Hay jobs evaluation

66,223 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
5 Comments
56 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
66,223
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
441
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4,192
Comments
5
Likes
56
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Hay jobs evaluation

  1. 1. HAY JOBSEVALUATION
  2. 2. What is HAY?• The Hay Job Grading Scheme was developed in the early 1950s by E. N. Hay and Associates. It is a scheme which is based on the "points factor" approach. This is a common approach to job grading.• It is the most common job evaluation system in all areas of activity – private, public, for-profit and non-profit.• Evaluate JOB not people who are working on that specific job• It is NOT based on performance, education, skills or current salary
  3. 3. Why we need Hay?• The general purpose for carrying out job evaluations using this or similar methods is to enable organizations to map all their roles in a manner that delivers the following key benefits – Recognizing equivalent levels for the purposes of salary and benefit grading/banding – Improved succession planning – Creation of more useful and focused job descriptions
  4. 4. Measuring jobINPUT PROCESS OUTPUTKNOW-HOW)• How deep and developed PROBLEM RESPONSIBILITIESHas to be the technical SOLVINGKnowdleges • Freedom to act •Analytical•Management Knowdleges Environment • Impact on the End results •Analytical•Human Relationship •Challenge •Magnitude skills
  5. 5. Job Dimensions1. KNOW - HOW  Technical Know-how  Managerial Know-how  Human Relationship skills2. PROBLEM SOLVING  Thinking Environment  Analytical Challenge3. ACCOUNTABILITY  Freedom to Act  Impact  Magnitude
  6. 6. Know-How Dimension• DefinitionAll the amount of knowledge, skills,aptitudes, independent of how it wasobtained, needed for a standardperformance, acceptable for the job•Know-How has three dimensions: – Technical and specialized knowledge – Managerial Know How – Human Relationship Skills
  7. 7. How we evaluate Know-How – Example: Management Area 0 I II III IV Task ACTIVITIE HOMOGENOU DIVERSE INTERGATION Technical Human S COMPLET Know-How Relationship S Skills B I C B I C B I C B I C B I C A. PRIMARY: 38 43 50 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 43 50 57 57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 B. ELEMENTARY VOCATIONAL : 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200E 57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264I+ C. VOCATIONAL: 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 2643 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304264 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 D. ADVANCED VOCATIONAL : 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 E. BASIC SPECIALIZED: 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 F. SPECIALIZED SEASONED : 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920 G. SPECIALIZED MASTERY: 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920 920 1056 1216 H. UNIC AUTHORITY: 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056 1056 1216 1400
  8. 8. Problem Solving•Definition“Self intiated” thinking required for thejob to evaluate, analyze, develop, think,identify and conclude.• Problem Solving has two dimensions: – Thinking Environment – Analytical Challenge
  9. 9. Problem Solving evaluation Example:E Analytical 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. AnalyticalI+ REPETITIVE PATTERNED INTERPO- ADAPTIVE UNCHARTED Environment Challenge3 LATIVE264 10% 14% 19% 25% 33% A. STRICT :ROUTINED+ 12% 16% 22% 29% 38%3 12% 16% 22% 29% 38%(33) B. ROUTINE:87 14% 19% 25% 33% 43% : 14% 19% 25% 33% 43% C. SEMI-ROUTINE 16% 22% 29% 38% 50% 16% 22% 29% 38% 50% D. STANDARDIZED 19% 25% 33% 43% 57% E. CLEARLY DEFINED 19% 25% 33% 43% 57% 22% 29% 38% 50% 66% 22% 29% 38% 50% 66% F. BROADLY DEFINED 25% 33% 43% 57% 76% 25% 33% 43% 57% 76% G. GENERALLY DEFINED: 29% 38% 50% 66% 87% 29% 38% 50% 66% 87% H. ABSTRACT DEFINED: 33% 43% 57% 76% 100%
  10. 10. Accountability•DefinitionAccountability is the factor utilized toquantify the jobs results• Accountability has three dimensions: – Freedom to Act – Impact – Magnitude
  11. 11. ImpactPrimary: The impact’s direction and control.Shared: Partnership and common responsibilities with similar jobs and other functions from the organization. There were not be shared the “supervisor” or the “ subordinate”.Contributive: Counseling Suport or services provided.Away (???): This level is inferior to the “contributive”. It is far from the selected area of magnitude.
  12. 12. Impact: Not quantifiedDefinitions for “non-dimensional” jobs; it is no financialrelevant value associated.Nominal: Incidental SupportModerate: Informational / Evidence in one departmentMajor: Facilitation / Interpretative, possible inter-departmentalCritical: Counseling / Diagnostic
  13. 13. Magnitude and Impact (N) (1) Very small (2) Small (3) Medium (4) Medium-Big (5) Big Magnitude Not quantified Equivalent AMI USD 50 – 500 K USD 550 K – 5 M USD 5 - 50 M USD 50 – 500 M USD 500 M – 5 B Impact A B C D A C S P R C S P A C S P A C S P A C S P K =thousants M = milllion B = billion IMPACT: EXPLANATION:A.????? : Informative Services, evidences and occasional, in A. Indirect Support services, that don’t have a clear order to be utilized by the others to achieve an important result. quantified effect to the activities or peopleC. CONTRIBUTIVE: Interpretative Services, counseling or served. facilitation that are used by other staff actions. C. Indirect Services or tasks that are utilized orS. SHARED: Participate together with others (except supervisor finalized by other roles. and subordinate), inside or outside the organization, to do an S. Non-standard Services or tasks that clearly have action. an effect to the end results.P. PRIMARY: Impact’s Control for end results, there where the P. Management role for services provided and shared responsibilities for other roles are secondary. tasks.
  14. 14. Accountability Example Impact Freedom to Act (0) (1) (2) (3) (4)E Aria NOT QUANTIFIED VERY SMALL SMALL MEDIUM MEDIUM-BIGI+ Impact l IMPACT l3 Nature A B C D R C S P R C S P R C S P R C S264 A. PRESCRIBED: 8 10 14 19 10 14 19 25 14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 9 12 16 22 12 16 22 29 16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50D+ 10 14 19 25 14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 573 B. CONTROLED: 12 16 22 29 16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66(33) 14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 7687 16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 C. STANDARDIZED:D 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 1152- 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132P D. GENERAL REGLEMENTED: 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152115 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200466 E. DIRECTED: 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 F. GENERAL DIRECTED: 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 G. GUIDED: 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 700 400 528 700 H. STRATEGIC GUIDED 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 800 460 608 800 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 700 400 528 700 920 528 700 920 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 800 460 608 800 1056 608 800 1056
  15. 15. Salary Politics Marked n atio aniz any Org mp / co Individual Salary
  16. 16. Hay Limits:• Complicated Matrix to be scored• Accent on Management’s Know How• Reflect hierarchy and budget• Not applied in educational field – team approach• Instant evaluation system – not looking to responsibilities development
  17. 17. JEM DATABASE:
  18. 18. Steps in Process• Plan for Hay Implementation –• Review all JDs• Organize Grading Committee• Training for Grading Committee• Grade all JDs• Ask for SMT/RO review and approval• Salary Survey and Salary Scale

×