← Back to imported archive search
WTW grading of doctors pay roles
Source: WhatDoTheyKnow
Authority: Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration
Status: The request was
successful
.
Imported path: /opt/loancharge/imports/wdtk/requests/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles
Open original request on WhatDoTheyKnow
Imported text
SOURCE: WhatDoTheyKnow
SOURCE_URL: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles
TITLE: WTW grading of doctors pay roles
AUTHORITY: Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration
AUTHORITY_URL: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/review_body_on_doctors_and_dentists_remuneration
STATUS: The request was
successful
.
REQUEST_SLUG: wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles
CAPTURED_AT: 2026-05-19T07:26:09+00:00
PROVENANCE: {"first_seen_at": "2026-05-18T13:02:33", "first_seen_page": "5", "first_query_term": "\"Amyas Morse\"", "first_date_after": "2001/01/01", "first_date_before": "2027/01/01", "matched_query_terms": "\"Amyas Morse\"", "matched_date_ranges": "2001/01/01 to 2027/01/01", "first_search_url_template": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/%22Amyas%20Morse%22/requests?commit=Filter&query=%22Amyas+Morse%22&request_date_after=2001%2F01%2F01&request_date_before=2027%2F01%2F01&request_variety%5B%5D=sent&request_variety%5B%5D=response&request_variety%5B%5D=comment&sortby=&utf8=%E2%9C%93&page="}
ATTACHMENTS:
- image001.jpg | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/3/image001.jpg?cookie_passthrough=1 | image/jpeg | 2446 bytes
- image002.png | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/4/image002.png?cookie_passthrough=1 | image/png | 17330 bytes
- DDRB_Job_Levelling_Calibration_080125_V1.0.pdf | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/5/DDRB%20Job%20Levelling%20Calibration%20080125%20V1.0.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 | application/pdf | 2673806 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/html/5/DDRB%20Job%20Levelling%20Calibration%20080125%20V1.0.pdf.html | | 0 bytes
- WTW_s_Global_Grading_System.pdf | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/6/WTW%20s%20Global%20Grading%20System.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 | application/pdf | 503842 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/html/6/WTW%20s%20Global%20Grading%20System.pdf.html | | 0 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/7/DDRB%20job%20descriptions.zip?cookie_passthrough=1 | | 0 bytes
- 20250930_FOI_Response_WTW_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles.pdf | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/8/20250930%20FOI%20Response%20WTW%20grading%20of%20doctors%20pay%20roles.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 | application/pdf | 224189 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wtw_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles/response/3168621/attach/html/8/20250930%20FOI%20Response%20WTW%20grading%20of%20doctors%20pay%20roles.pdf.html | | 0 bytes
================================================================================
MESSAGE 1 [outgoing]
HEADER: Stuart Beanman
27 May 2025
Delivered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration,
In the 53rd DDRB report, the Actuary role is no longer used as a pay comparator; this was used in the 52nd report. The 53rd report instead uses the data science role comparator. Please supply an explanation of why these roles were substituted and any assessment undertaken beforehand on the impact this may have on the DDRB's remit for ensuring "Developments in doctors’ and dentists’ earnings in the context of long-term trends in the wider labour market, alongside comparator professions".
Furthermore, Appendix E describes using the WTW grading tool for assessing the remuneration of doctors in the UK. Specifically, they describe "The assessment of medical/dental roles was based on a sample of job descriptions and background information provided by the DDRB secretariat".
Please supply all information used to determine the WTW grading score for doctors and methodologies for how this was determined. Please also supply the factor description scores for the seven domains (" job functional knowledge; business expertise; leadership; problem-solving; nature of impact; area of impact; and interpersonal skills") for each of the job roles in table E.1. Please supply an explanation of how these scores were determined based upon job roles.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Beanman
================================================================================
MESSAGE 2 [outgoing]
HEADER: Stuart Beanman
7 July 2025
Delivered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration's handling of my FOI request 'WTW grading of doctors pay roles'.
I am writing to formally request an internal review regarding the handling of my Freedom of Information (FOI) request, submitted on 27/5/25 (
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...
)
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, a public authority is legally obliged to respond to a request for information promptly, and in any event, not later than the 20th working day following the date of receipt.
As my request was submitted on 27/5/25, the statutory deadline for your response was 24 June 2025. To date, I have not received a substantive response to my request. This constitutes a failure to comply with the statutory timeframe outlined in Section 10 of the Act.
I would therefore be grateful if you would now conduct an internal review of the handling of my request, specifically addressing the delay in providing a response.
Please acknowledge receipt of this request for an internal review and provide me with an estimated date by which I can expect to receive the outcome of the review.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Beanman
================================================================================
MESSAGE 3 [outgoing]
HEADER: 3 September 2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 September 2025
Sent request to
Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration
again, using a new contact address.
================================================================================
MESSAGE 4 [incoming]
HEADER: DDRB inbox,
Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration
3 September 2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is to acknowledge receipt of your request and we will respond within 20 working days.
show quoted sections
================================================================================
MESSAGE 5 [incoming]
HEADER: Rashmi PANIGRAHI (DBT),
Review Body on Doctors and Dentists Remuneration
30 September 2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 Attachments
image001.jpg
2K
Download
image002.png
16K
Download
DDRB Job Levelling Calibration 080125 V1.0.pdf
2.5M
View
Download
WTW s Global Grading System.pdf
492K
View
Download
DDRB job descriptions.zip
9.8M
Download
20250930 FOI Response WTW grading of doctors pay roles.pdf
218K
View
Download
Dear Stuart Beanman,
Thank you for your FOI request of 3 September 25 to the Review Body on
Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration. Please find attached our response.
Kind regards,
Rashmi Panigrahi
Business Manager
[
mobile number
]
1^st floor, Caxton House, 6-12 Tothill Street
London, SW1H 9NA
[1][
email address
]
OPRB [2]website
OPRB [3]X [4]A black square with white x in it Description automatically
generated
A logo with a lion and text Description automatically generated
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email%20address]
2.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...
.
3.
https://twitter.com/PayReviewBodies?lang...
4.
https://twitter.com/PayReviewBodies?lang...
================================================================================
ATTACHMENT TEXT EXTRACTION / OCR
================================================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT: 20250930_FOI_Response_WTW_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles.pdf
TEXT_FILE: 20250930_FOI_Response_WTW_grading_of_doctors_pay_roles.pdf.txt
METHOD: pdf_native
OCR_USED: False
PAGES: 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- PDF page 1 ---
30 September 2025
Reference: 20250903/CSU/OPRB/20
Dear Stuart Beanman,
Your request to the Office for the Pay Review Bodies (OPRB) under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for your emailed Freedom of Information request dated 3 September
2025, requesting the following information:
‘In the 53rd DDRB report, the Actuary role is no longer used as a pay comparator;
this was used in the 52nd report. The 53rd report instead uses the data science
role comparator. Please supply an explanation of why these roles were
substituted and any assessment undertaken beforehand on the impact this may
have on the DDRB's remit for ensuring "Developments in doctors’ and dentists’
earnings in the context of long-term trends in the wider labour market, alongside
comparator professions".
Furthermore, Appendix E describes using the WTW grading tool for assessing the
remuneration of doctors in the UK. Specifically, they describe "The assessment of
medical/dental roles was based on a sample of job descriptions and background
information provided by the DDRB secretariat".
Please supply all information used to determine the WTW grading score for
doctors and methodologies for how this was determined. Please also supply the
factor description scores for the seven domains (" job functional knowledge;
business expertise; leadership; problem-solving; nature of impact; area of impact;
and interpersonal skills") for each of the job roles in table E.1. Please supply an
explanation of how these scores were determined based upon job roles.’
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ('the Act'), you have the right to:
•
know whether we hold the information you require;
•
be provided with that information (subject to any exemptions under the Act
which may apply).
1st Floor, Caxton House
Tothill Street
London
SW1H 9NA
Mobile: 07766 697605
Email:
Rashmi.panigrahi@businessandtrade.gov.uk
--- PDF page 2 ---
Response
The Office for the Pay Review Bodies (OPRB) provides an independent secretariat
to the eight Pay Review Bodies including the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’
Remuneration (DDRB). We are responsible for answering administrative queries
received by and for all the Pay Review Bodies. Please see below our responses to
your request.
1.
Kornferry did not report separate data for actuaries in its Reward Benchmarking
market data for 2024. The actuary role was included in the broader data
science category. This was not a substantive change in role.
2.
The information provided by the DDRB secretariat to WTW to inform its
evaluation of job roles is attached. The information for core training is here:
https://medical.hee.nhs.uk/medical-training-recruitment/medical-specialty-
training/person-specifications/person-specifications-2025
3.
The information supplied to DDRB from WTW setting out its methodology and
evaluation is attached. Background information provided to DDRB by WTW on
its Global Grading System and the seven domains is also attached.
Appeals procedure
If you are unhappy with the way the Office for the Pay Review Bodies has handled
your request, you may ask for an internal review. You should contact me at the
Office for the Pay Review Bodies if you wish to complain. If you are not content with
the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the
Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be
contacted at:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely,
Rashmi Panigrahi
FOI Officer
Office for the Pay Review Bodies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT: DDRB_Job_Levelling_Calibration_080125_V1.0.pdf
TEXT_FILE: DDRB_Job_Levelling_Calibration_080125_V1.0.pdf.txt
METHOD: pdf_native
OCR_USED: False
PAGES: 18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- PDF page 1 ---
wtwco.com
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
DDRB
8th January, 2025
Review of job levelling results
--- PDF page 2 ---
wtwco.com
2
Project steps
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
1.
Project set-up
•
Kick-off meeting to
confirm:
• Timings
• Roles in scope
• Data requirements and
status clarification
•
Introduction to the job
levelling methodology
•
DDRB provides details of
10 jobs
2. Organisational
Analysis
•
BU sizing to determine
ceiling grade
•
Organisational analysis to
adopt GGS terminology
•
Define organisational
hierarchies such as
function, sub-function,
area, team and other key
terminologies
3. Job Evaluation
•
WTW evaluate the
requested 10 jobs
through the GGS
methodology
4. Calibration & Next
Steps
•
A 1-hour call to
calibrate the grading
results, using a job
levelling matrix
(optional)
•
WTW develop a report
including findings
commentary on results
•
WTW pass report to
DDRB for next steps
--- PDF page 3 ---
wtwco.com
Objectives
3
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Validate outcomes:
• Confirm the grading results to validate the structure for DDRB
Achieve consistency across the organisation:
• Complete a horizontal review of roles to assess the relativities across both doctor and dentist roles
Ensure relativities are right:
• Complete a vertical review of roles focusing on the internal relativities of roles and ensuring appropriate
differentiation between roles
--- PDF page 4 ---
wtwco.com
4
Key questions for calibrating roles
Principles for calibration
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Validation
• Does the hierarchy reflected in the bands feel
right?
• Do the levels still feel appropriate on reflection?
Calibration
• Do the relativities in leveling outcomes look
appropriate?
• Can you identify common characteristics and /
or accountabilities in roles at the same Global
Grade?
• Remember – we’re talking about roles, not
people!
If a role is higher paid, do not assume it must
be a higher level
• Validate based on roles and responsibilities.
• Use comparisons to identify validation queries
• Focus on the role and not the role
holder. Better performance does not mean a
higher grade, so grade the role and manage
remuneration around the incumbent. Use
reporting lines to check the mapping, but do not
rigidly follow them
Key question
Description
1. Is it reasonable?
Reasonable distribution of roles through the grades, given makeup
of workforce
2. Is it value-oriented?
Grades reflect true organisational value and not reporting
relationships
3. Is it role-based, not person-
based?
Individual performance levels, retention concerns, compensation
levels and additional skills and abilities of incumbents should not be
considered during the “role” evaluation process
4. Is it appropriate?
Only a limited number of roles are given credit for setting or
significantly influencing business strategy within the organisation
5. Is it differentiated?
Some differences in role scope, accountability and complexity
should be handled solely though compensation, while others are
significant enough to warrant differences in Global Grade
6. Is it balanced?
Functional differences in organisation set-up and role design are
appropriately considered
7. Is it right (even if it’s different
than what we initially thought it
would be)?
Evaluation results that vary from the expected outcome are
frequently not wrong, just different from current perception
8. Does it pass the “gut check”?
It feels right in totality based on the unique way the organization
views the roles
--- PDF page 5 ---
wtwco.com
5
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Grading outputs
--- PDF page 6 ---
wtwco.com
6
Positioning jobs in the organisation hierarchy
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Functional
Strategy
Business
Strategy
Ultimate
responsibility
Jobs that are part of a functional leadership team
This will typically apply to jobs that are narrower in accountabilities
within a function or act in a specific advisory capacity
Job that has
ultimate ownership
and responsibility
Typically, the most significant jobs with the largest
accountabilities in the organisation
Jobs that shape and decide the
Business Strategy
•
The Global Grading System
approaches the sizing of jobs by
firstly considering the expected
responsibilities of each layer of the
structure.
•
In WTW’s view, the top of the
structure represents the strategic
jobs at the organisation.
•
The role that has ultimate
responsibility for an NHS Trust takes
the business unit grade of 20.
•
The executive leadership team
generally fall into the business
strategy category.
•
N-2 jobs sitting on a functional
leadership team, generally fall into
the functional strategy category.
Middle Management
Sub-function heads that do not directly
contribute to the strategy of a function
Jobs that are involved more in operational day-to-
day management of team(s)
Subject Matter Expert
Professional / technical thought leaders in
areas of specialized knowledge
Jobs that require deep technical expertise and
typically have few technical / professional peers
Middle
Management /
SME
Supervisor /
Professional
(4M / 4IC)
Professional
Jobs that are typically filled by qualified professionals who
are expected to use their judgement to apply expertise
Jobs that are expected to work independently with minimal
supervision
Supervisor
Jobs that supervise operator, technician and/or
clerical jobs
Jobs that provide guidance such as delegating work
assignments
(3M / 3IC)
(5FS)
(5BS)
(CEO)
--- PDF page 7 ---
wtwco.com
18
17
16
15
19
20
14
13
12
11
10
9
7
Provisional levelling results
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Specialty Doctor (SAS) (ST3)
Salaried Dentist (Band A)
Registrar
Salaried Dentist (Band B)
Salaried GP
Core Training (CT1)
CEO
Foundation Year 1 Doctor
Foundation Year 2 Doctor
Specialist Doctor (SAS)
Consultant
Senior Consultant *
Grade
4M / 4IC
Band
Key:
3M / 3IC
Band
* Please note that the Senior Consultant role has been slotted into the structure and has not been evaluated using the GGS methodology
--- PDF page 8 ---
wtwco.com
Every band has its own factor descriptions which relate to a factor
score
8
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
KN
Job functional knowledge
BE
Business expertise
LS
Leadership
PS
Problem-solving
NI
Nature of impact
AI
Area of impact
IS
Interpersonal skills
Example band 3IC
KN1
Good understanding of procedures and concepts within own discipline
KN2
Good understanding of procedures and concepts within own discipline
and a basic knowledge of these elements in other disciplines
KN3
In-depth understanding of procedures and concepts within own
discipline and a basic knowledge of these elements in other disciplines
--- PDF page 9 ---
wtwco.com
Provisional levelling results
Grading outputs
9
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Grading factors
Job Title
Band
Global
Grade
KN
BE
LS
PS
NI
AI
IS
Notes
Consultant
4IC
15
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
Specialist Doctor (SAS)
4IC
14
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Possibly GG15 (~12y exp.) if 1) this role is an externally recognised
expert 2) is a thought leader and 3) develops groundbreaking solutions
Salaried GP
4IC
13
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
5 years+ experience (incl. FYs).
Salaried Dentist (Band B)
4IC
13
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
Registrar
4IC
12
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
Depends on the year in speciality training. The JDs range from ST3-ST6
(4-7 years incl. FYs). If ST6, then this could be a GG13+ role.
Speciality Doctor (SAS) (ST3)
4IC
12
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
This role has ~4 years’ experience (incl. FYs). Borderline 3IC, depending
on the level of subject matter expertise developed.
Salaried Dentist (Band A)
3IC
12
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
Core Training (CT1)
3IC
11
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
Foundation Year 2 Doctor
3IC
10
3
1
2
2
1
1
2
Foundation Year 1 Doctor
3IC
9
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
--- PDF page 10 ---
wtwco.com
10
Next steps
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
WTW will update the results based on feedback from the calibration review.
WTW will develop a findings commentary on the results.
DDRB to reflect on and provide feedback on the grading results.
--- PDF page 11 ---
wtwco.com
11
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Appendix 1
--- PDF page 12 ---
wtwco.com
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
Grade Map 20 CEO
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
TASKS
SKILLS
EXPERTISE
LEADERSHIP
FUNCTIONAL
STRATEGY
‘Role’ Contributes (through)
GRADE
Management
Career Path
BAND
3M
4M
5FS
CEO
GRADE
Individual
Contributor
Career path
BAND
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3IC
4IC
Manual
Subject Matter Expert
5BS
BUSINESS
STRATEGY
Supervisor
Middle Management
Top
Management
First Line Top
Management
Clerical/Administrative
Professional
--- PDF page 13 ---
wtwco.com
13
Global Grades – broadly defined within an organisation
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Roles that manage part of a Division/Function with considerable input into the strategy. May also include roles that are responsible for a key policy area
impacts the entire Business Unit. Expected to lead or significantly influence the development of strategy for the area of responsibility. Will manage
multiple teams through subordinate managers.
Roles that deliver primarily through operational responsibilities with limited or indirect input into the strategy of the Division/Function. May include roles
that are key technical or subject matter expert providing professional or thought leadership in areas critical to the achievement of the Division’s
objectives. Will be responsible for setting policy and ensuring delivery within area of responsibility, linking with other parts of the Division/Function.
Roles that manage teams with a contribution into the operating plans of the Division/Function. May also include roles that are responsible for a key
policy area that will impact the entire business unit. Expected to significantly influence the development of strategy for the area of responsibility. Will
manage multiple teams through subordinate managers.
Roles that deliver primarily through operational responsibilities with limited or indirect input into the operating plans of the Division/Function. May
include roles that are key technical or subject matter expert providing professional or thought leadership in areas critical to the achievement of the
Division’s objectives. Will be responsible for setting policy and ensuring delivery within area of responsibility, linking with other parts of the
Division/Function.
GG
13
GG
14
GG
15
GG
16
Executive roles that typically act within
Divisions/ Functions
Most senior operational roles or key
technical experts
Senior management roles that typically act
with narrow remit or will act as technical
leaders to the business
Management roles that deliver operational
objectives or act as key technical experts
--- PDF page 14 ---
wtwco.com
14
Global Grades – broadly defined within an organisation
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Roles that contribute and achieve results through others, or roles that require specialised field of knowledge / qualified professionals who use their
judgement to apply expertise. Accountable for the results of a large and/or moderately complex support or production operations team including
subordinate work leaders. Applies acquired expertise to analyse and solve problems without clear precedent. Provides input on resource planning and
policy development.
Roles that require specialised field of knowledge / professionals who use their judgement to apply expertise. May be accountable for the results of
medium-sized routine support or operations teams. Solves problems based on practice and precedent. Trains team members and provides input to
employee performance evaluations. Requires knowledge and experience in own discipline; still acquiring higher level knowledge and skills. Builds
knowledge of the organization, processes and customers.
Roles that require specialised field of knowledge / professionals who use their judgement to apply expertise. Has limited discretion to vary from
established procedures. Has limited work experience involving basic concepts and procedures. Develops competence by performing structured work
assignments. Uses existing procedures to solve routine or standard problems. Receives instruction, guidance and direction from others.
Roles that require specialised field of knowledge / professionals who use their judgement to apply expertise. Has no discretion to vary from established
procedures. Has no related work experience or has work experience but requires formal training in theories/concepts in own function. May also apply to
roles that have developed high proficiency in a range of processes or procedures through job-related training and considerable on-the-job experience.
Roles that require developed expertise, typically through a combination of job-related training and considerable on-the-job experience. Typically acts as a
lead, coordinating the work of others, but is not a supervisor. Works autonomously within established procedures and practices. Performs moderately
complex and varied assignments and impacts through the quality of service provided.
Roles that deliver results through the management of professionals or roles that are highly professional / technical. Contributes to definition of standards
under which team operates and ensures essential procedures are followed based on knowledge of own discipline. For roles built around specific
individual specialisation, contributes to process improvements. Typically resolves complex problems or problems that do not have routine solutions.
GG
11
GG
10
GG
9
GG
8
GG
7
GG
12
Emerging Professional roles that have
developed some expertise but still operate
under supervision
Experienced professional roles that are
expected to operate with autonomy
Very experienced professional roles that can
apply expertise with very little oversight
Entry-level professional roles that have little
or no experience but have theoretical
knowledge.
Technician or experienced administrative
roles that works under little or no direct
supervision
Management roles that deliver more limited
operational objectives or act as technical
experts
--- PDF page 15 ---
wtwco.com
15
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Appendix 2
--- PDF page 16 ---
wtwco.com
WTW’s Global Grading System (GGS)
16
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Completed once for the BU
Completed once per role
Organisational context
1
Specific job
functional knowledge?
No
Yes
No
4IC
Subject matter expert?
2
Yes
3IC
Yes
Manage
professionals/managers?
No
3M
Yes
No
Yes
Managing people a focus?
Management
career path
Individual
contributor career
path
No
Yes
4M
Set/significantly influence
functional strategy?
No
5FS
Set/significantly influence
business strategy?
Yes
CEO/business unit manager?
5BS
Yes
CEO
No
No
Independence in applying
professional expertise?
Job functional knowledge
Business expertise
Leadership
Problem-solving
Nature of impact
Area of impact
Interpersonal skills
•
Scoping the business: Decision on the number of
levels based on company size, geographic breadth
and market/product complexity
•
Determines the grade of the top job
(Business Unit Head/CEO)
•
Differentiating between management and
individual contributor career paths
•
Deciding which general band is appropriate
•
Allocating a grade within the band through seven
grading factors
Scoping
Banding
Grading
Organisational context
Job specific
The three steps
--- PDF page 17 ---
wtwco.com
NHS trust
Step 1: Combine the measures to determine the top grade
17
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Number of
employees
200,000
75,000
27,500
10,600
4,100
1,600
620
240
90
Company
revenues ($m)
100,000
50,000
10,000
5,000
2,000
1,000
500
150
75
Diversity/Complexity and Geographic Breadth
Business Diversity
and Complexity
Geographic Breadth
Domestic
International
Global
Low
16
19
20
Medium
18
21
22
High
20
23
24
÷ 3 =
20
~ $1,000m
~ 8,000 FTE count
An NHS trust can be considered a
‘parent’ organisation, looking after
multiple hospitals that serve a
geographic area. It is also deemed
‘complex’, because it looks after
the full value chain of events, from
patient diagnosis to cure.
--- PDF page 18 ---
wtwco.com
18
© 2025 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
This material was prepared for your sole and exclusive use on the basis
agreed. It was not prepared for use by any other party and may not
address their needs, concerns or objectives. This material should not be
disclosed or distributed to any third party other than as agreed with you in
writing. We do not assume any responsibility or accept any duty of care or
liability to any third party who may obtain a copy of this material and any
reliance placed by such party on it is entirely at their own risk
Disclaimer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT: WTW_s_Global_Grading_System.pdf
TEXT_FILE: WTW_s_Global_Grading_System.pdf.txt
METHOD: pdf_native
OCR_USED: False
PAGES: 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- PDF page 1 ---
wtwco.com
WTW’s Global Grading System (GGS)
6
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Completed once for the BU
Completed once per role
Organisational context
1
Specific job
functional knowledge?
No
Yes
No
4IC
Subject matter expert?
2
Yes
3IC
Yes
Manage
professionals/managers?
No
3M
Yes
No
Yes
Managing people a focus?
Management
career path
Individual
contributor career
path
No
Yes
4M
Set/significantly influence
functional strategy?
No
5FS
Set/significantly influence
business strategy?
Yes
CEO/business unit manager?
5BS
Yes
CEO
No
No
Independence in applying
professional expertise?
Job functional knowledge
Business expertise
Leadership
Problem-solving
Nature of impact
Area of impact
Interpersonal skills
•
Scoping the business: Decision on the number of
levels based on company size, geographic breadth
and market/product complexity
•
Determines the grade of the top job
(Business Unit Head/CEO)
•
Differentiating between management and
individual contributor career paths
•
Deciding which general band is appropriate
•
Allocating a grade within the band through seven
grading factors
Scoping
Banding
Grading
Organisational context
Job specific
The three steps
--- PDF page 2 ---
wtwco.com
Step 1: How to scope the business
7
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Separate business units within the business can be created if:
•
They have a distinct P&L.
•
They have most or all of the main organisational functions (e.g. Finance, IT, HR).
•
The head of the entities are individually accountable for the business strategy and results.
Scoping
the
Business
Business size
Company revenues
Business diversity and complexity
Number of products/services, complexity
of the business processes, etc.
Organisational size
Number of employees
Geographic breadth
International reach of the organisation
--- PDF page 3 ---
wtwco.com
NHS trust
Step 1: Combine the measures to determine the top grade
8
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Number of
employees
200,000
75,000
27,500
10,600
4,100
1,600
620
240
90
Company
revenues ($m)
100,000
50,000
10,000
5,000
2,000
1,000
500
150
75
Diversity/Complexity and Geographic Breadth
Business Diversity
and Complexity
Geographic Breadth
Domestic
International
Global
Low
16
19
20
Medium
18
21
22
High
20
23
24
÷ 3 =
20
~ $1,000m
~ 8,000 FTE count
An NHS trust can be considered a
‘parent’ organisation, looking after
multiple hospitals that serve a
geographic area. It is also deemed
‘complex’, because it looks after
the full value chain of events, from
patient diagnosis to cure.
--- PDF page 4 ---
wtwco.com
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9
Grade Map 20 CEO
© 2022 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
TASKS
SKILLS
EXPERTISE
LEADERSHIP
FUNCTIONAL
STRATEGY
‘Role’ Contributes (through)
GRADE
Management
Career Path
BAND
3M
4M
5FS
CEO
GRADE
Individual
Contributor
Career path
BAND
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3IC
4IC
Manual
Subject Matter Expert
5BS
BUSINESS
STRATEGY
Supervisor
Middle Management
Top
Management
First Line Top
Management
Clerical/Administrative
Professional
--- PDF page 5 ---
wtwco.com
Step 2: Band decision tree
WTW’s GGS
10
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Scoping the Business
Banding a role
Grading a role
1
Specific functional knowledge?
Yes
No
Yes
No
4IC
Subject matter expert?
2
Yes
3IC
Manage professionals/managers?
No
3M
Yes
No
Yes
Managing people a focus?
No
Yes
4M
Set/significantly influence
functional strategy?
No
5FS
Set/significantly influence
business strategy?
Yes
No
Independence in applying
professional expertise?
CEO
No
5BS
CEO/business unit manager?
Yes
Individual
contributor
career path
Management
career path
--- PDF page 6 ---
wtwco.com
Step 3: Grading a role uses seven grading factors
11
© 2024 WTW. Proprietary and confidential. For WTW and WTW client use only.
Factor
Description
Job functional knowledge
•
Knowledge of functional work and activities measured through a hierarchy of work, extending from ‘tasks’ to ‘full theory’ and
practice in more than one discipline
Business expertise
•
Knowledge and expertise about the business, rather than about ‘technical expertise’, measured by establishing gradients of
knowledge of the work unit to knowledge of the industry(ies) in which the business functions
Leadership
•
Leadership and guidance provided to others measured through the nature and breadth of the leadership
Problem-solving
•
Level of mental/analytical skills required in order to perform a particular role
Nature of impact
•
The way the job impacts the business by measuring the associated responsibility
•
Works in tandem with area of impact
Area of impact
•
Area of impact which the job has on the business by measuring the specific organisational entities where the impact will be felt
•
Used in tandem with nature of impact
Interpersonal skills
•
Level and type of ‘people skills’ that are normally required in order to perform the role
Scoping the Business
Banding a role
Grading a role