Editor's note: Lynn Clement is chief research officer at KJT Group Inc., a Honeoye Falls, N.Y., research firm. Chris Claeys is senior director analytics and consulting KJT Group Inc. The authors gratefully acknowledge Jerry Arbittier and Brian Fischer of SurveyHealthcare for the data collection and their input in the interpretation of the results.

Fair market value (FMV) is a challenging issue, one that complicates the research process and can be felt at every level of our industry. As the demand for insights increases, the pressure to control compensation has also increased. Our previous research (“What’s fair? “Quirk’s, April/May 2019) provided evidence-based guidance around the appropriate incentive levels for several specific physician specialties. 

While physicians remain an important stakeholder in product decisions, there has been an increased emphasis on other non-physician roles. Our research on health care purchase decisions has consistently shown less concentration around decision-making, with roles such as procurement, nurses, nurse managers, biomedical engineering and pharmacy gaining more and more influence. As these roles historically have not been the focus of survey research, there is little evidence around what they expect to be paid for participation. In addition, they tend to be less empaneled than their physician counterparts, leading to a more difficult recruit. Little is known about their participation rates and a review of our clients’ FMV suggests there is an even larger gap between clients’ FMV and expected compensation, particularly among C-suite roles. Similar to the previous wave, this research was constructed to understand fair market value for these non-physician roles and the impact of below-market compensation on participation rates. 

Fair market value is the price, expressed in terms of cash equivalents, at which property would change hands between a hypothetical wi...