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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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)

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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.

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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).

21. 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??

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

23. 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

24. 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.

25. 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

26. 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.