Fifty percent. That’s the number of organizations that are "highly confident" in their job and skills data.
That means the other half—are making critical talent and pay decisions with major blind spots. And with 2026 approaching and AI reshaping the landscape, flying blind is no longer an option.
In our recent webinar, "From Job Content to Defensible Compensation," we brought together three industry heavyweights to cut through the noise: Paul Smith (Technical Product Manager, JDX), Sheila Sever (Senior Manager, Deloitte Consulting), and Theresa Hatcher (Customer Success, BetterComp).
They didn’t just talk theory—they laid out the blueprint for moving from chaotic "skills projects" to a sustainable, defensible governance model.
Here’s the thing—you can’t fix what you can’t see, and you certainly can’t price what you can’t trust.
During the live session, we asked the 140 attendees a simple question: Thinking about the next 12 to 18 months, do you have any plans to change how you’re governing job content?
The results were telling. The audience was split between those definitely making changes and those who are still undecided—but almost no one said they were staying the course.
The message is clear: the status quo isn't working. HR leaders know change is coming, but many are still figuring out what that transformation actually looks like.
Most organizations treat skills like a spring cleaning project. They spend months building a massive taxonomy, high-five each other, and then move on.
But as Sheila Sever pointed out, "If you delay putting that governance in place, competency erodes... and unfortunately, that means you're not going to have the value that you would hope from your skills program."
Without ongoing governance, that expensive skills library starts decaying the moment you launch it. New roles emerge, technology shifts (remember when C++ was the only thing that mattered?), and suddenly your "perfect" data is obsolete.
Paul Smith put it bluntly: "Governance isn't simply some rows on a spreadsheet. It's the systems that you're utilizing to ensure that your skills... are current for all compensation related needs."
We know—you can’t have a conversation about HR tech without mentioning AI. But here’s the reality check you need to hear: AI doesn’t fix bad data. It amplifies it.
If your underlying job architecture is a mess, feeding it into an AI tool for compensation benchmarking or career pathing will only generate bad answers faster.
"AI doesn't create data problems," Paul noted. "It's just helping expose the ones we already have."
To get the ROI you expect from AI & automation, you need a Job Data System of Record—a single source of truth that is governed, validated, and ready to feed downstream systems.
So, how do you stop the drift and start governing? Our panel outlined a practical path forward.
Who owns skills in your org? If the answer is "everyone," then it’s actually "no one."
According to Deloitte’s research, 55% of organizations say Talent Management owns skills, while only 7% say Total Rewards does. Yet, Total Rewards needs that data to defend pay decisions. You need a cross-functional core team—HR, IT & Compensation—to define who approves what.
You don’t need to burn your job architecture to the ground. Start where you are.
"Evolution, not revolution," Sheila advised. Leverage the processes you already have. If you have a strong approval workflow for headcount, can you adapt it for skills updates? Don’t let the pursuit of perfection stop you from making progress.
This is where the rubber meets the road for compensation pros. You need to show leadership that accurate skills data isn't just "nice to have"—it's a financial imperative.
If you can prove that a specific certification or technical skill commands a premium in the market, you can defend your salary bands. If you can’t, you’re just guessing.
As Theresa Hatcher explained, "You can't measure, you can't compare what you don't know and what you don't understand within your own organization."
One attendee asked a question that resonated with everyone: “Comp tries to nail down skills data, but leadership and TA insist on keeping things fluid. We’re told we’re not flexible. How do we manage this?”
Sheila’s Advice: Stand your ground on the non-negotiables.
"Your best defense is to let them know what all hinges off of nailing down these skills... You risk not paying appropriately, not being able to attract the right talent to a role... Some of those hard core, either you've got it or you don't kind of skills... those are the ones where you really want to stand your ground."
Governance isn't the most glamorous word in the English language. We get it. But it is the difference between a compensation strategy that withstands scrutiny and one that crumbles under pressure.
The insights shared by Paul, Sheila, and Theresa are backed by our latest research, The State of Job & Skills Data Governance 2026.
This report surveys 227 HR leaders to uncover the "High-Coverage Paradox"—why 92.6% of organizations with high skills visibility are still planning major governance overhauls. It’s the essential companion piece to this discussion.
Read the full research report here
You can keep trying to manage skills in a spreadsheet—or you can see how JDX helps you organize, standardize, and strategize your job data for the future.
Watch the full webinar on-demand to get all the insights from Paul, Sheila, and Theresa.