1. Evaluating Work: Job Evaluation
Chapter 5

2. Job-Based Structures: Job Evaluation
Job evaluation – process of systematically determining the relative worth of jobs to create a job structure for the organization
The evaluation is based on a combination of:
Job content
Skills required
Value to the organization
Organizational culture
External market
Note: focus is the job, not the person doing a job

3. Exhibit 5.1: Many Ways to Create Internal Structure
See Exhibit 5.1, text page 121

4. Exhibit 5.2: Assumptions Underlying Different Views of Job Evaluation

5. Exhibit 5.3: Determining an Internally Aligned Job Structure

6. Defining Job Evaluation: Content, Value, and External Market Links (cont.)
“How-To”: Major decisions
Establish the purpose
Supports organization strategy
Supports work flow
Is fair to employees
Motivates behavior toward organization objectives

7. Defining Job Evaluation: Content, Value, and External Market Links (cont.)
“How-To”: Major decisions (cont.)
Single versus multiple plans
Characteristics of a benchmark job:
Contents are well-known and relatively stable over time
Job not unique to one employer
A reasonable number of employees are involved in the job
Refer to Exhibit 5.4
Choose among methods
Refer to Exhibit 5.5

8. Exhibit 5.4: Benchmark Jobs

9. Exhibit 5.5: Comparison of Job Evaluation Methods

10. Ranking
Orders job descriptions from highest to lowest based on a global definition of relative value or contribution to the organization’s success
Simple, fast, and easy to understand and explain
Initially, the least expensive method
Can be misleading
Two approaches
Alternation ranking
Paired comparison method
See Exhibit 5.6

11. Classification
Uses class descriptions that serve as the standard for comparing job descriptions
Classes include benchmark jobs
Outcome: Series of classes with a number of jobs in each
See Exhibit 5.7, 5.8 (Federal GS)

12. Point Method Three common characteristics of point methods:
Compensable factors
Factor degrees numerically scaled
Weights reflect relative importance of each factor
Most commonly used approach to establish pay structures in U.S.
Differ from other methods by making explicit the criteria for evaluating jobs – compensable factors

13. Designing a Point Plan: Six Steps
Conduct job analysis (note Occupational Information Network)
Determine compensable factors
Scale the factors (define factor degrees)
Weight the factors according to importance (and then assign points to degrees within factors or subfactors)
Communicate the plan, train users, prepare manual
Apply to nonbenchmark jobs (note issue of interrater reliability)

14. Generic Compensable Factors
Skill
Effort
Responsibility
Working conditions

15. Generic Factor - Skill Technical know-how Specialized knowledge
Organizational awareness
Educational levels
Specialized training
Years of experience required
Interpersonal skills
Degree of supervisory skills

16. Generic Factor - Effort
Diversity of tasks
Complexity of tasks
Creativity of thinking
Analytical problem solving
Physical application of skills
Degree of assistance available

17. Generic Factor - Responsibility
Decision-making authority
Scope of organization under control
Scope of organization impacted
Degree of integration of work with others
Impact of failure or risk of job
Ability to perform tasks without supervision

18. Generic Factor – Working Conditions
Potential hazards inherent in job
Degree of danger which can be exposed to others
Impact of specialized motor or concentration skills
Degree of discomfort, exposure, or dirtiness in doing job

19. Exhibit 5.9: Compensable Factor Definition: Decision Making

20. Step 3: Scale the Factors
Construct scales reflecting different degrees within each factor
Most factor scales consist of four to eight degrees
See Exhibit 5.13: Factor Scaling -- NMTA
Issue
Whether to make each degree equidistant from adjacent degrees (interval scaling)

21. Exhibit 5.13: Factor Scaling – National Metal Trades Association

22. Step 4: Weight the Factors According to Importance
Different weights reflect differences in importance attached to each factor by the employer

23. Exhibit 5.14: Job Evaluation Form
Note that the only reason this form works as it does is
that each factor has same number of degrees!!!

24. Overview of the Point System
Job Factor
Weight 1 2 3 4 5
1. Education
50%
100
200
300
400
500
2. Respon s-
ibility
30% 75
150
225
3. Physical
effort
12% 24 48 72 96
120
4. Working
conditions 8% 25 51 80
Degree of Factor

25. Step 5: Communicate the Plan and Train Users
Involves development of manual containing information to allow users to apply plan
Describes job evaluation method
Defines compensable factors
Provides information to permit users to distinguish varying degrees of each factor
Includes appeals process for employees

26. Step 6: Apply to Nonbenchmark Jobs
Final step involves applying plan to remaining jobs
Benchmark jobs were used to develop compensable factors and weights
Trained evaluators will evaluate new jobs or reevaluate jobs whose work content has changed

27. The Final Result: Structure
The final result of the job analysis – job description – job evaluation process is a structure, a hierarchy of work
Ordered list of jobs based on value to organization
Relative amount of difference between jobs
Note that job hierarchy resulting from job evaluation process that mirrors pay hierarchy of key jobs in external labor market may in fact be problematic – may be perpetuating historical discrimination

28. Exhibit 5.15: Resulting Internal Structures – Job, Skill, and Competency Based
See Exhibit 5.15 on page 144

29. Balancing Chaos and Control
Job evaluation changed the legacy of decentralization and uncoordinated wage-setting practices left from the 1930s and ’40s
It must afford flexibility to adapt to changing conditions
Avoid bureaucracy and increase freedom to manage
Reduces control and guidelines, making enforcement of fairness difficult