3Job AnalysisH o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em .docx

3
Job Analysis
H o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em p lo yee f o r his o r
h er jo b ?
W h at kin d o f c riteria sh o u ld you use to s e le c t a p p
lic a n ts f o r op en jo b s ?
H o w d o y o u establish a selectio n p ro c e d u r e th a t g
iv e s yo u the b e s t chance f o r
p ick in g the m o s t qu alified c a n d id a te f o r a p o sitio n
a n d a t the sa m e tim e redu ces
the chance o f violatin g la w s a g a in s t discrim in ation ?
C an the tasks o f a jo b b e re d e s ig n e d to im prove em p
lo yee m otivation a n d /o r qu ality
o f resu lts?
H o w d o yo u d e c id e w h a t to include in a training p ro
g ra m ?
H o w can y o u p u t to g eth er a c a r e e r m an agem en t a
n d d ev e lo p m e n t p ro g r a m ?
These are among the most basic problems with which a human
resources management
program must grapple. Even though each of these questions
deals with a different facet
of human resources management, their answers eventually find
a common solution in the
process of job analysis. This is to say that job analysis is a

taproot to virtually all HRM
programming and practices (McCormick, 1976; Rohmert &
Landau, 1979; Teryek, 1979).
Job analysis is a collection of methods and procedures for
defining certain aspects of
a job (Gael, 1983; Schuler, 1992). The analysis of a job or set
of jobs can feed a number
of HRM applications. As elaborated on later, each form of
analysis focuses on distinctive
features of jobs. Whether the application is compensation,
selection, training, performance
engineering, or career management, all begin with the process
of job analysis.
Perhaps the most widely known version of job analysis is in its
use in making com-
pensation decisions (Beatty & Beatty, 1986; Lister & Mercier,
1993). To achieve this
purpose, the duties and activities that characterize a given job
are identified and described.
The result of this kind of job analysis is a job description. In its
most comprehensive
manifestation, all jobs in an organization are identified and
described. These job descrip-
tions are then put through some form of job evaluation. The job
evaluation compares
jobs on certain criteria (such as the amount of responsibility
required or the complexity
of the work). By evaluating the typical duties and activities of
different jobs using a
2 9

3 0 CHAPTER THREE
standard evaluation rating procedure, the relative worth of jobs
in the organization can
be determined. Jobs can then be ranked into groups (or grades),
and priced accordingly.
Keep in mind here that what is being analyzed are the jobs of
the organization, not
the people in those jobs. A warehousing wholesale operation
may have 30 different jobs
with a payroll of 100 employees. Obviously, a number of people
do the same job; for
example, there could be 20 people in a route deliveryperson job.
In the Job Analysis assignment, you complete an analysis of a
job held by an associate.
As a result of the interview with this person, you will see how a
job analysis procedure
can identify the typical duties and activities of a job as the basis
for producing a job
description.
In the Job Evaluation assignment, you work through the process
of evaluating several
different jobs in order to determine the relative worth of each.
You will use a type of
point-factor job evaluation procedure to rate the jobs in
question.
The point-factor method of job evaluation has been the subject
of some criticism
(Lawler, 1986). One criticism (U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights, 1985) suggested that
there may be a bias in favor of male jobs in the job evaluation
system that contributes

to the disparities in wages between men and women performing
comparable jobs. Many
observers would agree that although there is no purely objective
method of job evaluation,
the possibility that job evaluation programs contribute in any
meaningful way to wage
differences between men and women is slight (U.S. Commission
on Civil Rights, 1985).
In Something’s Just Not Right, an employee approaches her
manager requesting a
transfer. The problem seems to center around problems, either
real and/or imagined, of
pay fairness and equity. You are asked to identify what the
problems are and how job
evaluation systems can handle those issues.
Another important use of job analysis is to define minimum
hiring qualifications (Algera
& Greuter, 1989; Dipboye, 1992; Douglas, Feld, & Asquith,
1989). Here, a job analysis
is done to identify what knowledge, skills, and attitudes an
applicant should possess in
order to be considered for employment. As a result of this
analysis, a set of hiring
specifications is established as the basis for evaluating the
applicants for an open position.
A third use of job analysis is for training program planning
purposes (Nadler, 1982;
Rothwell & Kazanas, 1992). What knowledge and skills should
an employee possess in
order to perform his or her job effectively? How is it possible to
identify what competencies
a skilled performer should have? Again, job analysis techniques
that identify job tasks

are used as the basis for establishing what should be taught in a
training program.
There can be a trade-off in the costs associated with buying or
making talent, that is,
between the level of entry-level skills sought in hiring
specifications and the competencies
produced through training. Take the position of a computer
operator. If hiring specifica-
tions for this position are set so high that the new employee
must be fully competent,
training costs will approach zero. However, in a competitive
labor market, the compen-
sation level would have to be set high to attract candidates with
those qualifications. On
the other hand, compensation costs could be lowered by
reducing the entry-level hiring
specifications, allowing less fully qualified individuals to be
hired. However, the lower
the entry-level skills, the greater the likelihood that training
expenses would increase.
A fourth use of job analysis can focus on various applications of
workflow analysis.
In this context, job analysis can be used to identify
inefficiencies in the workflow process
JOB ANALYSIS 31
(Harbour, 1994). It can also be used to identify potential
selection procedures (as in the
case of work sample testing). Finally, this form of job analysis
can be used as part of
planning for pay-for-knowledge or skills-based pay plans

(Bunning, 1992; U.S. Depart-
ment of Labor, 1988).
Another use of job analysis combines all these approaches in
the development of career
management and development programs (Pearlman, 1980).
Different kinds of job analyses
could be used to define the duties of different jobs (permitting
the formation of job
ladders), to establish training requirements for specific jobs,
and to identify skills families.
The assignment Where Is Everybody? in chapter 7 focuses on
the issues of job analysis
for career planning and management program purposes.
Job analysis is an ensemble of techniques that share a common
purpose of highlighting
certain characteristics of jobs. The output of this analysis may
assume different forms,
such as job descriptions, hiring specifications, training
competencies, or career ladders.
Likewise, the fruits of job analysis may be used in different
ways to guide compensation,
selection, training, and performance management decisions.
Regardless of the application,
job analysis keeps human resources management grounded in
the needs and requirements
of the jobs to be performed in the organization.
3 2 CHAPTER THREE
Use the following worksheet to complete an analysis of a job
held by an associate

(classmate, friend, relative, coworker). Interview that person to
answer the questions as
specifically as possible.
Job Analysis
Title of Job
1. What is the general purpose and primary function of the job?
Answer in three
sentences or less.
2. List the typical tasks and activities performed in this job.
Once all major tasks are
listed, prioritize the tasks in terms of one of these criteria
(check one):
[ ] Frequency—how often it is performed
[ ] Importance—how critical the task is to overall successful job
performance
[ ] Difficulty—how difficult the task is to complete
Priority
3. List any equipment used on the job and how frequently it is
used (seldom, sometimes,
frequently).
4. Describe two typical decisions made or problems solved in
this job.
JOB ANALYSIS 3 3
5. Identify the people (either employees or nonemployees) with

whom you regularly
come into contact.
6. Describe the typical location(s) where the work is done. Note
any extreme or dan-
gerous conditions present at the location(s).
7. Is any special education, training, certification, or licensure
needed to perform the
job?
[ ] No [ ] Yes
(explain)_____________________________________________
8. How many employees are you officially responsible for
supervising?
Directly________ Indirectly________
9. Check if you regularly are expected to do any of the
following with other employees:
[ ] Scheduling employees to work
[ ] Assign work tasks
[ ] Train others in their job assignments
[ ] Resolve specific operating problems
[ ] O th e
r:___________________________________________________
_________
3 4 CHAPTER THREE
For this exercise, you evaluate certain jobs. The purpose of this
job evaluation is to
determine the total point value of the jobs using the enclosed
Job Evaluation Rating
system. There are five compensable factors that this system uses

to rate jobs:
• Job knowledge.
• Complexity.
• Relations with others.
• Supervision of others.
• Working conditions.
The rating levels for each factor are provided.
Instructions
1. Review the five evaluation factors and the rating levels for
each. Observe how the
degree of activity and responsibility increase as the levels
increase. Your instructor will
give you the point values for each factor; include those values
on the appropriate space
on the forms.
2. In your group, review each job description to familiarize
yourself with the job and
to see if you have any questions.
3. Write the name of each job to be evaluated at the top of the
columns on the Job
Evaluation Summary Worksheet.
4. For the job under evaluation, begin with the job knowledge
factor. What is the
typical level of job knowledge required for that job? The group
should agree on the rating.
If there is uncertainty about what the level should be, seek
clarification from the job
incumbent, or make a reasonable assumption.

5. Once a decision is reached, enter the corresponding point
value in the correct place
on the Summary Worksheet.
6. Repeat this basic process for each job factor. When you have
rated the job on all
five factors, summarize the scores for all five factors and create
a total point value for
the job.
7. Repeat this process for all the other jobs to be evaluated.
Job Evaluation
JOB ANALYSIS 3 5
Factor 1: Job Knowledge
This factor measures the minimum level of knowledge needed
by an employee in order
to be able to perform the duties of this position. Job knowledge
can be acquired through
formal education, training, and/or job experience.
Point
Level Standard Value
Job Evaluation Rating System
1. Basic ability to read, write, and understand English language,
and to per-
form basic arithmetic calculations. Equivalent to high school
degree.

2. General knowledge of basic business practices and work
procedures for
a specific function (such as bookkeeping, data processing, or
operations).
Equivalent to high school degree plus several years job
experience, or associates
degree.
3. Comprehensive understanding of a specific field or function
like account-
ing, information management, marketing, sales, production, or
engineering.
Equivalent to college degree or related level of work
experience.
4. Thorough knowledge of a professional field, including
training in specific
professional methods and techniques. Equivalent to graduate
degree.
5. Systematic knowledge of several fields related to the
functioning of the
organization.
Factor 2: Relationships With Others
This factor measures the nature of the working relationship that
the employee experiences
with others, either inside or outside the organization.
Point
1. Working relationships are limited to routine dealings with
other employees
in the same department.

2. Occasional contacts with personnel in other departments or
outside vendors
or customers. Ordinary courtesy and tact required; supervisor
maintains primary
responsibility for outcomes of contacts.
3. Regular phone or in-person contacts with other departments,
vendors, or
customers. Relationships involve moderately complex
transactions that requires
ability to manage in terms of gains or losses to the organization.
4. Frequent phone or in-person contacts with senior
administrative repre-
sentatives of other organizations, vendors, regulators,
customers, media, or the
community at large. High levels of tact and judgment required
to avoid serious
losses to the organization.
3 6 CHAPTER THREE
Factor 3: Complexity
This factor measures the complexity of the work performed.
Complexity is assessed in
terms of the degree to which the work is routine or
unpredictable, the amount of inde-
pendent action allowed, and the nature of decisions that can be
made.
Point

1. Work performed is routine and repetitive. Work is
continually supervised
with little room for choice of method or procedure to follow.
Decisions are
limited to complying with preset policies.
2. Work is somewhat routine and repetitive. There are general
rules to guide
decisions. However, employee has some leeway to interpret
those rules and
make adjustments to improve accuracy or efficiency of work.
Employee receives
regular supervision.
3. Work is varied, with some routine. Employee is expected to
adapt and
interpret policies and has broad leeway to act in most
appropriate manner.
Employee receives general supervision.
4. Work is professional or technical in nature. Employee is
expected to apply
professional or technical standards to solve the problem or
complete work
assignments. Employee works according to standards of chosen
field.
5. Work is of a broad, varied nature that often involves new and
unspecified
issues. Independent action is expected and common. Employee
involved in
establishing policies or formulating new goals and directions
for the organization
as a whole.

Factor 4: Supervision of Others
This factor measures the degree of responsibility for directing,
controlling, and overseeing
the work of other employees.
Point
1. Not responsible for supervising others.
2. Serves as a lead worker in directing others in the work group
by assigning
tasks, training, and helping resolve operating problems. No
formal supervisory
authority.
3. Serves as formal supervisor of others in a group or unit. Has
authority to
hire, fire, evaluate, and reward.
4. Manages others through subordinate supervisors. Controls
others through
long-range plans, budgets and forecasts, and general policies.
5. Executive leadership over entire division or business unit.
Decides on
organizational direction, resources allocation, and general
management goals.
6. Top executive management. Responsible for performance of
the entire
organization.

JOB ANALYSIS 3 7
Factor 5: Working Conditions
This factor measures the physical conditions of the work,
including the degree of danger
or risk found in the work, the amount of extreme physical
conditions experienced, and
the amount of physical effort required in the work.
Point
1. Work occurs primarily indoors. There is little if any risk
from dangerous
working conditions. Work does not require any strenuous
activity.
2. Work requires some amount of time outdoors and/or in
somewhat risky
conditions. Some amount of physical labor is required in lifting,
moving, shift-
ing, positioning, and so on. May require continuous standing.
3. Work occurs primarily outdoors and/or involves frequent or
continuous
exposure to dangerous or undesirable working conditions. Work
requires con-
tinual physical labor.
3 8 CHAPTER THREE
Use the given format to record the conclusions of your job
evaluation study. List the

jobs evaluated at the heading of the columns along the top line.
Then, add in the point
value for each factor as evaluated in the study. Finally, create a
total point value for each
of the jobs by adding up the individual scores.
Jobs Evaluated
Job Evaluation: Summary Worksheet
Job knowledge
Relations with others
Complexity
Supervision of others
Working conditions
Total point value
JOB ANALYSIS 3 9
Something’s Just Not Right
Mary Williams had been supervising the customer operations
department for the Provident
Services Corporation for almost 4 years. There were five
operations specialists in the
department who made sure Provident’s various customer
accounts were kept accurate
and up to date. Mary and the specialists were supported by a
secretary. Mary was proud

of her ability to establish a work group that was strong in both
morale and performance.
Building and maintaining a high performance team was
particularly important, because
there was a constantly high volume of work that kept them
continually busy.
One Tuesday morning, Mary’s secretary Jan Franklin knocked
on M ary’s door and
asked to see her. When Jan entered the office and closed the
door behind her, Mary knew
there must be a problem. The prospect of a problem worried
Mary, because Jan was one
of M ary’s favorites. Jan had begun working at Provident
shortly after graduating from
high school. As an employee, she had earned a reputation as a
very good and reliable
employee. Mary felt Jan had a lot of potential and took every
opportunity to develop
Jan’s talents and abilities through special assignments,
participation in all departmental
planning and problem-solving activities, and outright delegation
of various departmental
administrative duties (like coordination of production control
charts and service quality
follow-through). Indeed, Jan now worked more as an
administrative assistant than a
secretary.
Jan was clearly bothered by something as she sat in the chair
across from Mary’s desk.
Jan nervously handed Mary a Provident job-posting form. Jan
avoided making eye contact.
Mary was stunned. As far as Mary knew, Jan liked her job and
working in the operations

department. Mary knew that all the specialists liked and valued
Jan. Mary couldn’t guess
what the problem might be.
Mary stayed composed and after a minute of looking over the
form, spoke casually:
“So, you want to apply for the executive secretary’s job in the
sales division.” Neither
person was looking at the other. “To the say the least, I ’m
surprised. Could we talk about
what’s going on with you, Jan?”
Jan looked at her hands, deep in thought. Mary waited.
Finally, Jan looked at Mary and said: “My job is only a Grade
12. When I saw that
position listed last week, I also saw that it was a Grade 14, two
full grades higher. That’s
a lot of money!”
Jan let the message sink in, then continued: “I think that you
know I have a friend
Bill Magruder who works near their offices there. Bill told me
that he sees the secretaries
over there sitting around doing nothing half of the time he is
there.”
Jan’s voice began to rise as a tone of anger and resentment
become more apparent.
“Look, Mary, you know how hard I work, we all work, around
here. I mean I ’m always
busy. Why should I work so hard in a Grade 12 job when I
could move into a job that
pays more and requires less work? After all, the requirements
for that job are just a little
higher than the ones for my current job, and that merit increase

you gave me last month
didn’t amount to anything.”
Mary waited for Jan to finish, then thought for a second before
beginning: “Jan, I’m
hearing you say that you’re upset because you believe you’re
not being paid enough for
4 0 CHAPTER THREE
the work you do here. I ’m also understanding that you want to
move to another job that
pays more for less work. Is that a fair summary of your
position?”
Jan nodded her head in agreement.
As Mary sat there thinking, she knew that Provident’s job
evaluation system had been
recently brought up to date and that, as a result, differences in
job grades reflected real
differences in the background, skills, and responsibilities
required of jobs. Mary wanted
to help Jan through this issue, because Jan was both a good
employee and a nice person.
However, Mary was very concerned that Jan might be making a
wrong choice if she
switched to the executive secretary’s position. Obviously, Mary
did not want to lose Jan,
particularly if the move would not be the best for Jan’s long-
term interests and if it was
based on faulty reasoning. Mary wondered what she should do.
Questions

1. What reasons did Jan give for wanting to leave? Evaluate
each reason.
2. How should Mary respond to Jan’s request to transfer?
3. How should Mary respond to Jan’s salary complaints?

3Job AnalysisH o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 3Job AnalysisH o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em .docx

Similar to 3Job AnalysisH o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em .docx (20)

More from rhetttrevannion

More from rhetttrevannion (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

3Job AnalysisH o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em .docx