See the recommendation and everything behind it.
Northstar is a fictional company, and this decision is illustrative. Every number below is tied to an explicit role, range, configured company rule, candidate input or planning assumption — nothing is shown that cannot be traced to one of them.
Rules govern. AI explains. Humans decide.
Senior Software Engineer · I5 · Senior IC
- Geo tier
- US Premium
- Applicable range
- $175,000 – $245,000
- Midpoint
- $210,000
- Framework
- Locked Version 1
Growth · new headcount
- Candidate profile
- Experienced hire
- Hiring objective
- Fully proficient day one
- Candidate minimum
- $195,000
- Competing offer
- $200,000
- Requisition cap
- $212,000
7 of 13 years directly relevant
- Resume
- Attached · reviewed
- Interview scorecard
- Attached · reviewed
- Selected level
- Supported
- Reporting manager
- $218,000
Recommended starting base
$210,000
Your hiring zone $200,000 to $221,000
The shaded band is Northstar's configured placement zone ($200,000–$221,000). Range position 50% · compa-ratio 1.00.
$210,000 is a compa-ratio of 1.00, inside Northstar's configured 0.95–1.05 placement zone. It sits within the current range of the 7 people already in this job and tier, stays $8,000 below the reporting manager, and projects to $227,136 after two years at the configured 4% merit assumption — still under today's $245,000 range maximum.
Confirmed job-relevant evidence supports placement above the floor of the configured zone; the candidate stated a minimum of $195,000, with a competing offer reported at $200,000; and the internal peer group already begins at $204,000.
Northstar's configured placement zone tops out around $221,000; the reporting manager is at $218,000; and the requisition cap is $212,000.
Stratum recommends. It does not approve, deny or set pay. A human accepts, adjusts or takes another path, and the rationale is preserved with the decision.
Open any check. See the whole chain.
Each one shows what it is checking, what it found, the evidence behind the finding, the method that produced it and the source the data came from.
Is this offer consistent with the comparable employees already doing the same work? This catches a new hire landing materially above or below the people they will sit beside.
$210,000 sits inside the current same-role, same-tier peer range and creates no new pay lead over the group. It is $3,043 below the group average, which is a candidate-competitiveness question rather than an internal-fairness problem.
Default group: 7 employees in the same job, level and US Premium tier. Current base range $204,000–$227,100; average $213,043. This offer: $210,000.
Same job + same level + same geo tier first. If fewer than three employees exist, widen to the same job across geo tiers and compare compa-ratio. If still fewer than three, the user chooses the alternate comparison group — Stratum never widens into adjacent jobs or levels on its own.
Employee roster + applicable job/geo range + Stratum comparison methodology
This is one decision, on a fictional company's data.
On your own framework and people data, the same decision runs against your ranges, your configured governance, your peers and your decision history.