Compensation problems often appear late in a search. Let’s change that and save everyone time.
A company identifies a strong candidate, spends several weeks interviewing, gets everyone comfortable with the fit, and then discovers the financial expectations on both sides are farther apart than anyone realized.
By that point, a lot of time has been invested.
Our 2026 Animal Health & Nutrition Technical Professional Salary Survey gives employers a useful reason to address that issue earlier.
When respondents were asked what increase they would expect before considering a job change, 22% said up to 10%, 28% said 11% to 20%, and 31% said more than 20%. Another 20% reported no plans to change jobs.
The more-than-20% group was actually smaller than in the previous survey, when it was 39%. Even so, nearly one-third of respondents still indicated that a substantial increase would be necessary before they would consider moving.
That deserves attention before a company starts interviewing.
Internal Equity and External Recruiting Are Different Conversations
Companies have reasons for the salary ranges they use. They may be tied to internal equity, compensation grades, budgets, geography, or what the previous employee earned. All of that matters.
The candidate, however, is evaluating the opportunity from a different starting point.
They are looking at what they already earn, what they may give up, how much additional responsibility they would accept, and whether the move improves their situation enough to justify the disruption.
An employer may believe a $15,000 increase is significant.
For a candidate, the percentage increase may still be too small once they factor in incentive compensation, benefits, travel, relocation, or the risk of leaving a stable employer.
Neither side has to be unreasonable for the numbers to miss each other.
The problem is waiting until the offer stage to discover it.
Base Salary Is Only One Number
The survey defines compensation and taxable income as total taxable income reported on a W-2.
That distinction is important because many Animal Health & Nutrition professionals have incentive compensation tied to their positions.
Among the 122 Technical/Sales Support respondents, the most common incentive opportunity was 11% to 20% of base salary, reported by 34% of that group.
A candidate earning a $160,000 base salary with a meaningful incentive program does not necessarily view a $175,000 base offer as a $15,000 raise.
They may be comparing expected total compensation.
They may also be comparing how achievable the incentive is.
What determines the payout?
Is it based on individual sales, company performance, technical objectives, territory results, or some combination?
How often has the plan actually paid at target?
Those questions can matter as much as the percentage written into an offer.
The Candidates You Want May Have the Least Reason to Compromise
The survey found that 56% of respondents were open at some level to new opportunities, while only 8% were actively seeking another job.
That changes the compensation discussion.
An active candidate may have an immediate reason to leave. They may be dealing with restructuring, limited advancement, a difficult manager, relocation concerns, or unemployment.
Someone who is simply open to a conversation may have none of those pressures.
They can afford to be selective.
If they are well compensated and successful, they may require a stronger financial reason to leave.
This is especially relevant when companies target professionals who are already performing the same job successfully for a competitor.
Those candidates often have relationships, credibility, internal knowledge, and incentive plans that took years to build.
The company recruiting them has to understand what it is asking them to walk away from.
Job Scope Has to Match the Package
Compensation becomes harder to defend when the responsibilities grow faster than the salary.
I see this when a company wants someone who can handle technical work, develop customers, travel extensively, manage a team, support sales, participate in strategy, and perhaps build something that does not currently exist.
That may be an excellent opportunity.
It is also a substantial job.
If the salary range was built around an older version of the position, the company may struggle to attract the person it described.
This is where hiring teams benefit from separating their requirements into categories.
What does the person absolutely need to know when they arrive?
What responsibilities make the position larger than comparable jobs?
What could be learned after hiring?
What part of the candidate profile is a preference rather than a business requirement?
If the company truly needs the more experienced candidate, the compensation has to compete for that person.
If the budget cannot move, the profile may need to.
That conversation is much more productive before the search starts than after three finalists have declined.
A Competitive Range Can Still Produce a Weak Offer
Employers sometimes tell me their salary is competitive because it falls within a market range.
That information is useful, but a range is only the beginning.
Suppose a professional is currently near the top of that same range.
Offering the midpoint will not feel competitive to that person.
The company also needs to consider the size of the job.
A position with larger management responsibility, more travel, broader customer coverage, or greater revenue accountability should not automatically be compared with jobs that carry a similar title but less responsibility.
Titles are convenient.
Candidates make decisions based on the actual work.
Have the Compensation Conversation Earlier
I would rather know early that a candidate needs more money than the company can pay. That saves everyone time.
The employer (and recruiter) should understand the candidate’s current compensation, incentive opportunity, expectations, and reasons for considering a change.
The employer should understand its own range, where flexibility exists, and what would justify moving higher within that range.
Nobody benefits when people avoid those questions because they feel uncomfortable.
The survey shows that compensation expectations vary considerably. Some professionals may consider a modest increase. Others expect 20% or more. Some have no intention of changing jobs.
No single number solves every search.
There is a better process.
Define the position accurately. Understand the candidate’s current situation. Look at total compensation rather than one salary figure. Then determine whether the employer’s expectations and budget describe the same candidate.
Finding that out early makes the rest of the search considerably easier.
Download your copy of the Salary Survey here: www.continentalsearch.com/ebook/2026-ahn-salary-survey/
Source: 2026 Animal Health & Nutrition Technical Professional Salary Survey, Continental Search
Daniel C. Simmons, CPC
President | Continental Search
Dan@ContinentalSearch.com
(302) 405-7091
