Job evaluation

As jobs are redesigned, it becomes necessary to reevaluate their worth to the company. The process of job evaluation determines a hierarchy of job values.

The objectives of job evaluation are threefold:

The starting point for an evaluation is a job analysis. The job is studied in terms of the tasks involved, and an evaluation is made of the overall importance of those tasks to the company.

A variety of methods exist to compare the importance to the company of one job to another. They can be broken down into two categories: non-analytic and analytic. In a non-analytic plan, comparisons are made between whole jobs. An analytic plan, on the other hand, breaks jobs down into their constituent parts, and the factors that make up the jobs are compared.

The simplest non-analytic method is job ranking. Each job is compared to the others and all are arranged in order of importance. Jobs may be compared on the basis of one factor, such as responsibility or skills required. In other situations, the job as a whole would be evaluated relative to several factors. Typically, this might involve such things as the difficulty of the job, the amount of decision making, the range of tasks carried out, the level of knowledge and skills the job holder requires, and the physical effort required to do the job.

Each job is analyzed and described in such a way that the criteria being used to evaluate the jobs are brought out. Key jobs are then established for the basis of comparison. These would be the most and least important jobs, as well as those midway along the scale. Jobs are then ranked around the benchmarks in order of importance and divided into grades based on similarities in duties, skills, or required training, in order to provide guidance for future placement of new jobs in the hierarchy.

Job ranking is easy to do and understand. It may be appropriate when few jobs are involved and the person doing the evaluation is familiar with them all. As the number of different jobs increases, so do the difficulties in ranking them on a consistent basis. Different evaluators may weigh the various criteria differently. It is relatively easy to establish the extremes within a hierarchy. It is more difficult to place the positions in between correctly.

One way around this is the method of paired comparisons. Each job in the property is compared with each other job, one at a time. For each pair, the job that is more important (relative to the criteria decided above) receives two points. The one that is less important receives no points. If two are equally important, each receives one point. Once all the comparisons have been made, the total number of points for each job is determined and a ranking of importance developed. It is easier to compare one job to one other than one job to all.

The job classification method establishes several levels into which jobs will be placed. Each level is defined in terms of the skills and responsibility required. Benchmark jobs are then determined for each level, and the remaining positions within the property are slotted into the various levels based on their similarity to the descriptions of levels and the benchmark jobs. An example is given in Table 9 of a job classification system for a hotel involving seven levels. Although this system is easy to implement and understand, there are drawbacks. When using only one factor to evaluate jobs, such as skill levels, the problem of comparison is difficult for those positions that require little skill but, for example, demand great responsibility. If different factors are used, the problem becomes determining which is more important. In addition, different evaluators will weigh factors differently.

The most widely used method of evaluating jobs is the point rating method. This consists of determining the factors common to all jobs, weighing the importance of these factors to each other, then establishing the number of points at each level for each factor. There are several common factors in use, within a few broad categories:

Each factor would be given a number of points relative to its importance to the company. Then, levels for each factor would be established, using the initial rating as a base, multiplied by the number of levels for each factor. It may be determined, for example, that experience is worth 20 points but working conditions only 5 points. At the second and third levels, the values for experience would be 40 and 60, respectively. For working conditions, the values would be 10 and 15.

While the consideration of several factors allows for greater objectivity and consistency, it is more difficult to complete. A major difficulty is determining a list of factors that will describe all possible jobs. Additionally, some subjectivity still exists in the determination of weights for the factors.

A widely used method for evaluating managerial jobs is the Hay plan. Know-how, problem solving, and accountability are assumed to be the most important aspects of managerial jobs. Know-how has three dimensions: the amount of knowledge required, the breadth of the job in terms of the number of activities, and the requirement for skill in motivating people. Problem solving has two dimensions: the amount of freedom called upon in making decisions without regard to previously determined standards, and the complexity of mental activity involved. Accountability refers to the freedom to act independently, the monetary figure of job accountability, and the direct or indirect impact of the job in dollars on the bottom line. A job with direct impact is considered more important than one with indirect impact.