This post was originally published by Karla Dorsch, Founder and Managing Partner Evrima / AltoPartners Abu Dhabi, on LinkedIn. To view the original post, click here.

In financial services, executive pay is not merely a matter of attraction and retention; it is a direct expression of strategic priorities, regulatory posture, and institutional credibility.

Yet, too often, firms approach executive compensation with outdated benchmarks or anecdotal assumptions. The cost of such misalignment is substantial.

Leadership Volatility: In capital markets, banking, and fintech, executive turnover introduces significant operational disruption, potential regulatory scrutiny, and reputational noise, particularly in client-facing or risk-bearing functions.

Governance & Compliance Exposure: In regulated environments, compensation structures must stand up to board and auditor review, not just market expectations. Missteps here risk not only penalties, but also erosion of stakeholder trust.

Market Signaling: Compensation packages communicate a firm’s seriousness about its strategy. Offers that are misaligned with market norms, either too aggressive or too conservative , often fail to resonate with top-tier candidates, and can inadvertently signal instability or indecision.

At Evirma, we work with financial institutions to develop compensation strategies rooted in rigorous market data, institutional context, and evolving regulatory expectations.

We do not simply match pay to role, we align compensation to mission, risk appetite, and the firm’s forward-looking talent architecture.

If you’re not fully confident that your executive compensation approach reflects current market conditions and internal imperatives, drop us a note.