As an outsourced CIO, I built up numerous teams in a variety of contexts. This experience has enabled me to observe a reality that many prefer to ignore: compensation is the primary driver of work. This statement may seem cynical, but it reflects a reality on the ground that it’s counter-productive to deny.

The quality-pay correlation: a market reality

In my recruitment assignments, I systematically observe a direct correlation between the level of remuneration offered and :

• Number of applications received
• Profile quality
• Candidates’ experience
• Their level of technical expertise

This correlation is no coincidence. It reflects a simple reality: competent professionals know their market value.

The real cost of “cheap

I often remind my customers of this supposed Coco Chanel quote: “We can’t afford to buy cheap”.

This phrase takes on its full meaning in the IT context.

Let’s take a concrete example: the development of a business-critical tool.

In the early phases of such a project, technical decisions form the foundations of the overall architecture. These initial choices will have repercussions for years to come. In this context, can we really afford to entrust these decisions to a junior developer, on the pretext of saving on budget?

Experience shows otherwise. Savings on wages often turn into :

• Massive technical debt
• Costly refactoring
• Performance problems
• Maintenance difficulties
• Safety risks

The myth of alternative motivation

Some will argue that there are other motivations: the interest of the project, the work atmosphere, the company’s values… These elements are real, but they play a secondary role.

I’ve seen exciting projects fail to attract talent for lack of adequate remuneration. Conversely, I have rarely seen experienced professionals accept a significant pay cut for a more interesting project.

These secondary factors can :

• Tipping the balance between two similar offers
• Contribute to talent retention
• Improving day-to-day satisfaction
• Fostering commitment

But they never compensate for inadequate remuneration.

The impact of the work environment

It’s true that a toxic environment or poorly managed projects can demotivate even the highest-paid professionals. However, these factors act as demotivators rather than primary motivators.

In other words:

• Good pay doesn’t guarantee motivation
• But inadequate remuneration guarantees demotivation

Implications for companies

This reality has concrete implications for organizations:

1. Realistic budgeting
   Budgets must be consistent with the skills required, especially for critical positions.

2. Prioritizing investments
   On critical projects, saving on wages is often the worst strategy.

3. Transparency
   It’s healthier to assume that compensation is a key factor than to hide behind rhetoric about “passion” or “commitment”.

Conclusion

My experience in the field has taught me that it is counter-productive to deny the primordial importance of remuneration in motivating people to work. This recognition does not exclude the importance of other factors, but it does allow :

• A more realistic approach to recruitment
• Better resource allocation
• Healthier team relations

At the end of the day, accepting this reality paradoxically allows us to build more authentic and effective work environments. Once compensation issues have been properly addressed, we can then calmly focus on the other aspects that make for a quality work experience.