Hey definitely, we actually outline how we evaluate the leveling on our home page if you click on “View how levels map across companies.” > “The question our visualization answers is 'What level would I transfer to if I were to switch companies?'. We use employee transfer information along with overlapping scope and responsibility from company leveling rubrics we collect to create the mappings. There are also a lot of factors on an individual case by case basis that go into leveling including: interview performance, tenure in level, and scope of work, which is why it won't always perfectly map 1:1 for all cases and hence why some levels are wider and can overlap into more levels at another company. Our site is meant to serve as a rough guide for where you may be placed. Note that the leveling boxes actually have no bearing on compensation.” We do update our levels as we get new information, many companies either update scope or even restructure leveling altogether and we collect the leveling rubrics and competencies documents whenever that happens. These documents can be submitted along with a custom mapping comparison via our leveling creation tool: https://levels.fyi/create.html. Regarding Google and Meta, Google is certainly shifted higher generally, but most scope is similar across L4 and E4 as well as L5 and E5. I think we may have some gaps with the LinkedIn leveling so curious on your thoughts there, but I do think some of it's a result of the title scheme going to Senior directly after the entry level role.

This comment was deleted.