Job evaluation


A job evaluation is a systematic way of determining the value/worth of a job in relation to other jobs in an organization. It tries to make a systematic comparison between jobs to assess their relative worth for the purpose of establishing a rational pay structure.
Job evaluation needs to be differentiated from job analysis. Job analysis is a systematic way of gathering information about a job. Every job evaluation method requires at least some basic job analysis in order to provide factual information about the jobs concerned. Thus, job evaluation begins with job analysis and ends at that point where the worth of a job is ascertained for achieving pay equity between jobs and different roles.

Process

The process of job evaluation involves the following steps:
Once the evaluation process is over and a plan of action is ready, management must explain it to employees and put it into operation. good boy

Reviewing periodically

In the light of changes in environmental conditions jobs need to be examined closely. For example, the traditional clerical functions have undergone a rapid change in sectors like banking, insurance and railways, after computerisation. New job descriptions need to be written and the skill needs of new jobs need to be duly incorporated in the evaluation process. Otherwise, employees may feel that all the relevant job factors - based on which their pay has been determined - have not been evaluated properly.
For job evaluation to be practicable it is necessary:
There are primarily three methods of job evaluation: ranking, classification, Factor comparison method or Point method. While many variations of these methods exist in practice, the three basic approaches are described here.

Ranking method

Perhaps the simplest method of job evaluation is the ranking method. According to this method, jobs are arranged from highest to lowest, in order of their value or merit to the organization. Jobs can also be arranged according to the relative difficulty in performing them. The jobs are examined as a whole rather than on the basis of important factors in the job; the job at the top of the list has the highest value and obviously the job at the bottom of the list will have the lowest value.
Jobs are usually ranked in each department and then the department rankings are combined to develop an organizational ranking.
The variation in payment of salaries depends on the variation of the nature of the job performed by the employees. The ranking method is simple to understand and practice and it is best suited for a small organization. Its simplicity however works to its disadvantage in big organizations because rankings are difficult to develop in a large, complex organization. Moreover, this kind of ranking is highly subjective in nature and may offend many employees. Therefore, a more scientific and fruitful way of job evaluation is called for.

Classification method (Grading method)

According to this method, a predetermined number of job groups or job classes are established and jobs are assigned to these classifications. This method places groups of jobs into job classes or job grades. Separate classes may include office, clerical, managerial, personnel, etc. Following is a brief description of such a classification in an office.
The job grading method is less subjective when compared to the earlier ranking method. The system is very easy to understand and acceptable to almost all employees without hesitation. One strong point in favour of the method is that it takes into account all the factors that a job comprises. This system can be effectively used for a variety of jobs.
The weaknesses of the Grading method are:
This method is widely used and is considered to be one of the reliable and systematic approach for job evaluation in mid and large size organisations. Most consulting firms adopt this method, which was pioneered by Edward Hay in 1943. Here, jobs are expressed in terms of key factors. Points are assigned to each factor after prioritizing each factor in order of importance. The points are summed up to determine the wage rate for the job. Jobs with similar point totals are placed in similar pay grades. The procedure involved may be explained thus:
1. Select key jobs. Identify the factors common to all the identified jobs such as skill, effort, responsibility, etc.
2. Divide each major factor into a number of sub factors. Each sub factor is defined and expressed clearly in the order of importance, preferably along a scale.
The most frequent factors employed in point systems are:
' Skill ; Education and training required, Breadth/depth of experience required, Social skills required, Problem-solving skills, Degree of discretion/use of judgment, Creative thinking
' Responsibility/Accountability: Breadth of responsibility, Specialized responsibility, Complexity of the work, Degree of freedom to act, Number and nature of subordinate staff, Extent of accountability for equipment/plant, Extent of accountability for product/materials;
Effort: Mental demands of a job, Physical demands of a job, Degree of potential stress
The educational requirements under the skill may be expressed thus in the order of importance.
3. Find the maximum number of points assigned to each job.
This would help in finding the relative worth of a job. For instance, the maximum points assigned to an officer's job in a bank come to 540. The manager's job, after adding up key factors + sub factors points, may be getting a point value of say 650 from the job evaluation committee. This job is now priced at a higher level.
4. Once the worth of a job in terms of total points is expressed, the points are converted into money values keeping in view the hourly/daily wage rates. A wage :wikt:survey|survey is usually undertaken to collect wage rates of certain key jobs in the organization.

Market Pricing

Market pricing is the process for determining the external value
of jobs, allowing you to establish wage and salary structures and pay rates that are market
sensitive. Job matching session is conducted.

Merits and demerits

The point method is a superior and widely used method of evaluating jobs. It forces raters to look into all key factors and sub-factors of a job. Point values are assigned to all factors in a systematic way, eliminating bias at every stage. It is reliable because raters using similar criteria would get more or less similar answers. The methodology underlying the approach contributes to a minimum of rating error. It accounts for differences in wage rates for various jobs on the strength of job factors. Jobs may change over time, but the rating scales established under the point method remain unaffected.
On the negative side, the point method is complex. Preparing a manual for various jobs, fixing values for key and sub-factors, establishing wage rates for different grades, etc., is a time consuming process, According to Decenzo and Robbins, "the key criteria must be carefully and clearly identified, degrees of factors have to be agreed upon in terms that mean the same to all rates, the weight of each criterion has to be established and point values must be assigned to degrees". This may be too taxing, especially while evaluating managerial jobs where the nature of work is such that it cannot be expressed in quantifiable numbers.

Vendors

The following table lists several vendors of analytical job evaluation systems. The list is not conclusive.
VendorGrading CriteriaCareer Paths
Aon - JobLinkCompensable factors:
  • Knowledge and application
  • Problem solving and innovation
  • Interaction
  • Impact
  • Accountability
  • Working environment and physical activity
Source

  • Support
  • Individual contributor
  • Management
  • Executive
- OMD HCM JET Grading criteria:
  • Contribution: Reporting level, Budget, Nature of impact on the budget, and Degree of autonomy
  • Framework: Thinking environment, and Thinking challenge
  • Requirements: Knowledge required, Relevant work experience required, and Communications skills required most of the time
  • Scope: Functional scope, Time-span for most business objectives, People responsibility, Multi-country responsibility, and Production facilities responsibility
  • No differentiation of career paths
    Ltd - HERA and FEDRA for universities and colleges14 elements used for evaluating each role, including Communication, Liaison and Networking, Decision Making, Planning and Organising, Teaching and Learning Support.Sourcecareer paths determined by organisation using the system
    Job Evaluation Methodology Cognitive and Creativity
    • Knowledge and Experience
    • Innovation and Creativity
    Complexity, Leadership and Engagement
    • Organisation Complexity and Diversity
    • Leadership and Engagement
    • Analysis and Reasoning
    Accountability and Risk
    • Scale
    • Independence and Authority
    • Risk Management
    • Work Environment
  • Administrative / Operational
  • Technical / Professional
  • Senior Professional / Management
  • Executive
  • common factors for all career paths
  • Professional Knowledge
  • Experience
  • Cognitive Abilities / Problem Solving
  • Organisational Knowledge
  • Communication
  • common factors for individual contributor and management
    • Process Responsibility
    • Scope of Decisions
    specific for individual contributor
    • People Responsibility
    • Functional Responsibility
    specific for people management
    specific for project management
    • Project Responsibility & Span of Control
    • Project Size
    Source

    • Individual Contributor
    • People Management
    • Project Management
    - Guide Charts Profile Method of Job EvaluationKnow-how
  • Practical / technical knowledge
  • Planning, organizing and integrating knowledge
  • Communicating and influencing skills
  • Problem solving
    • Thinking environment
    • Thinking challenge
    Accountability
    • Freedom to act
    • Scope
    • Impact
    Source
    no differentiation of career paths
    - International Position EvaluationImpact
    • Size of Organisation
    • Impact
    • Contribution
    Communication
    • Communication
    • Frame
    Innovation
    • Innovation
    • Complexity
    Knowledge
    • Knowledge
    • Teams
    • Breadth
    Working Conditions
    • Risk
    • Environment
    Source
    no differentiation of career paths
    - STRATAKnow-How
    • Professional know-how
    • Corporate/Business awareness
    • Social Competence
    Problem solving
    Accountability and Impact
    • Autonomy of Decision
    • Area of Influence
    • Intensity of influence on target achievement
    Source
    no differentiation of career paths
    - Global Grading System
    • Functional Knowledge
    • Business Expertise
    • Problem Solving
    • Leadership
    • Area of Influence
    • Nature of Influence
    • Communication / Interpersonal Skills
    Individual Contributor
  • Band 1 : Un-/Semi-Skilled Labour
  • Band 2 : Skilled Labour
  • Band 3IC : Professionals
  • Band 4IC : Experts
  • Management
    • Band 3M : Supervisors / Team Leads
    • Band 4M : Middle Management
    • Band 5FS : Functional Strategic Management
    • Band 5BS : Business Strategic Management
    Paterson Method
  • Judgment and Decision Making
  • Accountability
  • Knowledge & Skill
  • Impact
  • Complexity and Problem Solving
  • No differentiation of career paths

    Limitations

    1. Job evaluation is not completely scientific.
    2. Different job evaluators may reach different results, requiring validation
    3. More complex systems, such as point factor, may be difficult to explain to managers or employees

      Concept of job evaluation

    What is job design? As we just explained, job analysis provides job-related data as well as the skills and knowledge required for the incumbent to perform the job. A better job performance also requires deciding on sequence of job contents. This is called 'job design'. Job design is a logical sequence to job analysis. In other words, job design involves specifying the contents of a job, the work methods used in its performance and how the job relates to other jobs in the organisation.
    A few definitions on job design are produced here with a view to help you understand the meaning of job design in a better manner.
    Michael Armstrong11 has defined job design as "the process of deciding on the contents of a job in terms of its duties and responsibilities, on the methods to be used in carrying out the job, in terms of techniques, systems and procedures, and on the relationships that should exist between the job holder and his superiors, subordinates and colleagues".
    Mathis and Jackson I2 have defined job design as "a process that integrates work content, the rewards, and the qualifications required for each job in a way that meets the needs of employees and organisations."
    Popplewell and Wildsmith13 define job design in these words: "......involves conscious efforts to
    organise tasks, duties, and responsibilities into a unit of work to achieve certain objectives".
    Having gone through the above definitions of job design, it can now be described as a deliberate attempt made to structure both technical and social aspects of the job to attain a fit between the individual and the job. The very idea is that job should be designed in such a way as to enable employees to control over the aspects of their work. The underlying justification being that by doing this, it enhances the quality of the work life, harnesses the potential of the workers in a more effective manner and thereby improves employee performance.

    Techniques for designing jobs

    Basically, there are four techniques used in the design of jobs. These include Job simplification, Job enlargement, Job enrichment and Job rotation.

    Job simplification

    Job simplification is a design method whereby jobs are divided into smaller components and subsequently assigned to workers as whole jobs. Simplification of work requires that jobs be broken down into their smallest units and then analysed. Each resulting sub-unit typically consists of relatively few operations. These subunits are then assigned to the workers as their total job.
    Many fast food restaurants such as McDonald's, Burger King and KFC use simplification because employees can learn tasks rapidly; short work cycles allow task performance with little or no mental effort and low-skilled and low-paid employees can be hired and trained easily.
    On the negative side, job simplification results in workers experiencing boredom, frustration, alienation, lack of motivation and low job satisfaction. This, in turn, leads to lower productivity and increased cost.

    Job enlargement

    Job enlargement expands a job horizontally. It increases job scope; that is, it increases the number of different operations required in a job and the frequency with which the job cycle is repeated. By increasing the number of tasks an individual performs, job enlargement increases the job scope, or job diversity. Instead of only sorting the incoming mail by department, for instance, a mail sorter's job could be enlarged to include physically delivering the mail to the various departments or running outgoing letters through the postage meter.
    Efforts at job enlargement have met with less than enthusiastic results. As one employee who experienced such a redesign on his job remarked, "Before I had one lousy job. Now, through enlargement, I have three!" So while job enlargement attacks the lack of :wikt:diversity|diversity in overspecialised jobs, it has done little to provide challenge or meaningfulness to a worker's activities.

    Job rotation

    Job rotation refers to the movement of an employee from one job to another. Jobs themselves are not actually changed, only the employees are rotated among various jobs. An employee who works on a routine job moves to work on another job for some hours/days/months and returns to the first job. This measure relieves the employee from the boredom and monotony, improves the employee's skills regarding various jobs and prepares worker's self-image and provides personal growth. However, frequent job rotations are not advisable in view of their negative impact on the organisation and the employee..

    Job enrichment

    Job enrichment, as currently practiced in industry, is a direct outgrowth of Herzberg's Two Factor Theory of motivation. It is, therefore, based on the assumption that in order to motivate personnel, the job itself must provide opportunities for achievement recognition, responsibility, advancement and growth. The basic idea is to restore to jobs the elements of interest that were taken away under intensive specialisation. Job enrichment tries to embellish the job with factors that Herzberg characterised as motivators: achievement, recognition, increased responsibilities, opportunities for growth, advancement and increased competence. There is an attempt to build into jobs a higher sense of challenge and achievement, through vertical job loading. 6
    Job enrichment has four unique aspects: