Downloaded 34 times
More Related Content
Job evaluation
- 1.
- 2. JOB EVALUATION • Jobevaluation -is the systematic process for assessing the relative worth of jobs within an organization • It tries to make a systematic comparison between jobs to assess their relative worth for the purpose of establishing a relational pay structure.
- 3. PROCESS OF JOBEVALUATION • Gaining Acceptance • Creating job evaluation committee • Finding the job to be evaluated • Preparing job description • Selecting the method of job evaluation • Classifying jobs • Installing the method • Reviewing periodically
- 4. Job evaluation guidelines •Rate the job-not the person or employee on the job. • Strive to collect all the facts accurately. • Look especially for distinguish feature of jobs and Relationship to other job. • Job evaluation must be conduct systematically , based on factual and accurate information.
- 5. Benefits of Jobevaluation • Link pay with the requirement of job. • Systematic procedure for determination the relative worth of jobs • Outcomes is an equitable wage structure. • Employees and union are also an active part of the job evaluation process. • Helps in evaluation of new jobs. • Point out possibilities of more appropriate use of the plant ‘s labour force.
- 6. Methods of Jobevaluation • Ranking Method • Classification Method • Factor comparison Method • Point Method
- 7. Ranking method RANK Monthly Salaries(in INR) 1ACCOUNTANT 30000 2 ACCOUNTS CLERK 20000 3 PURCHASE ASSISTANT 15000 4 MACHINE OPERATOR 10000 5 TYPIST 8000 6 OFFICE BOY 5000 • As per this method jobs are arranged from highest to lowest , in order of their value or merit to the organization • Job at the top has highest value and job at the lowest has the lowest value • Jobs are arranges in each department then department ranking are combined to develop an organization ranking.
- 8. CLASSIFICATION METHOD CLASS RANKEMPLOYEE CLASS 1 EXECUTIVES Office manger, deputy office manager, Office superintendent CLASS 2 SKILLED WORKERS Purchasing assistant, Cashier, Receipt clerk CLASS 3 SEMI SKILLED WORKER machine operator CLASS4 LESS SKILLED WORKER File clerk office boy. As per this method , a predetermined group of job are assign to their classification
- 9. Factor comparison method •Under this method instead of ranking complete jobs ,each job is ranked according to series of factor .these factor include mental effort, physical effort, skill needed, responsibility, working condition . • Pay will be assigned in this method by comparing the weights of factor require for each job.
- 10. Point factor • Jobsare expressed in terms of key factor. • Points assigned to each factor after prioritizing each factor in order of importance • The point are summed up to determine the wage rate for the job
- 11. Hongkong Electric Company Jobevaluation case study • Founded in 1890 • In 1984 company started the job evaluation exercises Need of job evaluation • There was inequality of paying different salaries for local and expatriate staff doing the same job. • The objectives of the whole exercise is to have more consistency in salary scale design so as to maintain fairness and equity, to have payroll cost controlled and rate of promotion reduced and finally to have performance rewarded.
- 12. Case study cont.. •The company decided to use external consultant as they were considered to be more technically qualified and could be viewed as the impartial and objective third party. Hay was chosen after reviewing proposals from various consultants • To minimize the cost, it was decided that the consultant' should be involved in the design stage and in the evaluation of the Benchmark jobs only Internal resources would involve in every stage of the job evaluation, so that subsequent work of evaluating the remaining jobs and maintaining the system could be born by internal staff. Three senior staff were then employed to form the salary administration group to handle the project.
- 13. Case study cont.. •The exercise was carried out in two stages, viz, the benchmark and non- benchmark evaluation. • Benchmark Job Evaluation -A total of 163 benchmark jobs were selected by the consultant in consultation with the 3 General Managers. Job descriptions for Head of Division (HOD) level were written by Hay consultant whereas staff on Department head level were given training by Hay to write their own job description. In addition, 15 job analysts were appointed and arranged to receive training from Hay to write job descriptions for jobs in lower grades after conducting interview with the job holders .
- 14. Case study cont.. Question 1-The most important activity you perform 2- To what extent do you develop policies or procedures for others to follow. Please explain policies or procedures you – develop 3- To what extent do you follow policies or procedures. Please explain •what: policies or procedures you follow 4- List the area you need general approval form your superior eg staffing ,capital expenditure, promotion , salaries, organizational change. 5- What decisions can you make without reference to your superior 6- What is your Involvement and impact on the planning and budgeting processes of the Company, i.e. Approve departmental annual budget or Contribute to long term planning by providing sales statistics 7- What are the major results expected from your job and the type of impact you have on those results, i.e. Ensure completion date of "the building is attained by directing and controlling the subcontractor .Contribute to management ! control and planning by providing timely and accurate financial accounts.
- 15. Case study cont.. •A total of 15 Benchmark Committee meetings were organized to evaluate the benchmark jobs by determining the scores on know-how, problem solving and accountability for each individual post- Altogether 12 HODs were appointed as members o£ the Committee with equal representation from different Branches. Nevertheless each session o£ committee meeting only required 5 HODS plus Hay consultant and the Personnel Manager to attend • Finally, two sore-thumb sessions with all the Benchmark committee members present were held to agree the final scores o£ the benchmark job.
- 16. Case study cont.. •Non-benchmark job evaluation Due to the large member of non-benchmark jobs (more than 800)it was not possible for the job analyst to write all job descriptions Therefore, all non- benchmark job holders were given training by either Hay (for Departmental head level) or job analysts. A total of 63 training sessions were conducted by staff in Salary Administration and Management Development. • To speed up the evaluation, process, individual HOD carried out the initial evaluation on the jobs of their own division by comparison with benchmark jobs. The divisional results were then presented to the Non-benchmark committee for further evaluation. The Non-benchmark committee consisted of 2 Benchmark committee members outside the function being evaluated, 1 Benchmark committee member responsible for the function and one representative from Personnel. There was also a final sore-thumb session to finalize and agree on all jobs
- 17.