By: Dan Simons

A compensation problem can stay hidden through most of a recruiting process.

The company finds someone it likes. Interviews go well. The hiring team becomes comfortable with the candidate. Then the numbers finally come up in detail, and the gap is larger than expected.

By then, the company has already invested time in the search, and the candidate has invested time learning about the opportunity.

The better question is whether they could have identified that gap earlier.

Our 2026 Animal Health & Nutrition Technical Professional Salary Survey suggests that employers have good reason to address compensation sooner.

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% said they had no plans to change jobs.

A wide gap exists between someone who may move for a modest increase and someone who expects more than 20%.

A hiring process works better when the company knows which type of candidate it is trying to attract.

Companies usually have legitimate reasons for their compensation ranges.

Internal equity matters. So do budgets, geography, compensation grades, and the salaries of people already performing similar work.

Candidates approach the conversation differently.

They compare the new opportunity with what they already have or others they are interviewing for.

That includes current income, incentive opportunity, benefits, travel, responsibilities, stability, and the professional risk involved in making a change.

This is especially important when recruiting someone who is already performing well.

The survey found that 56% of respondents expressed some level of openness to new opportunities, while only 8% were actively seeking another job.

That leaves a large group of professionals who may listen but have no immediate reason to leave.

They can afford to be selective.

The survey defines compensation as total taxable income reported on a W-2.

That distinction matters because incentive compensation is common across Animal Health & Nutrition.

Among the 122 Technical/Sales Support respondents, the most common incentive opportunity was 11% to 20% of base salary, reported by 34% of the group.

A hiring team should understand how the candidate’s current incentive works before deciding how competitive an offer is.

The percentage alone doesn’t tell the whole story.

How is the payout determined?

How consistently has the plan paid?

Is the formula consistent or does it change annually? (Employees hate changing formulas!)

How much influence does the employee have over the result?

Those details affect how candidates compare one position with another.

Another problem arises when companies update a position’s responsibilities without reconsidering the compensation attached to it.

A role may now include technical work, customer development, travel, management responsibility, sales support, and broader strategic expectations.

If the compensation range was built around an older version of the job, recruiting the person described in the new job description can become difficult.

Hiring teams should separate true requirements from preferences.

What must the candidate know on day one?

What responsibilities make the position larger?

Which skills could be developed after hiring?

Which parts of the preferred profile are genuinely necessary?

The answers help determine whether the budget and the candidate profile actually belong together.

Knowing the market range is useful.

The hiring team still needs to compare that range with the actual work.

Two positions with similar titles may differ significantly in management scope, travel, customer responsibility, geography, technical expectations, or revenue accountability.

Those differences influence what candidates are willing to accept.

They also influence where an employer may need to position the opportunity within a range.

Compensation conversations do not need to wait until the offer stage.

Recruiters and employers should understand the candidate’s current compensation, incentive opportunity, expectations, and reasons for considering a move.

Employers should understand their range, their flexibility, and what circumstances would justify paying toward the upper end of that range.

There will still be searches where the numbers do not work.

Finding that out early is useful information.

The 2026 survey shows that professionals have very different expectations around job changes. Some may consider a relatively small increase. Others expect substantially more. Some are not interested in moving at all.

A strong recruiting process accounts for those differences before everyone reaches the offer stage.

Define the job accurately.

Understand the candidate’s current situation.

Compare total compensation.

Then determine whether the company’s budget and the candidate profile actually match.

If you would like a complimentary copy of the 2026 AHN salary survey, contact Dan@ContinentalSearch.com

Source: 2026 Animal Health & Nutrition Technical Professional Salary Survey, Continental Search