Lecture 4 Job Evaluation and Compensation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1.
Advertisements

Evaluating Work: Job Evaluation
JOB EVALUATION Job evaluation is the process of analysing & assessing the various jobs systematically to ascertain their relative worth in an org. purpose.
Industrial Management & Operations Research notes Basavraj Kulali Assistant Professor DKTE’s Textile & Engineering Institute ICHALKARANJI, Dist : Kolhapur.
Chapt. 8 – Job Evaluation Primary Goal of Job Evaluation:
1 Position Evaluation is the foundation of Pay Program Design Exempt Pay Program Design.
PART TWO EMPLOYMENT Chapters 5-7.
Chapter 8 Compensation Practices, Planning, and Challenges
O RGANIZATION S TRUCTURE : S TRATEGIC AND T ACTICAL C OMPENSATION I SSUES Jayendra Rimal.
Building Internally Consistent Compensation Systems
Pay, Compensation and Benefits
Chapter 11 Learning Objectives
STAFFING VAIBHAV VYAS.
Cash, Bonuses, Insurance,
Total Strategic Compensation Human Resource Management.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. PowerPoint Presentation by Charlie Cook The University of West Alabama t e n t h e d i t i o n Gary Dessler.
1 Employee Relations/Reward Assessing job size. 2 Question??????? Why is one job worth more than another? How do you measure or evaluate jobs in a way.
Compensating Employees Definition Objective Bases Types Determining Reward Job Evaluation Compensation Structure.
MANPOWER PLANNING.
P AY DELIVERY ADMINISTRATION Jayendra Rimal. I NTRODUCTION Employees develop an unique view of the relationship between pay and assigned job, pay and.
1 Administrative Office Management, 8/e by Zane Quible ©2005 Pearson Education, Inc. Pearson Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ Job Evaluation.
Human Resource Staffing and Performance Management Introduction
Job Evaluation Dr. Anil Mehta.
© Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2001 Chapter Seven Building Internally Consistent Compensation Systems.
Human Resource Management Lecture 16 MGT 350. Last Lecture Factors that can Distort Appraisals – Leniency error – Halo error – Similarity error – Low.
JOB EVALUATION MAGNETIC CONTACTORS.
 Job evaluation is the process of systematically determining the relative worth of jobs to create a job structure for the organization  The evaluation.
Lecture 11: Compensation. Strategic Issues and Compensation  Why do dome employers pay more than other employers?  Why are different jobs within the.
Human Resource Staffing and Performance Management Introduction
1 Classification Process at MSU b Objectives How are classifications determined?How are classifications determined? What is factor analysis?What is factor.
Advances in Human Resource Development and Management Course code: MGT 712 Lecture 12.
Pay Reform Perspectives in Jordan Amman-Jordan September 2006 Ministry of Public Sector Development.
11-1 McGraw-Hill/IrwinCopyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. fundamentals of Human Resource Management 4 th edition by.
© 2008 by Prentice Hall9-1 Cost of Living When prices rise over a period of time and pay does not, real pay is actually lowered Some firms index pay increases.
Compensation and Benefits. Meaning of Compensation Compensation means what the employees receive in exchange for their work. It is the monetary plus non-
COMPENSATION AND JOB EVALUATION OBJECTIVES Understand the Factors that Play a Role in Compensation Decisions Evaluate Jobs for Determining Compensation.
Chapter 10: The Texas Bureaucracy and Policy Implementation.
Discussion on Compensation. Goal To assist in securing and retaining a staff of necessary quality to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization.
Jayendra Rimal. Introduction: Compensation Compensation refers to all forms of financial returns and tangible benefits that employees receive as part.
Planning Planning is considered the most important element of the administrative process. The higher the level of administration, the more the involvement.
1– 1 MGT-351 Human Resource Management Chapter-11 MGT-351 Human Resource Management Chapter-11 Establishing Strategic Pay Plans.
Position Islands on the Career Sea : An Evaluation of the Open Competitive Position System in Korea. By Sangmook Kim, PhD Public Personnel Administration.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. PowerPoint Presentation by Charlie Cook The University of West Alabama t e n t h e d i t i o n Gary Dessler.
Wage and Salary Management
Job Evaluation & Base Wage Systems
JOB EVALUATION MAGNETIC CONTACTORS 1/26/2018.
ESTABLISHING STRATEGIC PAY PLANS
Routes to Internal Equity
Lecture 2 The Development of Public Personnel Administration
Establishing Strategic Pay Plans
Introduction to HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Lecture 5 Recruitment and Selection
VAIBHAV VYAS.
ESTABLISHING STRATEGIC PAY PLANS
MKT 305 Human Resources Management Mishari Alnahedh
MANAGING HUMAN RESOURCES
Lecture 9 The Future of Civil Services
8 Human Resources, Culture, and Diversity 8-1 Human Resources Basics
Job-Based Structures and Job Evaluation
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 11 COMPENSATION PowerPoint Presentation by Charlie Cook
Career Banding Program for North Carolina State Government Employees
Establishing Strategic Pay Plans
EXCEL BOOKS 14-1 JOB EVALUATION.
Introduction: Strategic Compensation Management
Compensation.
CHAPTER 4 - ORGANISATION AND JOB DESIGN
Establishing Strategic Pay Plans
Chapter 10: Compensation
Managing Compensation
Presentation transcript:

Lecture 4 Job Evaluation and Compensation Introduction to Public Personnel Administration Spring 2014

Today’s Learning Objectives Rank-in-person (계급제) vs. Position classification (직위분류제) The methods and processes of job evaluation and classification - Position classification - Factor Evaluation System (FES) - Broadbanding Pay and compensation

Rank-in-person What is rank-in-person? Assigning rank to an individual on the basis of individual abilities, knowledge, and experiences (focus on the person, not the job) Pros - Hiring the young talented and training them to generalists (or group of administrative elits) in the closed system - Higher commitment to job and organization - Greater flexibility in managing human resources: easier transfer between positions and occupations - More opportunities for self-development

Rank-in-person Pros (continued) Less expensive and simplified management of personnel system: Job analysis and evaluation not required Cons - Pay inequity: “equal pay for equal work” not possible - Decreased specialization: Hard to find the best qualified individual for a position - Unclear definition of jobs and positions - Limited employment opportunities for outsiders

Reform Efforts in Korean Government Efforts to combine position classification and rank-in-person Position Classification Act (1963—1973) Open position (1999): Opening top positions that require special skills and knowledge and effective decision making Experiments of job analysis (2000—2002) on selected agencies (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Construction and Transportation, National Tax Service) Job analysis and evaluation of top position (2003—2004): Replaced rank 1—3 with grades Senior Civil Service (2006): 5 grades 2 grades

Implementation Failure Lack of experience with position analysis and evaluation Resistance from strong tradition of rank-in-person Financial difficulties to adopt the position classification system

Position Classification What is position classification? - Organizing “work” (focus on the job, not the person) into groups and levels on the basis of duties and responsibilities Purpose - To correct the inconsistent and ineffective processes of hiring and paying public sector employees - “Equal pay for equal work” - Influence of scientific management (Taylor and Gulick): In order to ensure uniformity and consistency across government

The Evolution of Position Classification The Classification Act of 1923 1) The positions and not individuals should be classified 2) The duties and responsibilities should be ones that distinguish a position from other positions 3) Qualifications necessary for the performance of certain duties are determined by the nature of job duties 4) Persons holding positions in the same class should be considered equally qualified for any other position in that class

The Evolution of Position Classification The Classification Act of 1949 - Established the General Schedule (GS) pay plan for white collar workers and a separate CPC (Craft, Protective, and Custodial) pay plan for blue collar workers - The 1954 Amendments changed the CPC pay schedule to a wage grade system The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 - Reclassified the Senior Executive Service (SES)

Approaches to Position Classification Ranking method - Ranks order each position by collective judgment. Positions are evaluated as whole units. Classification method (traditional) - Sorts positions into grades/ classes using predetermined standards or descriptions to ascertain grade levels. Positions are evaluated as whole units. - Best for traditional stable, large organizations where outside control is significant especially if legislature is involved.

Approaches to Position Classification Factor comparison method 1) Predetermined selection of factors, weights for the factors, and key jobs (benchmark positions). 2) Positions are then scored on each factor compared to benchmark positions. 3) Position is then evaluated as cumulative score. - Most suitable for large, dynamic public sector organizations where extensive employee/ supervisory involvement and interaction are critical for acceptance.

Approaches to Position Classification Pointing-rating method 1) Uniform set of job factors are used to evaluate value of the job. 2) Positions are then rated in terms of degrees on each factor with points assigned for each degree. 3) Position evaluated as a cumulative score from its components.

Factor Evaluation Factor Evaluation in the 1970s - To improve the active involvement of operating management and reduce the limitations of traditional control-oriented classification methods. - Positions are ranked by factors; all the factors of each position are compared and ranked.

Factor Evaluation in the 1970s The factors categorized five groupings 1) Job requirements: the knowledge, skills, and abilities 2) Difficulty of work: the complexity and intricacy of the work and the mental demands 3) Responsibility: the freedom of action required by a job and the impact upon the organizational mission 4) Personal relationships: interpersonal relationships for mission accomplishment

Criticisms on Position Classification Questionable accuracy and objectivity of job analysis and classification An inflexible system limited managers’ discretionary power Accentuates hierarchy Limits ability to offer competitive salaries: “grade creep” and the inflation of average grade Impedes employee development

Reform Efforts: How to Respond to Challenges? Decentralization of job evaluation and classification to the agency and sub-agency level Increasing flexibility by reducing the number of narrowly defined occupational categories and grade levels ex. Broadbanding

Broadbanding in the 1990s Advantage of broad- or pay banding - Providing more flexibility, authority, and discretion for managers. - Encouraging individual career development, and market competitiveness. - Strengthening “the relationship between employees and managers by giving the manager more control over the employee’s status and pay ” (Covard, 2000).

Criticism on Broadbanding The difficulty in comparison - More complex salary surveys and blurring distinctions about job values within organizations. The increased pressure on performance appraisal practices - More emphasis on an individual’s performance within a broader pay band as determined by the manager. Increased salary costs Return to the personnel practice of over a century ago??

Recommendation for Improvement Substantial planning Reviewing and studying successful and well-designed programs Sufficient commitment and resources

Characteristics Federal wage system Traditional position classification system (1940s) Factor evaluation system (1970s) Occupations Trades and labor Clerical, technical, administrative, and professional Pay basis Hourly rates Per-annum rates – national general schedule Factors used in evaluating positions - Skill and knowledge - Responsibility (including supervisory controls, guidelines, scope, and effort) - Physical effort - Working conditions - Qualification - Supervision received - Guideline - Originality - Nature and variety of work - Recommendations, decisions - Nature of person-to-person work relationships - Knowledge required - Supervisory controls - Guidelines - Complexity - Scope and effect - General contacts - Purpose of contacts - Physical demands - Work environment Standards Same factors used consistently in narrative descriptions of grade levels Various combinations of factors –mostly narrative descriptions of grade levels: some quantitative and factor format standards Some factors used consistently in benchmarks and factor-level descriptions (each factor level carries a point value) Application Positions graded to highest level reflected in regular, recurring duties Positions graded to highest level compared to standards Positions graded by totaling points and converting to grade – all regular, recurring work considered

Criticism on Recent Reform Efforts Overlooking the value of employees’ development in their jobs People should not be viewed as generic entities that merely carry out the duties assigned to their positions rather than assets with intrinsic value, requiring continual investment.

Alternatives: Rank-in-Person - Operated in the U.S. military and Foreign Service - Ranked by experiences and capabilities - Paid according to the knowledge and experience rather than according to how their job is defined. Adding or subtracting classifications - More flexibility - Results of decentralized merit system

Comparable Worth Equal pay for equal work vs. comparable worth Gender-based pay disparities - The traditional women’s jobs have been chronically underpaid. Equal-pay-for-work-of-equal-value - Every job has a value or worth to the employer and should be paid based on its value.