1.
Definition of Job Evaluation
Job evaluation is the process
used to measure the relative job worth of positions within an organization at a
point in time. Job evaluation focuses on the actual requirements of the
position, not on a person or their performance. Job evaluation measures the
content/work value and not the volume of work. The work value of the position
is dependent on a range of factors including the experience, skills and
training required to perform the duties and responsibilities of the position.
2. Reasons for Evaluation Positions
a) Positions are evaluated to establish internal relativities
and to determine the appropriate classification level within the University’s
applicable Industrial Instrument and this in turn establishes the salary range.
b) When the requirements of the position have changed, or
when there have been significant changes or growth in the role, or when new
roles have been created, the position will be formally evaluated.
c) Trained job evaluators in the Human Resources Unit
evaluate positions based on one or more of the following circumstances: -
i) Creation of
new positions
ii) Ongoing
significant change(s) to the function or scope required of the position
iii) Change(s)
to the position over time as a result of redesign or change(s) to other jobs
that directly affect the functions and/or focus of the position
iv) Change(s) to
a position as part of a restructure of the immediate organizational area
v) Change(s) to
a position as a result of the restructure of another organizational area that
directly affects the position’s function and/or focus
3. Staff Classification System
a) The University utilizes the Higher Education Officer (HEO)
classification grading structure Levels 1-10. The classification grading structure
is underpinned by the Hay Chart Points Job Evaluation Methodology, which is utilized
globally in both the private and public sectors and is recognized as being a
valid and reliable method of evaluating positions.
b) The information required to assess a position may come
from position descriptions (PD), performance management documentation,
interviews with Supervisors and Staff Members, specially designed
questionnaires which are completed by both the Staff Member and Supervisor and
the organisational structure chart.
c) The following systems are used to evaluate positions:
i) Hay
methodology & CAJE (Computer-Aided Job Evaluation questionnaire – Points
system sourced from the Hay Group Human Resource Consultancy and is the basis
on which the CAJE program evaluates positions.
ii) Hay job
evaluation system – Points system designed by Hay Group
iii) Mercer CED
job evaluation system – Points system designed by Cullen Egan Dell
iv) General
Staff Position Descriptors (DWM Descriptors)
d) Each position
from Level 1 to 10 is evaluated using a comprehensive process based on three
areas common to all jobs:
i) Knowledge
& Experience
ii) Problem
Solving & Judgement
iii)
Accountabilit
e) External
remuneration benchmarking and advice is also obtained as required (e.g. HEO10
and above).
4. Criteria for Job Evaluation
There are four
opportunities for evaluating non-casual positions:
a) New
positions
All non-casual
positions that are new to the area must be evaluated. However, if the position
is the same as an existing position in the same organizational unit, there is
no need for the new position to be evaluated. If the position (or a similar
position) exists within the University, a consistent approach is required. Any
relevant position descriptions will be reviewed to ensure consistency.
b) Vacant
positions
Where the
position has not been formally evaluated in the previous five years or where
there are changes to the requirements of the position, the position must be
evaluated.
c) Currently
filled positions
Positions can
only be considered for evaluation where there is someone in the position
currently and there is a view that the work value has changed.
d) Position
changes arising from a major restructure
While an organizational
area is undergoing a substantial change process, applications for
reclassification will be frozen for all affected positions in the area.
However, part of the change process may require positions to be evaluated.
Applications for reclassification received prior to the notification of a
managing change process will still be considered.
Job Evaluation
In a preceding section we
have seen that internal equity in pay isone of the requisites of a sound
primary compensation structure. Management’s method to achieve equity in pay is
jab evaluation. It is the cornerstone of formal wage and salary programme. The
central purpose of job evaluation is to determine the relative worth of jobs of
an enterprise. It thereby helps in establishing fair pay differentials among
jobs. According to Knowles and Thompson2 evaluation is useful in eliminating
the following discrepancies of a wage payment system:
· Paying high wages and
salaries to persons who hold jobs and positions not requiring great skill,
effort and responsibility;
· Paying beginners, less
than they are entitled to receive in terms of what is required of them;
· ‘Giving a raise to
persons whose performance does not justify the raise;
· Deciding rates of pay on
the basis of seniority rather than ability;
· Paying widely varied wages
for the same or closely related jobs and positions; and
· Paying unequal wages and
salaries on the basis of race, sex, religion or political differences.
Advantages of Job
Evaluation
According to an LL.D.
publication3, job evaluation enjoys the following advantages:
(a) It is an objective and
logical method of rankil1g jobs and of removing unjust differentials in the
existing wage structure.
(b) It helps in fining new
jobs at their appropriate places in the existing wage structure.
(c) It improves labor-management
relations by reducing grievances concerning relative wages in the long run.
(d) It establishes an
objective and clear basis for wage bargaining.
(e) It simplifies wage
administration by making wage rates more uniform.
(f) It reveals the possibilities
of more efficient use of the plant’s labor force by pointing out jobs which
need less or more skilled workers than those who are manning these jobs at
present.
Major Steps in Job Evaluation
Major procedural steps to
be followed in a job evaluation programme are as under:
I. Planning Acceptance
of the Job Evaluation Programme:
Since the personnel
department is a staff department it cannot itself enforce a job evaluation
program. It must win cooperation and acceptance for the programme from top line
executives, employees, labor unions and first line supervisors.
This can be done in two
ways: by soliciting participation and by communicating information.
Participation leads to identification with the plan and greater acceptance of
it by persons active in its formulation. Communication regarding the purposes
of
job evaluation, the’”
process by which it is carried out, and the results currently attained is also
vitally important. To the extent this information is provided voluntarily to
all concerned it creates a feeling of trust and stimulates interest.
A variety of methods may be
adopted to organize and communicate information to different categories of
persons. Conferences may be planned for top line executives to explain to them
their obligations under the programme. For example, job evaluation necessarily
presupposes selfdiscipline by management and its willingness to abide by job evaluation
findings rather than to allow judgment or favoritism to influence salary
decisions. Similarly, training programme may be instituted to acquaint
supervisors with the plan to be used, role that they will be expected to play
and the day-to-day problems which they may face in administering and explaining
the programme to their subordinates.
One of the most effective and widely used
media Jar introducing job evaluation to workers is a letter addressed to the employees
signed by the personnel officer. It brings out two important points in which
employees are interested: namely, it stresses management’s support and it assures
the employee that his wages will not be reduced as a result of a programme. Effective
results have also been attained through the pub· location and distribution of
booklets, which explain in some detail the general principles of job
evaluation.
2. Selection of Jobs to
Be Evaluated
Due to difficulties of time
and money all jobs and positions within an enterprise are not evaluated at one
time. Most companies in the beginning evaluate only shop jobs and office work.
Executive, professional, and technical jobs are usually excluded. But later on
when conditions permit these jobs are also brought into the plan. Sometimes a
pilot plan is installed to evaluate a group of jobs within a single department
or in a single plant of a multi-plant company. If the plan works well, it is
extended to other units in the organization.
3. Preparing job
descriptions and job specifications
Before any job can be
evaluated it is necessary to know what the duties of the job are. A job
description is required, therefore, indicating in considerable detail the
duties and responsibilities of each job or position in the enterprise. From
these job descriptions, individual job specifications are prepared. On the basis
of the information contained in these job specifications individuals in the
enterprise are evaluated.
Before employing any job
specification for evaluation purposes, its accuracy and acceptance should be
thoroughly checked. It should be made certain that there are no omissions and duplication
of responsibilities in it and that it has been harmoniously accepted by the
employee concerned. Once all job specifications covering jobs selected for
evaluation have been thus checked and agreed upon we have the foundation for determining
the relative worth of each job through one of several methods of job evaluation
described below.
4. Appointment of A
Committee to Perform Job Evaluation:
Job evaluation may be
carried out either by the employees or by outside consultants or by employees
and outside consultant) jointly. In the first case, a committee consisting of
senior, experienced and respected representatives of management and workers is
constituted. Employees’ participation in job evaluation work reduces their
doubts and suspicions about the programme. But the committee lacks objectivity
and speed because its members have to carry out job evaluation work in addition
to their normal duties. These disadvantages areremoved when job evaluation is
performed by outside experts who generally work on a full time basis.
Employees. however, resent appointment of outside experts and view them with suspicion
and doubt. These experts may also lack intimate knowledge about the problems’
of the enterprise. As such the best course is to ask both employee
representatives and consultants to perform job evaluation jointly. The joint
venture makes it possible to combine the intimate knowledge of the company
possessed by the employees with the necessary expertise of the consultants.
5. Selection of A Job
Evaluation Method
As a student will read in
the following section there are in use today four basic methods of job
evaluation. While the basic approaches of all these methods are somewhat
similar, they differ in their detailed procedures. Some methods are designed specifically
for evaluating clerical and administrative jobs; others work best when applied
only to operative jobs. Sometimes it may be decided to evaluate the same jobs
by two t different methods. The greater the amount of agreement between the two
results, the greater would be their reliability.
6. Periodic Review
A periodic review, usually
every one or two years, of all job descriptions must be done. Many job
evaluation programme have failed because management failed to recognize this
fact. A periodic review of all job descriptions is important for two reasons:
One, it softens the
feelings of those who believe that their work was not properly described or
evaluated last time and that they will get a fair deal at the time of review.
Two, it enables management to keep itself abreast of changes taking place in
the nature of a job. As the nature of a job changes factors which form the
basis of job evaluation also change. Thus automation of job reduces ‘physical
effort’ and increases ‘responsibility’.
The need for daily
application of a skill is also reduced but the need for potential skill in emergencies
increases. New factors ,aches ‘machinery utilization’ and ‘isolation from fellow
workers’ become important.
Methods of Job Evaluation
Determining the relative
worth of all jobs in the enterprise is difficult. Different jobs make varying
demands on workers. One job, for example, might demand a prescribed level of education,
require a certain physical ability, or
~exact specific
responsibilities from an employee, whereas another job may be very lax in these
aspects. Jobs, therefore, differ with repeat to the demands made on the
employee as well as in value to the enterprise.
Job evaluation compares all
demands made on each worker and, by means of this comparison, establishes the
relative worth of each job in an enterprise. The comparison and evaluation may
be made on a non-quantitative basis by simply ranking or classifying the jobs
from lowest to highest, or on a quantitative basis where points value are
assigned to the various demands of a job, and its relative worth determined by
the sum of such point values.
Job evaluation programme
should be implemented carefully.The following principles help in successful
implementation of the programme:
1. Rate the job but not the
employee. Rate the elements on the basis of the job demands.
2. The elements selected
for rating should be easily understood.
3. The elements should be
defined clearly and properly selected.
4. Employees concerned and
the supervisors should be educated and convinced about the programme.
5. Supervisors should be
encouraged to participate in rating the jobs.
6. Secure employee
cooperation by encouraging them to participate in the rating programme.
7. Discuss with the
supervisors and employees about rating but not about assigning money values to
the points.
8. Do not establish too
many occupational wages.
For, better understanding
let us look at the flowchart given below:
Job evaluation process
The job-evaluation process
starts defining objectives of evaluation and ends with establishing wage and
salary differentials.
The main objective of job
evaluation, as was stated earlier, is to establish satisfactory wage and salary
differentials. Job analysis should precede the actual program of evaluation.
Job analysis, as was discussed earlier, provides job-related data, which would be
useful in drafting job description and job specification.
A job-evaluation program
involves answering several questions:
The major ones are: I)
which jobs are to be evaluated. II) Who should evaluate the jobs? Iii) What training
do the evaluation need? IV) How much time is involved? V) What should be the criteria
for evaluation? VI) What methods of evaluation are to be employed?
Which jobs are to be
evaluated in any exercise, where there are more than 30 or 40 jobs to be evaluated,
it is necessary to identify and select a sample of benchmark jobs, which can be
used for comparisons inside and outside the organs. The benchmark jobs should
be so selected to achieve representative sample of each of the main levels of
jobs in each of the principal occupations.
The size of the sample
depends on the number of different jobs to be covered. It is likely to be less
than about five percent of the total number of employees in the organization
and it would be difficult to produce a balanced sample unless at least
25 percent of the distinct
jobs at each level of the organization were included.
Staffing the Evaluation
Exercise
A committee, which consists
of Head of several of department’s, as was pointed out earlier, does
representatives of employee unions and specialist drawn from the National Productivity
council Job evaluation. HR specialists will be normally the chairmen of the
committee.
Responsibility for the
overall coordination of the job-evaluation programme should be in the hands of
a senior executive who can then report its progress to the board, and advise it
on ensuring wage and salary development.
Training for the
Committee
Members of the
job-evaluation committee should be trained in its procedure so as to make the
program successful.
Time Factor
Job evaluation should not
be conducted in haste. Any rushing through will lead to appeals against the
grading of jobs. Eight jobs in a day can be the ideal pace. After this, the
quality of evaluation tends to drop, and more time has to spent later in checking
and assessing the validity of the grading. The final review of all the time
should be allowed for re-evaluation, if necessary.
Isolating Job-evaluation
Criteria
The heart of job evaluation
is the determination of the criteria for evaluation. Most job evaluations use
responsibility, skill, effort and working conditions as major criteria. Other
criteria used are difficulty, time-span of discretion, size of subordinate staff,
and degree of creativity needed. It needs no emphasis that job evaluation
criteria vary across jobs.
So friends you must have
got a fare idea what is job evaluation; now we will discuss what are the
methods involved in job evaluation.
Methods of Job Evaluation
Job-evaluation methods are
of two categories- non-analytical and analytical.
Job
Evaluation
Analytical
Non–Analytical
Point
Ranking Factor Comparison Ranking
Job-grading
Method Method Method Method
Analytical
1. Point-Ranking method
2. Factor comparison Method
Non-Analytical
1. Ranking Method
2. Job-grading method
Non-analytical Methods
Ranking and job
classification methods come under this category because they make no use of
detailed job factors. Each job is treated as a whole in determining its
relative ranking.
Ranking Method
This is the simplest, the
most inexpensive and the most expedient method of evaluation. The evaluation
committee assesses the worth of each job on the basis of its title or on its contents,
if the latter is available. But the job is not broken down into elements or
factors. Each job is compared with others and its place is determined.
The method has several
drawbacks. Job evaluation may be subjective as the jobs are not broken into
factors. It is hard to measure whole jobs.
Ranking is the most
straightforward method of work evaluation. Jobs, people, or even teams can be
ranked from the ones adding most value to least value to the organization.
Criteria for the ranking are not made explicit. Jobs rather than people are easier
to rank when there are a large number of people in jobs. Teams can be ranked in
a team-based environment as a substitute for or addition to the ranking of jobs
and people.
When a larger number of
jobs, people, or teams are to be ranked, the method of paired comparisons can
be used. With this approach each entity is compared to every other entity in terms
of value to the organization.
Overall value of the entity
is determined by the number of times that the entity is evaluated as being of
greater value then the entity being compared against. If an extremely large
number of comparisons needs to be made, statistical formulas are available to
reduce the number of comparisons required using sampling theory.
Advantages
1. Simple to use if there
is a small number of jobs, people, or teams to evaluate
2. Requires little time
3. Minimal administration
required
Disadvantages
1. Criteria for ranking not
understood
2. Increases possibility of
evaluator bias
3. Very difficult to use if
there is a large number of jobs, people, or teams to evaluate
4. Rankings by different
evaluators are not comparable
5. Distance between each
rank is not necessarily equal
6. May invite perceptions
of inequity
Banding
A banding procedure takes
place when jobs are grouped together by common characteristics. Characteristics
used to group jobs follow: exempt versus nonexempt, professional versus
nonprofessional, union versus nonunion, key contributor versus non-key
contributor, line versus staff, technical versus non-technical, value-added
versus non-value-added, and classified versus non-classified. Often these
groups are then rank ordered and each group is then placed in a pay band.
Advantages
1. Quick and easy procedure
2. Has initial face
validity to employees
3. Allows for
organizational flexibility
4. Minimal administration
required
Disadvantages
1. Subtle, but important,
differences between groups ignored
2. Subtle, but important,
differences within groups ignored
3. May invite inequity
perceptions
Classification
Classification systems
define the value of jobs, people, or teams with written standards for a
hierarchy of classification level. Each classification level may be defined by
a number of factors that need to be present for a job, person, or team to be
slotted into a particular classification level. These factors are usually blended
together resulting in one standard for each classification level.
Advantages
1. Jobs, people, and teams
can be quickly slotted into the structure
2. Classification levels
have face validity for employees
3. Standards to establish
value are made explicit
Disadvantages
1. Many jobs, people, or
teams do not fit neatly into a classification level
2. Extensive judgment is
required because standards used to define each factor are blended together
3. Differences between
classification levels may not be equal
4. Creates status
hierarchies within organizations
5. Extensive administration
required
Job-grading Method
As in the ranking method,
the job-grading method (or job classification method) does not call for a
detailed or quantitative analysis of job factors. It is based on the job as a
whole. The difference between the two is that in the ranking method, there is
no yardstick for evaluation, while in the classification method, there is such
an yardstick in the form of job classes or grades. Under the classification
method, the number of grades is first decided upon, and the factors
corresponding to these grades are then determined.
The advantages of the
method are; I) job grade descriptions are vague and are not quantified; ii)
difficulty in convincing employees about the inclusion of a job in a particular
grade because of vagueness of grade descriptions; and iii) more job classification
schedules need to be prepared because the same schedule cannot be used for all
types of jobs.
Analytical Methods
Point-ranking Method
The system starts with the
selection of job factors, construction of degrees for each factors, and
assignment of points to each degree. Different factors are selected for
different jobs, with accompanying differences in degrees and points.
Factor-Comparison Method
The factor-comparison method
is yet another approach for job evaluation in the analytical group. Under this
method, one begins with the selection of factors, usually five of them- are assumed
to be constant for all the jobs. Each factor is ranked individually with other
jobs. For example, all the jobs may be compared first by the factor ‘mental requirements.’
The skills factor, physical requirements, responsibility, and working conditions
are ranked. The total points are then assigned to each factor. The worth of a
job is then obtained by adding together all the point values.
Let us now discuss the few
important measures to improve Job Evaluation.
How
to Improve Job Evaluation
Following measures and
steps for improving the work of evaluation programmes;
· A job evaluation scheme
should be chosen cautiously. It should be devised and administered on the basis
of employment market, demand for labour, bargaining power of the parties &
job conditions.
· The details of the scheme
should be drawn up in such a way that they do not conflict with other provision
of a collective agreement.
· The scheme should be sold
to all concerned and suggestions sought.
· Give major importance
that the number of job titles and classification be kept to a minimum.
· Any anticipated changes
in methods should be carried out before a scheme is installed and all
modifications in it should be resisted until it becomes fully established.
· In preparing job
descriptions it is a sound practice to emphasis in them the things which makes
one job different from another rather than to find a comprehensive statement of
all the duties of the job.
· The better the state of
industrial relations the easier it is to introduce a job evaluation scheme.
Essentials for the
Success of A Job Evaluation Programme
Following are the essential
for the success of Job Evaluation:
1. Compensable factors
should represent all of the major aspects of job content. Compensable factors
selected should be (a) Avoid excessive overlapping or duplication,
(b) Be definable and
measurable, (c) Be easily understood by employees and administrators, (d) Not
cause excessive installation or admin cost and (e) Be selected with legal considerations
in mind.
2. Operating managers
should be convinced about the techniques and programme of evaluation. They
should also be trained in fixing and revising the wages based on job
evaluation.
3. All the employees should
be provided with complete information about job evaluation techniques and programme.
4. All .groups and grades
of employees should be covered by the job evaluation
The results of job
evaluation must be fair and rational and unbiased to The individuals being
affects
Summary
A job evaluation scheme
should be chosen cautiously. It should be devised and administered on the basis
of employment market, demand for labour, bargaining power of the parties &
job conditions.
No comments:
Post a Comment