The article Deep Dive by John Davis in your October 2018 issue was one of your best ever. The 80% gender pay gap has for far too long been misused by special interest groups without a good, scientific critique. I was thrilled to see someone objectively break it down and explain the concept of “Simpson’s Paradox.” It definitely reveals how many companies are doing the right thing with fairly narrow gaps, but whose efforts go for naught in the court of public opinion when their data is inappropriately combined with other companies to produce a far worse gap. I have long struggled to succinctly make this same argument at conferences and other forums. I will now always be sure to have your article handy.
— Andreas (Andy) Spurlock, Senior HR Analyst, City of Las Vegas
Just want to tell you that I was doing something shamefully atypical for me last week: I was reading recent back issues of Workspan. I know that the periodical is only one element of your larger publication portfolio, but I just want to convey that I think the topical content is still moving in a good direction. I’ve particularly liked the treatment of topics that are not directly related to total rewards, but are clearly complementary and relevant to that domain (e.g., the Blockchain Reaction article in the June/July 2018 issue).I’m still assessing the ethics offerings from Brock Meyer. (Editor’s note: See “Ethics in Total Rewards”) I think the ethics topic is relevant, but I’ll acknowledge that “the jury is still out.” I’ve really enjoyed the articles that focus on the staff. (Editor’s note: See .) While it’s been more than 10 years since I was there in Scottsdale for an in-person visit, lots of names and faces have changed in that intervening period. It’s nice to put known names to (unknown) faces though.
— Chris Dobyns, CCP, CBP, Human Capital Strategic Consultant, Office of HR Strategy & Program Design, National Security Agency