Use the postings as role-design comparators, not as a blended market average. The sample spans operational analysts, product owners, senior technology leaders and supplier sales staff. For example, Optum asks for a product-delivery profile with two or more years of relevant experience, while Guardian asks for ten or more years of technology leadership. Their pay ranges should not be averaged into one “GRC platform owner salary”. (careers.unitedhealthgroup.com)
For an enterprise GRC software pricing or implementation-cost comparison, use a separate labour schedule:
Annual attributable labour = Σ(annual base pay × employer-cost multiplier × allocated FTE)
Then add separately:
- Incentive compensation and other employment costs not included in the multiplier.
- Recruitment, training and any temporary cover.
- External implementation and managed-service charges.
- Internal migration, testing and control-owner participation.
- Software, environments, integrations and support.
- Dual-running and an optional exit scenario.
These are proposed modelling categories, not measured cost proportions. Finance should determine the employer-cost multiplier and treatment of equity, overhead and existing staff allocations.
What would an illustrative labour model look like?
The following is entirely synthetic. It is not a recommended team size, market salary benchmark or quotation. It assumes flat pay, a 30% employer-cost loading and the same allocations for three years.
| Illustrative responsibility | Assumed full-time base salary | Allocation | Annual loaded allocation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platform owner | $150,000 | 1.00 FTE | $195,000 |
| Shared integration engineer | $140,000 | 0.50 FTE | $91,000 |
| Shared business analyst | $120,000 | 0.25 FTE | $39,000 |
| Total | 1.75 FTE | $325,000 |
Three-year attributable labour: $975,000, before software, implementation partners, migration peaks or other excluded expenditure.
This calculation is intended to expose an omitted cost category—not to suggest that every deployment needs this staffing level. It also does not imply $975,000 of incremental cash expenditure if existing employees provide the capacity. Show new cash commitments and allocated internal capacity separately.
What should not be done with these figures?
- Do not treat the bottom of every advertised range as an achievable hiring price.
- Do not apply a senior enterprise-leadership range to a narrowly scoped administrator.
- Do not convert supplier OTE into a buyer-side base-pay benchmark.
- Do not double-count a shared engineer in both central IT and the GRC programme.
- Do not assume an existing employee has spare capacity because no new position is requested.
- Do not deduct hypothetical automation savings before measuring the replacement review workload.
Sources cited on this page
- careers.unitedhealthgroup.com ↗careers.unitedhealthgroup.com