Candidates naturally compare salaries because salary is visible. But two jobs paying exactly €40,000 can have very different real value.

One may include a performance bonus, health insurance, extra leave, three remote days and paid professional training. The other may require daily commuting, offer little beyond the basic package and provide limited development.

Those are not economically identical jobs.

Start with bonus. Guaranteed salary and discretionary bonus should not be valued equally. Ask how the bonus is calculated, whether it depends on individual or company performance and how reliably it has historically paid.

Then look at leave. Additional paid leave has both financial and lifestyle value. Parents, travellers and people with demanding outside commitments may value those days particularly highly.

Health insurance and other protection can have a clear market cost, although their value depends on coverage and individual circumstances.

Employer pension contributions are another form of compensation that is easy to undervalue because the benefit is delayed. Over a long career, recurring contributions can become meaningful.

Flexibility is harder to price. Calculate commuting costs first, then commuting time. Someone saving six hours a week may value that arrangement more than a modest salary increase. Flexibility can also make employment possible for people with caring responsibilities.

Training deserves its own line. Employer-funded qualifications, conferences, courses and protected learning time can increase future earning power. For an early-career employee, that can be one of the most valuable benefits in the package.

Some value cannot be priced neatly at all. A good manager can accelerate a career. A toxic environment can make an apparently excellent package unbearable.

Candidates should therefore treat interviews as due diligence on the employer, not simply an examination of themselves.

A useful total-compensation score should include guaranteed cash, realistic variable cash, benefits with a direct monetary value, time benefits, development benefits and major costs such as commuting.

The result will never be perfectly objective.

It will still be far more intelligent than comparing two salary figures and assuming the larger one automatically wins.