Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
How to Conduct
Effectively Job Analysis
by I - Wei Chang and Brian H. Kleiner Effectively
In this article, the result of job analysis will be used in job evaluation and
decision-making of compensation.
Sifting the important from the trivial aspects of a job during and after
analysis is really what the whole exercise is about. Attention finally should
be directed at the significant differences between jobs, having first collected
all the relevant information necessary to form a complete picture of any par-
ticular unit of work. There are no hard and fast rules that can be applied; at
There are, of course, many different ways in which job analysis can be
tackled. Some cover the information which would normally go into a job de-
scription, and some cover the main points of a job specification. The sugges-
tion here is that a comprehensive job information sheet should be compiled
for each job. It does not matter whether it is called a job description or job
specification, provided all relevant information about the job is recorded
clearly, accurately, and so far as is possible, with brevity. There are various
ways in which information can be obtained. The main methods are interview,
observation, questionnaires, critical incidents, and diaries.
Interview is the most flexible and productive approach for the job analyst
to conduct a personal interview with the job holder. Properly structured, the
interview can elicit information about all aspects of the job, the nature and se-
quence of the various component tasks. Much of the job activity is obvious,
and not too much is hidden in the form of mental processes or in the exercise
of individual discretion. It is unlikely that simple observation will produce all
the answers, but it can always be backed up with interview and discussion.
With a large number of similar jobs of a routine clerical nature, it may well be
expeditious and time-saving to structure a questionnaire to be circulated to
all employees in those jobs. The questionnaire must be tailor-made to elicit
the right sort of responses and useful information. The replies can then be
sorted, and any further details, misunderstanding, gaps or disagreements can
be investigated during the interview.
Under the point evaluation system, various factors which measure a job are
selected and defined. A separate yard-stick for different degrees of each fac-
tor is prepared. A job is then rated against every yard-stick. In essence, this is
the same process as the classification system except that the job is evaluated
on a separate scale for each factor. In addition, each degree of each factor has
point weightings.
The main problems of the point evaluation system are the difficulty of se-
lecting relevant factors, of defining degrees for each factor and assigning ap-
propriate point values. In addition, there is the problem of determining the
correct number of degrees. Ideally, just enough degrees are established to
identify minimum measurable differences in each factor. Finally, the various
degree definitions must be written so as to serve as guides that are both useful
and meaningful in terms of the jobs being measured in each specific com-
pany.
Factor Comparison
The final basic approach used in traditional job evaluation is the factor com-
parison system. In this system, factors must also be identified, as under the
point system. Within each factor, a ranking system rather than a classifica-
tion system is used. That is, for each factor, the evaluator ranks all jobs from
highest to lowest. Various degrees result, but they are not defined or de-
scribed. Points are assigned to each of these degrees.
Factor comparison has two basic advantages. First, it uses the job-by-job
comparison technique. Second, it does not involve the semantic problems
encountered in defining factor degrees. However, because of the lack of defi-
nitions, it is always difficult to explain the results of factor comparison
evaluations to employees or supervisors.
How to Conduct In practice, most companies use combination plans. The most typical ap-
Job Analysis proach is to use a combination factor comparison and point system. In this
Effectively way, the advantages of each system are obtained, and the difficulties of each
are neutralised.
In the combination system, there are five steps involved. Firstly, factors
are selected and defined. These are usually the five basic factors of responsi-
bility, authority, knowledge, skill, and working conditions. Secondly,
benchmark jobs are selected and priced if they can be priced in the market,
and all benchmark jobs are ranked under each factor. This includes both
those which were priced in the market-place and those which were not.
Ranking of market-priced jobs, however, must reflect market pay relation-
ships. Ranking of other jobs is done primarily by comparison with jobs that
have been priced. Thirdly, points are assigned to each degree of each factor
on the basis of a standard system. The relative maximum weight of each fac-
tor is a function of the number of degrees established in the ranking process.
Fourthly, each degree is defined. This is done in terms of the company jobs
that have been ranked in each degree. Finally, all other jobs are evaluated, by
comparison against degree definitions and on a job-against-job ranking sys-
tem, particularly using benchmark jobs priced under each factor.
Management of Compensation
* Identifying Needs
* Determining Objectives
Once attainable objectives have been identified, they must be further trans-
lated to specific techniques, procedures, and schedules. The specific tech-
niques and procedures need not necessarily be worked on in detail at this
stage, but they should be identified in a general manner. Also, a timetable
must be established. Cost estimates for the work and elapsed time necessary
to accomplish objectives must be determined. Milestones against which
progress can be measured should be established.
* Implementation
* Revisions
As circumstances of the firm change, there comes a time for most pro-
grammes when they must be revised. Actually, the decisions and cases which
occur cumulatively cause sufficient changes in most programmes. A major
revision may be necessary because of a change in operations, regulation, or
management. The company’s needs may change, or there may be changes in
priorities. If the question changes, then a revision is necessary to have a pro-
gramme that reflects the appropriate answer.
How to Conduct To conduct job analysis effectively, managers have the obligation to keep all
Job Analysis the job information up to date. It is vital that they report changes in the or-
ganisation, job assignments, and methods of work to ensure that classifica-
Effectively
tions are kept current. Even when staff specialists evaluate jobs, line
managers still have the basic responsibility of reviewing both the job analysis
and the results of job evaluation. This review carries with it the authority to
approve or appeal. Line managers have the basic responsibility for making
pay decisions. Decisions must be made within the framework of policies,
practices, techniques, and controls. Clearly, the individual supervisor is in-
volved in interpreting compensation policies and applying them to many in-
dividual situations. The supervisor also has the job of gaining employee
acceptance of the company evaluation and compensation programme. The
supervisor is not likely to gain that acceptance unless employees understand
basic policies and practices, and unless they perceive that the application of
those policies and practices in individual situations is equitable and reason-
able. Information, knowledge, programmes, and practices must be continu-
ously reviewed and re-thought. Management of job analysis, job evaluation
and compensation administration, like many other fields, requires a never
ending search for excellence.