultant fees: $50K-$500K+ depending on size/complexity
Internal team time
Remediation funds (often 1-3% of payroll if issues found)
Process improvement investments

Step 3: Legal Privilege Strategy

Attorney-Client Privilege

Engage law firm to conduct or direct audit
All analysis and communications through counsel
Protects findings from discovery in litigation

Trade-offs

Pros: Legal protection, confidential remediation
Cons: Can't publicize results, limits learning/improvement culture
Recommendation: Use privilege for first comprehensive audit, transition to transparent ongoing monitoring

Data Collection

Step 4: Identify Required Data Elements

Employee Demographics

Employee ID
Gender (self-identified preferred)
Race/ethnicity (where legal and available)
Age/date of birth
Disability status (where available)

Compensation

Base salary/hourly rate
Annual bonus/incentive pay
Total cash compensation
Equity grants
Other compensation elements
Effective date of compensation

Legitimate Pay Factors (Control Variables)

Job title/position
Job family/function
Job level/grade
Department/division
Manager
Hire date
Years of experience (internal and total)
Education level
Performance rating(s)
Geographic location/work location
Full-time/part-time status
Exempt/non-exempt status

Optional but Valuable

Promotion history
Compensation change history
Recruitment source
Prior salary (for analysis, not decision-making)

Step 5: Data Quality Review

Common Data Issues

Missing demographic data (especially race/ethnicity)
Inconsistent job titling across departments
Outdated or inconsistent job levels
Missing performance ratings
Compensation data not current
Insufficient experience data

Data Cleaning Steps

Identify and handle missing data
Standardize job titles and codes
Verify compensation amounts and dates
Validate demographic coding
Check for outliers and errors
Document all assumptions and decisions

Data Privacy and Security

Minimize individuals with access
Encrypt data files
Secure storage
Clear retention and destruction policies
Comply with GDPR, CCPA, and other privacy laws

Statistical Analysis

Step 6: Choose Analytical Methodology

Regression Analysis (Most Common)

Multiple Linear Regression

Used when: Normal pay distribution, large sample size
Predicts: Compensation based on legitimate factors
Identifies: Unexplained gap associated with protected characteristics

Model Structure:

Log(Compensation) = β0 + β1(Gender) + β2(Job Level) + β3(Experience)
                    + β4(Performance) + β5(Location) + ... + ε

Coefficient Interpretation:

Gender coefficient shows average pay difference after controlling for other factors
Example: -0.05 = women paid 5% less than similarly situated men

Job Matching

Used when: Clear comparable job groups
Compares: Individuals in same jobs or job families
Advantages: Easy to explain, very defensible
Limitations: May miss cross-job comparability

Cohort Analysis

Compares: Similar groups (same hire year, same education level)
Useful for: Identifying when gaps emerge (hiring vs. later)

Step 7: Determine Statistical Significance

P-Value Testing

P < 0.05: Statistically significant (95% confidence)
P < 0.01: Highly significant (99% confidence)
Determines whether gap could occur by chance

Confidence Intervals

Range in which true gap likely falls
Example: "Women paid 3-7% less, 95% confidence"

Practical Significance

Statistical significance ≠ meaningful difference
Consider magnitude: 1% gap vs. 10% gap
Assess number of affected employees
Evaluate financial materiality

Step 8: Conduct Analysis by Subgroup

Department/Division

Identify where problems concentrate
Account for different cultures/practices

Job Family/Function

Some functions may have worse equity
Different dynamics in tech vs. sales vs. operations

Job Level

Gaps often largest at senior levels
Or concentrated in entry-level hiring

Tenure Cohorts

Do gaps widen over time?
Hiring problem vs. promotion/raise problem?

Intersection Analysis

Gender + Race (e.g., Black women vs. white men)
Multiple protected characteristics
Reveals compounding discrimination

Findings and Interpretation

Step 9: Analyze Results

Key Questions

What is the magnitude?

Overall adjusted gender gap: X%
Range across departments: Y% to Z%
Number of employees affected: N

Is it statistically significant?

P-value < 0.05?
Confidence intervals?

Where is it concentrated?

Specific jobs, departments, locations?
Hiring, promotions, raises, bonuses?

What are root causes?

Biased starting salaries
Inequitable raise/bonus processes
Promotion disparities
Performance rating bias
Concentrated in certain manager groups

Are legitimate factors truly legitimate?

Are performance ratings themselves biased?
Is experience measurement fair?
Are job levels assigned equitably?

Step 10: Calculate Remediation Needs

Individual Adjustments

For each underpaid employee
Calculate fair pay based on model
Determine adjustment amount
Total remediation budget

Example Calculation:

Employee A:
- Current salary: $75,000
- Predicted salary (based on model without gender): $82,000
- Gap: $7,000 (9.3%)
- Recommended adjustment: $7,000

Aggregate Planning

Total number requiring adjustment
Total dollar amount
Percent of payroll
Timing (immediate vs. phased)
Back pay considerations

Typical Findings

15-40% of organizations have statistically significant gaps
Median gap when found: 3-8%
Remediation typically costs 1-3% of payroll
Affects 20-50% of underrepresented group

Remediation and Action Planning

Step 11: Immediate Pay Adjustments

Remediation Principles

Adjust pay for all affected individuals
Make adjustments retroactive if required by law
Provide adjustments as lump sum or ongoing base increase
Communicate individually or confidentially

Timing

Immediate (within 30-90 days) preferred
Phased if budget constraints require
Document reasons for any delays

Communication

Some organizations communicate individually
Others make adjustments confidentially
Transparency vs. privacy trade-offs

Step 12: Fix Systemic Processes

Hiring

Standardize starting salary offers
Remove salary history questions
Train recruiters and hiring managers
Use salary ranges not negotiation

Promotions

Clear criteria and processes
Diverse promotion panels
Track and monitor promotion rates
Calibrate across departments

Performance Management

Standardize rating processes
Bias training for raters
Forced ranking analysis by demographics
Regular calibration

Compensation Decisions

Merit increase guidelines
Bonus calculation formulas
Salary range structures
Manager approval requirements

Step 13: Ongoing Monitoring

Frequency

Annual full audits
Quarterly monitoring of new hires/promotions
Real-time flagging of concerning decisions

Dashboards and Reporting

Leadership visibility to key metrics
Trend tracking over time
Comparison to benchmarks

Accountability

Manager scorecards including equity metrics
Inclusion in executive performance goals
Compensation committee oversight

Communication and Transparency

Step 14: Stakeholder Communication

Internal Communication

To Employees

If gaps found: Remediation plan and timeline
Process improvements
Commitment to ongoing equity
How to raise concerns

To Managers

Findings (aggregate)
Process changes expected
Training and support
Accountability measures

To Leadership

Detailed findings and implications
Remediation costs and timing
Risk assessment
Strategic recommendations

External Communication

Voluntary Disclosure

Some organizations publish findings
Demonstrates transparency
Builds trust
Sets expectations

Required Disclosure

Regulatory reporting where mandated
Litigation discovery if privileged strategy not used

Investor/Stakeholder

ESG reporting frameworks
Proxy statement disclosures
Sustainability reports

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Pitfall 1: Insufficient Data Quality

Problem: Garbage in, garbage out Solution: Invest time in data cleaning and validation

Pitfall 2: Over-Reliance on Job Titles

Problem: Same title doesn't mean same job Solution: Use job levels, evaluation, or detailed functions

Pitfall 3: Including Biased Factors

Problem: Controlling for performance ratings that are themselves biased Solution: Examine control variables for bias, run models with/without suspect factors

Pitfall 4: Ignoring Small Gaps

Problem: 3% gap dismissed as "not significant" Solution: Consider cumulative impact, legal standards, and employee perception

Pitfall 5: One-and-Done Mentality

Problem: Audit once, declare victory, gaps re-emerge Solution: Establish ongoing monitoring and accountability

Pitfall 6: Remediation Without Process Fixes

Problem: Adjust pay but don't fix root causes Solution: Implement systemic process changes alongside adjustments

Pitfall 7: Inadequate Budget Planning

Problem: Shocked by remediation costs, delays or partial fixes Solution: Budget 2-3% of payroll contingency

Pitfall 8: Poor Communication

Problem: Affected employees don't know they were underpaid Solution: Transparent communication builds trust

Conclusion

Conducting a pay equity audit is a critical step in ensuring fair compensation and legal compliance. While complex and potentially revealing uncomfortable truths, audits provide invaluable insights and roadmaps for improvement.

Key Success Factors:

Executive commitment and adequate resources
Quality data and rigorous methodology
Prompt remediation of identified gaps
Systemic process improvements
Ongoing monitoring and accountability
Transparent communication

Organizations that conduct regular audits demonstrate commitment to fairness, reduce legal risk, improve employee trust, and build stronger, more inclusive cultures.

This guide provides general information about pay equity audits and should not be considered legal or statistical advice. Organizations should engage qualified legal counsel and compensation experts for specific guidance.

Rewards Equity & Transparency