Job Evaluation Guideline

Job Evaluation
Job Evaluation - What is it ?

Job evaluation is a practical technique, designed to enable trained and
experienced staff to judge the size of one job relative to others. It
does not directly determine pay levels, but will establish the basis for
an internal ranking of jobs.
The two most common methods of job evaluation that have been used
are first, whole job ranking, where jobs are taken as a whole and
ranked against each other. The second method is one of awarding
points for various aspects of the job. In the points system various
aspects or parts of the job such as education and experience required
to perform the job are assessed and a points value awarded - the
higher the educational requirements of the job the higher the points
scored. The most well known points scheme was introduced by Hay
management consultants in 1951. This scheme evaluates job
responsibilities in the light of three major factors - know how, problem
solving and accountability.
Some Principles of Job Evaluation
Clearly defined and identifiable jobs must exist. These jobs will
be accurately described in an agreed job description.
All jobs in an organisation will be evaluated using an agreed job
evaluation scheme.
Job evaluators will need to gain a thorough understanding of the
job
Job evaluation is concerned with jobs, not people. It is not the
person that is being evaluated.
The job is assessed as if it were being carried out in a fully
competent and acceptable manner.
Job evaluation is based on judgement and is not scientific.
However if applied correctly it can enable objective judgements
to be made.
It is possible to make a judgement about a job's contribution
relative to other jobs in an organisation.
The real test of the evaluation results is their acceptability to all
participants.
Job evaluation can aid organisational problem solving as it

highlights duplication of tasks and gaps between jobs and
functions.
Job Evaluation - The Future

As organisations constantly evolve and new organisations emerge
there will be challenges to existing principles of job evaluation.
Whether existing job evaluation techniques and accompanying
schemes remain relevant in a faster moving and constantly changing
world, where new jobs and roles are invented on a regular basis,
remains to be seen. The formal points systems, used by so many
organisations is often already seen to be inflexible. Sticking rigidly to
an existing scheme may impose barriers to change. Constantly
updating and writing new jobs together with the time that has to be
spent administering the job evaluation schemes may become too
cumbersome and time consuming for the benefits that are derived.
Does this mean that we will see existing schemes abandoned or left to
fall into disrepute ? Will providers of job evaluation schemes examine
and, where necessary, modify them to ensure they are up to date and
relevant ? Simply sticking rigidly to what is already in place may not
be enough to ensure their survival.
Job Evaluation - More

Job evaluation is essentially one part of a tripartite subject, which is
collectively referred to as Job Study (other names exist). The three
parts are Job Analysis; Job Evaluation - the information collected is
evaluated using a numerical scale or ranking and rating methodology;
and Merit Rating - BSI definition (32542).
BSI definition - 32529 Any method ranking the relative worth of
jobs which can then be used as a basis for a remuneration system
It is essentially a comparative process.
Job evaluation evaluates selected job factors, which are regarded as
important for the effective performance of the job, according to one of
several alternative methods. The resulting numerical gradings can
form the basis of an equitable structure of job gradings. The job
grades may or may not be used for status or payment purposes.
Explanation:
Job Evaluation is concerned with measuring the demands the job
places on its holder. Most factors that contribute to this job pressure,
e.g. physical strength required, knowledge of mathematics required,
are assessed and the result is a numerical estimate of the total job
pressure. When evaluations are carried out on all hourly paid
personnel the techniques uses include establishing relative wage rates
for different tasks. It is possible to use it for all grades of personnel,
even senior management.
Illustration:
The Time Span of Discretion is an interesting and unusual method of
job evaluation developed by Elliot Jaques for the Glacier Metal
Company. In this method the job pressure is assessed according to the
length of time over which managers decisions commit the company. A
machine operative, for example, is at any moment committing the
company only for the period needed to make one product unit or
component. The manager who buys the machine is committing the
company for ten years.
References:
Job Analysis
Merit Rating - BSI definition (32542)
Further reading:
NBPI Job Evaluation report No. 83 - Supplement
Author:
Roger Edgell
Job Analysis
Job Analysis: BSI definition (33206) - the determination of the
essential characteristics of a job in order to produce a job specification
(BSI definition 32212).
Essentially the process of examining a job to identify its component
parts. The detail and approach may vary according to the purpose for
which the job is being analysed, e.g. training, equipment design,
workplace layout (GTT).
Rationale:
Information on job content is useful to a company for a large number

of applications. The Personnel Unit needs data for recruiting; Costing
need information for establishing labour standards; other corporate
management services units require information for organisation
manuals, job evaluation, salary grading and so on. The information
required is collected by a Job Analyst, trained in the information
gathering technique. This is usually by interview and can be supported
by questionnaires and examination of existing records. In an
integrated job study scheme, the job analysis will be used as a basis
for all applications, but it is possible to limit the data collection and
subsequent analysis to the needs of only one or two applications, e.g.
a job description (BSI definition - 32207) for recruitment will require
less data than a detailed job specification (q.v.) for a job evaluation
(BSI definition - 32529) scheme. The word analysis has a double
meaning in this context. Firstly you consider the detailed operations of
which the job consists and secondly you consider the physical and
mental pressures involved in carrying out the job.
Illustration:
A job analysis for a Transport Manager would consider the road, rail,
sea and air responsibilities, the tonnage moved, the responsibility for
decision-making in breadth and depth, the amount of resources
controlled and so on.
CUPE/UBC JOB EVALUATION MANUAL
Factor 1 Knowledge
Factor 2 Learning Experience
Factor 3 Judgement
Factor 4 Consequence of Error
Factor 5 Financial Responsibility
Factor 6 Responsibility for Goods, Tools, Equipment and Software
Factor 7 Supervision of Others
Factor 8 Contacts
Factor 9 Working Environment
Factor 10 Hazards
Factor 11 Dexterity
Factor 12 Physical Effort
Factor 13 Mental Effort
Factor 1 Knowledge
This factor measures the general knowledge and specialized or

vocational training necessary to comprehensively understand the
work elements involved to perform the job duties in a satisfactory
manner.
The degree levels are expressed in terms of formal education or
equivalent. This does not mean that a designated amount of formal
education is an absolute necessity.
Knowledge is usually gained as the result of time spent in schools,
vocational centres, community colleges, universities or other formal
instruction programs. However, similar levels of achievement can be
obtained through related experience, courses or self-improvement.
Degree Definition
Degree Definition
Elementary school or
equivalent training
Two years post secondary

or equivalent training
Partial high school or

equivalent training
Three years post secondary

Full high school or

equivalent training
Four years post secondary

One year post

secondary or equivalent
training
Five or more years post

secondary or equivalent
training
comprehensively understand the work elements refers to such

things as coordination capability and supervisory skills, or the
accumulation of knowledge of work methods and "tricks of the trade."
Factor 1 Notes to Raters
to top
Factor 2 Learning Experience

This factor measures the characteristic amount of time it takes an
average individual (who has already completed the appropriate
theoretical knowledge, specific education and specialized training
under the knowledge factor) to obtain the practical work experience
required to perform the job duties adequately.
The minimum learning experience is normally less than the
amount of learning experience possessed by incumbents, since it
refers to the "learning curve" function of learning experience and not
total personal experience.
Assess compressed time by dividing the reasonable amount of

elapsed or real time by 3.
Degree Compressed Time
Elapsed / Real Time
Up to 6 months
Up to 1 years
Over 6 months and under 1

year
Over 1 years and under 3

years
Over 1 year and under 1

years

years

years

years
Over 2 years
Over 6 years
minimum learning experience refers to time spent on related

work or lesser positions and the breaking-in time or training period on
the job itself learning the techniques, methods, practices, procedures,
use of forms, and routines, etc., needed to become competent.
to top
Factor 3 Judgement
This factor measures the requirement of the position to exercise
judgement in making decisions and carrying assignments within the
parameters and constraints of the position. (i.e., the choice of action
which is within the scope of the job duties)
Degree Definition
Tasks are clearly defined.

Little or no latitude exists for exercising
judgement
Most problems are referred to supervisor.
Little planning required. Tasks arranged by

others.
Assignments are covered by well defined

methods and procedures.
Some latitude exists for organizing work or
exercising judgement within established
guidelines.
Most unusual problems are referred to the

supervisor.
Nature of Situations
Typically Encountered
Repetitive and identical in

nature.
Similar in nature with

choice among limited
alternatives. (i.e., there is a
definite pattern to
situations encountered.
Required data and
information is available or
obtainable.)
Assignments are covered by broadly

established methods and procedures or
standards of accepted practices. However, some
judgement is required in adapting these
guidelines to get the desired end result.
The exercise of judgement is a normal
requirement but is restrained by program
objectives.
Direction is sought when apparent solutions

to problems are not within the intent of
established practices.
Assignments frequently involve modifying

established methods or procedures, recognizing
and analyzing problems/situations and using
trouble shooting techniques to reach solutions or
devising new courses of action within the intent
of existing programs, legislation or professional
standards.
The exercise of judgement is extensive and
is complicated by the need to consult and
coordinate action plans.
Supervisors are available in relation to

administrative matters, and may be consulted on
professional/clinical/technical matters, but
solutions are not normally expected during such
discussions.
Assignments involve development of

solutions to diverse and interrelated problems,
often having conflicting requirements, affecting
an individual or affecting specific policies or
programs.
The exercise of judgement is extensive and
involves complex issues.
Differing in nature,
requiring search for
solutions among several
alternatives. (i.e., there
may be certain intangibles,
uncertainty or missing
information to assess and
consider.)
Variable in nature, requiring

analytical, interpretative
and evaluative thinking.
(i.e., there are significant
intangibles and
uncertainties to consider.)
Consultation will usually take place in a peer

group or interdisciplinary team review.

to top
Factor 4 Consequence of Error

This factor is used to measure the consequence of making errors in
judgement.
Consider the consequences on UBC of making judgemental errors in

the decision making process.
Degree Incorrect or inappropriate recommendations, decisions,

or actions could have the following consequences on
UBC.
Little effect on financial costs and/or
Little effect on service to the public.
Obvious consequences on financial costs

Adverse client, patient, or public relations
Reduced service to the public
Requires intervention to deal with repercussions.
Serious, usually short term consequences

Significant financial costs
Reduced or impaired service to the public
Negative media reaction
Requires intervention by head of the department to deal with repercussions.
Major, frequently long-term consequences

Very substantial financial costs
Negative media reaction
Requires President's Office and/or political debate to deal with the repercussions.

to top
Factor 5 Financial Responsibility

This factor is used to measure the responsibility or accountability for
financial resources. The following characteristics of the work are to be
considered in selecting a degree:
the responsibility for financial processing

the administration of a budget
the responsibility for activities that result in making financial commitments
Degree
Definition
No responsibility.
Handling or processing cash, purchase requisitions, cheques, bonds, etc.
Responsibility for initiating requests or authorizing the payment of materials delivered or

services rendered.
Signing authority to make expenditures or recoveries according to detailed written

procedures.
Administering a budget or contract.
Authority to sign official University contracts.
Financial forecasting and making recommendations based on those forecasts.

to top
Factor 6 Responsibility for Goods, Tools,

Equipment and Software
This factor measures the responsibility to operate, handle, adjust,
adapt or maintain goods, tools, equipment and software.
Degree
Definition
No responsibility
Responsible for basic care and handling of goods, tools,

equipment and software.
Responsible for doing prescribed maintenance and/or making

modifications/adjustments required to do the job.

to top
Factor 7 Supervision of Others

This factor measures the continuing responsibility the incumbent
assumes for the supervision and direction of staff. Consider the
following the nature of supervision given that is either direct or
functional
Degree Definition
Work does not have the requirement to exercise supervision.
Occasionally may explain work procedures to new or inexperienced employees.
The job may involve:
Coordinating and scheduling the day to day work of other workers or volunteers in the unit
and monitoring output, and/or
Providing functional supervision to others.
Employee acts as a supervisor or group leader of other workers or volunteers with
responsibilities such as scheduling and assigning work, training staff, providing direction,
checking work in progress and upon completion. This level has input into decision making for
all or some personnel matters such as:
making hiring or promotion recommendations
appraising the work of others
handling disciplinary matters
to top
Factor 8 Contacts
This factor measures the responsibility for effective handling of
personal contacts with students, faculty, other staff, members of other
organizations and with the general public. Consideration should be
given to the nature and purpose of such contacts.
The following characteristics of the work are to be considered in
selecting a degree:
the purpose of the contact

the nature of the contact (i.e., the extent to which tact, persuasiveness and interpersonal skills, etc., are
required)
Degree
Nature
Courtesy
Tact and
discretion
Communication,
Purpose A
Purpose B
To exchange/discuss
information in
accordance with
current policies and
technical practices
To clarify/exchange and
discuss information of a
detailed or specialized
nature requiring
specialized knowledge;
gain cooperation;
coordinate activities or
programs; mitigate
high tension or
emotional situations.
empathy and/or
sensitivity skills
Interpersonal
and
communications
skills

to top
Factor 9 Working Environment

This factor measures the frequency of exposure to undersirable or
disagreeable environmental conditions under which the work is
performed.
Refer carefully to the Notes To Raters for the characteristics of the
work to be considered before selecting a degree.
Degree Exposure to Disagreeable Working Conditions
Almost no exposure to disagreeable conditions.
Occasional exposure to minor disagreeable conditions.
Frequent exposure to minor or
Occasional exposure to major disagreeable conditions.
Almost continuous exposure to minor or
Frequent exposure to major disagreeable conditions.
Almost continuous exposure to major disagreeable conditions.

to top
Factor 10 Hazards
This factor is used to measure the frequency of exposure to hazards or
safety requirements under which the work is performed. Refer
carefully to the Notes to Raters for the characteristics of the work to
be considered before selecting a degree. In general, consider the
following characteristics of work:
exposure to hazards which present a risk to health or personal safety

requirement to use safety devices, clothing or other safety procedures.
Degree
Exposure to Hazards
Almost no exposure to hazards or safety requirements.
Occasional exposure to minor hazards or safety requirements.
Frequent exposure to minor or
Occasional exposure to major hazards or safety requirements.
Almost continuous exposure to minor or
Frequent exposure to major hazards or safety requirements.
Almost continuous exposure to major hazards or safety requirements.

to top
Factor 11 Dexterity
Notes to Raters
This factor measures the level of dexterity required by a job. The
levels of manual dexterity are determined by considering the elements
of hand/eye or hand/foot coordination. Movements can be either
coarse, medium or fine.
Degree Coordination of Movements Required by Employee
Tasks do not demand coarse, medium or fine movements.
Tasks demand coordination of coarse movements.
Tasks demand coordination of medium movements.
Tasks demand coordination of fine movements.

to top
Factor 12 Physical Effort

This factor refers to the physical fatigue that results from performing
the duties of the job. Consider the following characteristics of the work
in selecting a degree:
frequency of performing tasks that cause fatigue

requirements to assume an uncomfortable or awkward posture
requirements to lift, push or pull objects
Degree
The Work Involves:
Occasional light physical activity.
Frequent light physical activity or
occasional moderate physical activity.
Almost continuous light physical activity or

frequent moderate physical activity or
occasional heavy physical activity.
Almost continuous moderate physical activity or frequent heavy physical

activity.
Almost continuous heavy physical activity.

to top
Factor 13 Mental Effort

This factor refers to the mental, visual and/or auditory fatigue that
results from performing the duties of the job. The frequency and
duration of mental/sensory concentration is what determines the
fatigue. The following characteristics of the work are to be considered

in selecting a degree:
frequency of performing tasks that cause mental/sensory fatigue

length of time spent on tasks that cause mental/sensory fatigue.
Degree Periods of Sensory Concentration Required
Occasional short periods
Frequent short periods or
Occasional intermediate periods
Almost continuous short periods or

Frequent intermediate or
Occasional lengthy periods
Almost continuous intermediate periods or
frequent lengthy periods
Almost continuous lengthy periods
THE HAY GUIDE CHART-PROFILE METHOD OF JOB

EVALUATION
General Use of the Hay Scheme

The nature of job evaluation schemes is such that only those schemes that compare jobs against jobs
are universally applicable at any level in an organisation. The Hay scheme has found widespread
acceptance because it:*
is based on the step difference principle;
it measures any job from office junior to the Chairman;
will relate different cultures and styles of organisation; and
is effective in all market sectors.
Consequently, it is now used by more organisations on a worldwide basis than any other single type of
evaluation scheme. Hay has over 1000 consultants working from 76 offices in 36 countries around the
world. In the British Isles, the HayGroup are working with over 1000 clients. Wherever the Hay Guide
Chart-Profile Method of Job Evaluation is used it employs a number of well tried procedures and rules.
Procedures
1.Jobs must be properly understood before they can be evaluated hence, good quality information is
required in the shape of job descriptions which make the content and context of the job clear.
2.Job evaluation is a judgmental, not a scientific, process thus every effort must be made to minimise
subjectivity. This is achieved by having people with knowledge of the sector, function or organisation
involved and by having a number of factors to make judgements about.
3.The task of the evaluators is to make consistent judgements and the use of the evaluation method is
the tool which enables this to happen.
4.Each evaluation is checked using the profiling techniques.
5.As patterns of relativities begin to emerge they are reviewed on the basis of reason and fairness
using the step difference and profile techniques to clarify judgements.
6.Each decision is properly recorded in order that the reasoning is documented for future use when
maintaining the scheme as jobs change, or dealing with appeals when job holders consider the
evaluators are at fault.
Rules
1.It is jobs that are evaluated not job holders.
2.The evaluation is based on a fully acceptable level of performance by occupants of the
job.
3.The job is evaluated as it exists today.
4.Present pay, status or grading are not relevant.
5.Jobs can only be evaluated if they are understood.
The Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method has been developed empirically over a period of 50 years and
has a number of key features:-
a) the three elements common to all jobs which facilitate comparison;

b) the step difference principle, which is the tool of comparison;
c) the numerical scale for relating different levels of jobs; and
d) the profiling technique for checking the consistency of each evaluation.
The Common Element

There are a number of different methods of job evaluation. Some compare whole jobs, the majority
look at factors or elements which are common between jobs, such as knowledge, skills, experience,
mental effort and responsibility. The Hay scheme is based on the analysis of three common elements,
each element being measured on a separate guide chart which is set out like a grid. The elements
are:* KNOW-HOW
The sum total of every kind of capability or skill, however acquired, needed
for acceptable job performance.
* PROBLEM SOLVING
The original, self-starting use of KNOW-HOW required by the job to identify,

define and resolve problems. "You think with what you know." This is true of
even the most creative work. The raw material of any thinking is knowledge
of facts, principles, and means. For that reason, PROBLEM SOLVING is
treated as a percentage of KNOW-HOW.
*ACCOUNTABILITY
The answerability for action and the consequences thereof. It is the

measured effect of the job on the end results of the organisation.
The Step Difference Principle

Some job evaluation schemes compare job factors against pre-determined scales. These are known
as points rating schemes. The Hay scheme compares jobs against jobs using the step difference
principle which works as follows:* if the difference between an element in two jobs is immediately evident and requires no consideration
at all, then it is probably three steps or more;
*
if, after some consideration, the difference is reasonably clear, it is probably two steps;
* if, after very careful consideration and scrutiny, a difference can just be discerned, then the difference
is one step;
* if, after very careful scrutiny and consideration, no difference can be detected between the element
in the jobs, then they are, for evaluation purposes, identical.
The Numerical Scale

Each intersect on the grid contains two or three numbers which overlap other intersects in order to
provide the finest of tuning in evaluation judgements. The numbers themselves are directly
proportional to each other in a geometric progression e.g. 100, 115, 132, 152. This avoids the difficulty
that in an ordinary progression e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, the numbers are in a constantly diminishing relationship
to each other. The Hay scale of progression is 15% and means that each judgement is given this
constant relativity wherever it falls on the scale.
Profiling
The Hay scheme also has a facility for checking the soundness of an evaluation by considering the
shape or profile of the job. This is accomplished by testing the distribution of the three elements of
Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability in the evaluation of each job to see if it makes sense.
Job Descriptions
Job descriptions, as a management tool, can greatly simplify an organization's human

resource management.
A job description clarifies work functions and reporting relationships,
helping employees understand their jobs. Job descriptions aid in
maintaining a consistent salary structure. Performance evaluations
may be based on job descriptions.
Well written duty statements contain action words which accurately
describe what is being done.
Duty statements should focus on primary, current, normal, daily duties
and responsibilities of the position (not incidental duties, an
employees qualifications or performance, or temporary assignments).
Related or similar duties should be combined and written as one
statement.
Each duty statement should be a discreet, identifiable aspect of the
work assignment, described in one to three sentences, and should be
outcome-based, allowing for alternate means of performing the duty,
changes in technology, preferences of employees and supervisors, and
accommodations of workers with disabilities, without altering the
nature of, and/or the duty itself.
Examples of duty statements are:
Compiles reports on a quarterly basis to ...

Adjusts height of lathe tool ...
Drives tractor to worksite ...
Opens valve to flush pipe.
Listens to customer at counter.
Compares department expenses with budget...
Duty statements typically contain three parts: 1) the Verb, the Object,
and a Purpose. Examples of these parts of duty statements are shown
below:
Verb
Object
Purpose
Collects
financial data
to evaluate budget requests.
Conducts
analytical studies
to support financial planning.
Compiles
enrollment data
for distribution to administrators.
Cleans
computer equipment
in conformance with established

schedules.
Drives
pickup truck carrying motor

fuels
to job sites.
Overhauls and
repairs
equipment
daily, or as needed.
A form, such as the one below may help in identifying the necessary
information to create duty statements.
Worksheet for task statements
Who?
Performs what
action?
To whom or
what?
Using what tools,

equipment, methods?
To achieve what
result?
Subject
Action Verbs
Object of
verb
Phrase
In order to...
the
worker
Task statement
Job Analysis answers the following important questions:
What tools, materials, and equipment are used to perform the tasks in the
job?
What methods or processes are used to perform the tasks in the job?
What are the specific duties for the position? This puts the position in context
and spells out broad responsibilities.
What are the critical tasks and key result areas of the position? The question
helps to isolate the most critical activities that the position holder is expected to
perform.
What are the discrete outcomes of the job for which the person appointed
will be held accountable and evaluated on?
What behaviors, skills, knowledge and experience are the most important to
the program in achieving the key results and outcomes? This question focuses
on the specific personal qualities that are necessary to best meet the job
requirements.
The content of job descriptions should identify and describe:
1. Mental Functions
a. COMPARING - Judging the readily observable functional, structural, or
compositional characteristics (whether similar to or divergent from
obvious standards) of data, people, or things.
b. COPYING - Transcribing, entering, or posting data.
c. COMPUTING - Performing arithmetic operations and reporting on and/or
carrying out a prescribed action in relation to them.
d. COMPILING - Gathering, collating, or classifying information about data,
people, or things. Reporting and/or carrying out a prescribed action in
relation to the evaluation is frequently involved.
e. ANALYZING - Examining and evaluating data. Presenting alternative
actions in relation to the evaluation is frequently involved.
f. COORDINATING - Determining time, place, and sequence of operations
or action to be taken on the basis of analysis of data. May include
prioritizing multiple responsibilities and/or accomplishing them
simultaneous-ly.
g. SYNTHESIZING - To combine or integrate data to discover facts and/or
develop knowledge or creative concepts and/or interpretations.
2. Relations with Others
a. SUPERVISION (given) - Coordinating and directing the activities of one
or more subordinates.
b. SUPERVISION (received) - Independence of actions; authority to
determine methods of operation.
c. NEGOTIATING - Exchanging ideas, information, and opinions with
others to formulate policies and programs and/or jointly arrive at
decisions, conclusions, solutions, or solve disputes.
d. COMMUNICATING - Talking with and/or listening to and/or signaling
people to convey or exchange infor-mation; includes giving/receiving
assignments and/or directions.
e. INSTRUCTING - Teaching subject matter to others, or training others
through explanation, demonstration, and supervised practice; or making
recommendations on the basis of technical disciplines.
f. INTERPERSONAL SKILLS/BEHAVIORS - Dealing with individuals
with a range of moods and behaviors in a tactful, congenial, personal
manner so as not to alienate or antagonize them.
g. CONTROL OF OTHERS - seizing, holding, controlling, and/or otherwise
subduing violent, assaultive, or physically threatening persons to defend
oneself or prevent injury. Body strength and agility of all four limbs is
necessary.
3. Physical Demands (strength)
a. SEDENTARY - Exerts up to 10 lbs. of force occa-sionally and/or a
negligible amount of force frequently or constantly to lift, carry, push,
pull, or otherwise move objects, including the human body. involves
sitting most of the time, but may involve walking or standing for brief
periods of time.
b. LIGHT - Exert up to 20 lbs. of force occasionally, and/or up to 10 lbs. of

force frequently, and/or a negligi-ble amount of force constantly to move
objects. Physical demands are in excess of those of Sedentary work. Light
work usually requires walking or standing to a significant degree.
c. MEDIUM - Exert up to 50 lbs. of force occasional-ly, and/or up to 20 lbs.
of force frequently, and/or up to 10 lbs. of force constantly to move
objects.
d. HEAVY - Exert up to 100 lbs. of force occasionally, and/or up to 50 lbs. of
force frequently, and/or up to 20 lbs. of force constantly to move objects.
e. VERY HEAVY - Exert in excess of 100 lbs. of force occasionally, and/or
in excess of 50 lbs. of force frequently, and/or in excess of 20 lbs. of force
constantly to move objects.
4. Physical Demands (movement)
a. CLIMBING - Ascending or descending using feet and legs and/or hands
and arms. Body agility is emphasized.
b. BALANCING - Maintaining body equilibrium to prevent falling on
narrow, slippery, or erratically moving surfaces; or maintaining body
equilibrium when perform-ing feats of agility.
c. STOOPING - Bending body downward and forward. This factor is
important if it occurs to a considerable degree and requires full use of the
lower extremities and back muscles.
d. KNEELING - Bending legs at knees to come to rest on knee or knees.
e. CROUCHING - Bending body downward and for-ward by bending legs
and spine.
f. CRAWLING - Moving about on hands and knees or hands and feet.
g. REACHING - Extending hand(s) and arm(s) in any direction.
h. HANDLING - Seizing, holding, grasp-ing, turning, or otherwise working
with hand or hands. Fingers are involved only to the extent that they are an
extension of the hand.
i. FINGERING - Picking, pinching, or otherwise working primarily with
fingers rather than with the whole hand or arm as in handling.
j. FEELING - Perceiving attributes of objects, such as size, shape,
temperature, or texture, by touching with skin, particularly that of
fingertips.
5. Physical Demands (auditory)
a. TALKING - Expressing or exchanging ideas by means of the spoken
word. Talking is important for those activities in which workers must
impart oral information to clients or to the public, and in those activities in
which they must convey detailed or important spoken instructions to other
workers accurately, loudly, or quickly.
b. HEARING - perceiving the nature of sounds. Used for those activities
which require ability to receive detailed information through oral
communication, and to make fine discriminations in sounds, such as when
making fine adjustments on running engines.
6. Physical Demands (taste/smell)
a. TASTING/SMELLING - Distinguishing, with a degree of accuracy,

differences or similarities in intensity or quality of flavors and/or odors, or
recognizing particular flavors and/or odors, using tongue and/or nose.
7. Physical Demands (vision)
a. NEAR ACUITY - Clarity of vision at 20 inches or less. Use this factor
when special and minute accuracy is demanded.
b. FAR ACUITY - Clarity of vision at 20 feet or more. Use this factor when
visual efficiency in terms of far acuity is required in day and night/dark
conditions.
c. DEPTH PERCEPTION - Three-dimensional vision. Ability to judge
distances and spatial relationships so as to see objects where and as they
actually are.
d. ACCOMMODATION - Adjustment of lens of eye to bring an object into
sharp focus. Use this factor when requiring near point work at varying
distances.
e. COLOR VISION - Ability to identify and distinguish colors.
f. FIELD OF VISION - Observing an area that can be seen up and down or
to right or left while eyes are fixed on a given point. Use this factor when
job performance re-quires seeing a large area while keeping the eyes fixed.
8. Environmental Conditions and Physical Surroundings - exposure results in
marked bodily discomfort.
a. EXPOSURE TO WEATHER - Exposure to hot, cold, wet, humid, or
windy conditions caused by the weather.
b. EXTREME COLD - Exposure to nonweather-related cold temperatures.
c. EXTREME HEAT - Exposure to nonweather-related hot temperatures.
d. WET AND/OR HUMID - Contact with water or other liquids; or exposure
to nonweather-related humid conditions.
e. NOISE - Exposure to constant or intermittent sounds or a pitch or level
sufficient to cause mark ed distraction or possible hearing loss.
f. VIBRATION - Exposure to a shaking object or surface. This factor is
rated important when vibration causes a strain on the body or extremities.
g. ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS - Exposure to conditions such as fumes,
noxious odors, dusts, mists, gases, and poor ventilation, that affect the
respiratory system, eyes or, the skin.
h. CONFINED/RESTRICTED WORKING ENVI-RONMENT - Work is
performed in a closed or locked facility providing safety and security for
clients, inmates, or fellow workers.
9. Equipment Used
a. office equipment such as computer, typewriter, projector, casette
player/recorder.
b. hand tools (e.g., hammer, shovel, screwdriver)
c. power tools (e.g., radial saw, reciprocating saw, drill, pheunomatic
hammer)
d. vehicles (e.g., automobile, truck, tractor, lift)
10. Hazards
a. Proximity to moving, mechanical parts.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Exposure to electrical shock.

Working in high, exposed places.
Exposure to radiant energy.
Working with explosives.
Exposure to toxic or caustic chemicals.
Job Analysis refers to various methodologies for analyzing the

requirements of a job.
Contents
[hide]
1 Purpose
2 Methods
3 Results
4 Systems
5 References
[edit] Purpose
The general purpose of job analysis is always to understand the
requirements of a job. However, there is generally a specific purpose
that has a profound effect on the job analysis.
In the fields of Human Resources (HR) and Industrial Psychology, job
analysis is often used to gather information for use in personnel
selection, training, classification, and/or compensation.
The field of vocational rehabilitation uses job analysis to determine the
physical requirements of a job to determine whether an individual who
has suffered some diminished capacity is capable of performing the job
with, or without, some accommodation.
Professionals developing certification exams use job analysis (often
called something slightly different, such as "task analysis") to
determine the elements of the domain which must be sampled in order
to create a content valid exam. When a job analysis is conducted for
the purpose of valuing the job (i.e., determining the appropriate

compensation for incumbents) this is called "job evaluation."
[edit] Methods
There are several ways to conduct a job analysis, including: interviews
with incumbents and supervisors, questionnaires (structured, openended, or both), observation, and gathering background information
such as duty statements or classification specifications. In job analysis
conducted by HR professionals, it is common to use more than one of
these methods. For example, the job analysts may tour the job site
and observe workers performing their jobs. During the tour the analyst
may collect materials that directly or indirectly indicate required skills
(duty statemenets, instructions, safety manuals, quality charts, etc).
The analyst may then meet with a group of workers or incumbents.
And finally, a survey may be administered. In these cases, job analysts
typically are industrial psychologists or have been trained by, and are
acting under the supervision of, an industrial psychologist.
In the context of vocational rehabilitation, the primary method is direct
observation and may even include video recordings of incumbents
involved in the work. It is common for such job analysts to use scales
and other apparatus to collect precise measures of the amount of
strength or force required for various tasks. Accurate, factual evidence
of the degree of strength required for job performance is needed to
justify that a disabled worker is legitimately qualified for disability
status. In the United States, billions of dollars are paid to disabled
workers by private insurers and the federal government (primarily
through the Social Security Administration). Disability determination is,
therefore, often a fairly "high-stakes" decision. Job analysts in these
contexts typically come from a health occupation such as occupational
or physical therapy.
Questionnaires are the most common methodology employed by
certification test developers, although the content of the
questionnaires (often lists of tasks that might be performed) are
gathered through interviews or focus groups. Job analysts typically
operate under the supervision of a psychometrician.
[edit] Results
Job analysis can result in a description of common duties, or tasks,
performed on the job, as well as descriptions of the knowledge, skills,
abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) required to perform those

tasks. In addition, job analysis can uncover tools and technologies
commonly used on the job, working conditions (e.g., a cubicle-based
environment, outdoor work), and a variety of other aspects that
characterize work performed in the position(s). When used as a
precursor to personnel selection (a commonly suggested approach),
job analysis should be performed in such a way as to meet the
professional and legal guidelines that have been established (e.g., in
the U.S., the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures).
In the context of vocational rehabilitation, the output of the job
analysis is usually evidence. The evidence is used to support a
determination regarding the injured worker's vocational choices.
In certification testing, the results of the job analysis lead to a
document for candidates laying out the specific areas that will be
tested (named in various ways, such as the "exam objectives") and to
a "content specification" for item writers and other technical members
of the exam development team. The content specification outlines the
specific content areas of the exam and the percentage of the exam
(i.e., the numbers of items) that must be included on the exam from
that content area.
[edit] Systems
The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) lists job requirements for a
very large number of jobs and is often considered basic, generic, or
initial job analysis data. Data available from the DOT includes physical
requirements, educational level, and some mental requirements.
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a well-known job analysis
method. Although it is labeled a questionnaire, the PAQ is actually
designed to be completed by a trained job analyst who interviews the
subject matter experts (e.g., job incumbents and their supervisors).
Functional job analysis (FJA) was developed by Sidney Fine between
1950 and 1960 as a reaction against task-based questionnaires. This
method involves extensive discussion with focus groups of subject
matter experts
Skills-based job analysis is a reaction to task-based job analysis. In a
task-based job analysis, data are gathered about the tasks performed
by the job incumbents. Typically, subject matter experts rate long lists
of tasks on scales such as frequency, amount of time spent, or

importance. The KSAO's required for a job are then inferred from the
most frequently-occurring, important tasks. In a skills-based job
analysis, the skills are inferred from tasks and the skills are rated
directly in terms of importance of frequency. This often results in data
that immediately imply the important KSAO's. However, it can be hard
for subject matter experts to rate skills directly.
The Fleishman Job Analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic,
skills-based approach. Fleishman factor-analyzed large data sets to
discover a common, minimum set of KSAO's across different jobs. His
system of 73 specific scales measure three broad areas: Cognitive
(Verbal Abilities; Idea Generation & Reasoning Abilities; Quantitative
Abilities; Memory; Perceptual Abilities; Spatial Abilities; and
Attentiveness), Psychomotor (Fine Manipulative Abilities; Control
Movement Abilities; and Reaction Time and Speed Abilities), and
Physical (Physical Strength Abilities; Endurance; Flexibility, Balance,
and Coordination; Visual Abilities; and Auditory and Speech Abilities).
Classification Systems used as basis for or resulting from job analyses.

Common
Metric
Questionaire
(CMQ)
The Common Metric Questionnaire (CMQ) is targeted toward both exempt and
nonexempt jobs. It has five sections: (1) Background, (2) Contacts with People, (3)
Decision Making, (4) Physical and Mechanical Activities, and (5) Work Setting. The
Background section asks 41 general questions about work requirements such as travel,
seasonality, and licensure requirements. The Contacts with People section asks 62
questions targeting level of supervision, degree of internal and external contacts, and
meeting requirements. The 80 Decision Making items in the CMQ focus on relevant
occupational knowledge and skill, language and sensory requirements, and managerial
and business decision making. The Physical and Mechanical Activities section contains
53 items about physical activities and equipment, machinery, and tools. Work Setting
contains 47 items that focus on environmental conditions and other job characteristics.
The CMQ is a relatively new instrument. It has been field tested on 4,552 positions
representing over 900 occupations in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT), and
yielded reasonably high reliabilities. (Harvey, 1993)
Fleishman Job
Analysis
Survey
Another job analysis methodologythe Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS),

formerly the Manual for Ability Requirements Scalescontains a taxonomy of abilities
that is buttressed by decades of research (Fleishman & Mumford, 1991). The taxonomy
includes 52 cognitive, physical, psychomotor, and sensory abilities that have strong
research support, and the FJAS uses level of ability rating scales that specify level of
functioning requirements for jobs. FJAS is a job analysis method; it has not been applied
to a large number of jobs in the U.S. economy to produce an occupational database.
Functional
Job Analysis
Scales
Beginning in the 1940s, Functional Job Analysis (FJA) was used by U.S. Employment
Service job analysts to classify jobs for the DOT (Fine & Wiley, 1971). The most recent
version of FJA uses seven scales to describe what workers do in jobs: (1) Things, (2)
Data, (3) People, (4) Worker Instructions, (5) Reasoning, (6) Math, and (7) Language.
Each scale has several levels that are anchored with specific behavioral statements and
illustrative tasks. Like other job analysis instruments, FJA is a methodology for collecting
job information. While it was used for many years as a part of the DOT, the Department
of Labor is replacing the DOT with O*NET and will not be using FJA in O*NET. There is
no current database of jobs (other than the DOT) containing FJA data for jobs in the
national economy.
MOSAIC
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is in the process of developing a database of

information on federal jobs using Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis
Inventory-Closed Ended (MOSAIC). Toward that end, OPM has been conducting a series
of occupational analysis projects, each project handling a different set of occupations
(e.g., clerical, managerial, etc.). Each job analysis inventory used to collect data for
OPM's system includes a variety of descriptors. The two primary types of descriptors in
each questionnaire are tasks and competencies. Tasks are rated on importance and
competencies are rated on several scales including importance and requirement for entry.
The MOSAIC database is intended to include all government occupations. Clerical,
technical, and managerial job sections are complete. Information on the reliability of
MOSAIC questionnaires has not been reported.
Occupational
Analysis
Inventory
(OAI)
The Occupational Analysis Inventory (OAI) contains 617 "work elements." It was
designed to yield more specific job information than other multi-job questionnaires such
as the PAQ while still capturing work requirements for virtually all occupations. The
major categories of items are five-fold: (1) Information Received, (2) Mental Activities,
(3) Work Behavior, (4) Work Goals, and (5) Work Context. OAI respondents rate each job
element on one of four rating scales: part-of-job, extent, applicability, or a special scale
designed for the element. The OAI has been used to gather information on 1,400 jobs
selected to represent five major occupational categories. Reliabilities obtained with the
OAI have been moderate, somewhat lower than those achieved with the PAQ.
Position
Analysis
Questionaire
(PAQ)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) developed by McCormick, Jeanneret, and

Mecham (1972) is a structured job analysis instrument to measure job characteristics and
relate them to human characteristics. It consists of 195 job elements that represent in a
comprehensive manner the domain of human behavior involved in work activities. The
items that fall into five categories:
1. Information input (where and how the worker gets information),
2. Mental processes (reasoning and other processes that workers use),
3. Work output (physical activities and tools used on the job),
4. Relationships with other persons, and
5. Job context (the physical and social contexts of work).
Over the course of many studies, PAQ researchers have aggregated PAQ data for
hundreds of jobs; that database is maintained by Purdue University. A wealth of research
exists on the PAQ; it has yielded reasonably good reliability estimates and has been linked
to several assessment tools.
http://international.state.ut.us/Companies/data/REC00795.HTML
Work
Profiling
System
(WPS)
Saville & Holdsworth's Work Profiling System (WPS) is designed to help employers
accomplish human resource functions. The job analysis is designed to yield reports
targeted toward various human resource functions such as individual development
planning, employee selection, and job description. There are three versions of the WPS
tied to types of occupations: managerial, service, and technical occupations. The WPS is
computer-administered on-site at a company. It contains a structured questionaire which
measures ability and personality attributes in areas such as Hearing Skills, Sight, Taste,
Smell, Touch, Body Coordination, Verbal Skills, Number Skills, Complex Management
Skills, Personality, and Team Role. Saville & Holdsworth aggregates information
provided by users into a database when users make those data available. Saville &
Holdsworth does not require WPS users to submit their data.
Copyright 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 hr-guide.com All Rights

Reserved.
Send questions or
Current Occupational
Analysis Systems
his appendix describes current occupational analysis systems in more

detail than is provided in the main text. Category/enumerative
systems are presented first followed by descriptions of six illustrative
descriptive analytic systems.
CATEGORY/ENUMERATIVE SYSTEMS
ISCO-88
The ISCO system uses two key concepts: job and skill. Job is
defined as "a set of tasks and duties executed, or meant to be
executed, by one person." Skill is defined as "the ability to carry out
the tasks and duties of a given job." Operationally, four levels of skill
are defined, entirely in terms of achieved education. The lowest level
approximates primary school (about sixth grade in United States), the
second approximates secondary school (about the twelfth grade in
United States) but includes apprenticeships, the third approximates
college education but not obtaining a degree, and the fourth includes
undergraduate and graduate college education (International Labour
Office, 1990:2-3).
The ISCO-88 structure is hierarchical, with 10 major groups at the

top, 28 submajor groups, 116 minor groups, and 390 unit groups.
Eight of the 10 major groups are categorized at one of the four skill
levels ("armed forces" and "legislators, senior officials and managers,"
were not so categorized). For example, all occupations in the major
group "clerks" are categorized at the second skill level, and all those in
"elementary occupations" are at the first level. All descriptions are
verbal, and no quantitative data are provided. Each major group,
submajor group, and minor group is described by a general duty
description and a list of tasks (usually no more than a brief paragraph
in length). The lowest level "unit groups" also include names of
"example occupations" and related occupations, in addition to the
general duty and task list descriptions.
This development of this structure was "carried out in line with the
recommendations and decisions of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth
International Conferences of Labour Statisticians, held at the
International Labour Office, Geneva, in 1982 and 1987" (International
Labour Office, 1990:1). The underlying source data consist of
population censuses, statistical surveys, and administrative records
maintained at the national level.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(1997) recently reviewed the use of ISCO-88 in Europe and elsewhere
around the world. It reached a number of conclusions:
ISCO-88 has superseded ISCO-68 and has become the model for new national
classifications in many countries, even those with previously existing systems.
Levels of reliability of classifying occupations into ISCO categories remain fairly
low, at 75 percent for the most detailed levels of categorization (about 350
categories).
Aggregating to higher levels of categorization improves the correspondence of
across-nation coding (aggregation to about the "submajor" level in ISCO-88
terms).
International comparability of ISCO-88 results is improved through technical
assistance to participating countries in the use of the system.
Australia
The Australian Standard Classification of Occupations (ASCO) uses
the same concepts of skill level and skill specialization as does ISCO88 and has eight major groups, 52 minor groups, 282 unit groups, and
1,079 occupations. An occupation is defined as a set of jobs with
similar sets of tasks. In 1993, changes likely to be made to ASCO were

seen as including (Madden and Tam, 1993):
Developing procedures for monitoring changes in industry, vocational education,

and training to keep ASCO up to date,
A movement toward the use of competencies (specific skills, knowledge, and
training designed to meet industry standards) rather than educational
qualifications and duration of training and experience as indicators of skill level,
Increasing use of job tasks rather than job titles for classifying into occupations,
because jobs are becoming broader and titles less reliable indicators of job
content, and
Modifying the major group structure of ASCO to meet user problems, including
the need for career path analysis.
The Netherlands
The Netherlands Standard Classification of Occupations 1992
(NSCO'92) also classifies occupations by skill level and specialization,
but it differs primarily in its operational definition of those concepts.
This system uses the "most adequate training program, that is the
training program that best prepares for the tasks and duties in the job"
(Bakker, 1993:273) as the method to identify skill level and
specialization for each job. To do this, the Netherlands Standard
Classification of Education is used as the basic information to conduct
the coding. Skill specialization coding is made according to the major
(and minor) educational sectors in the Netherlands, e.g., agriculture,
mathematics and natural sciences, and language and culture. Skill
level is coded with a five-point scale that combines formal education
and length of on-the-job experience. Beyond these higher-level criteria
for coding, they include two interesting concepts: main tasks and
specific skills. If level and specialization are not adequate, then a list of
128 main tasks is used to differentiate the occupation. Examples of
these 128 "task clusters" include "managing supervisors and decisionmaking general policy," "check, inspect, examine, verify, test, sort,"
and "navigate a ship." If still further differentiation is needed, then a
list of 11 specific skills are used (e.g., quantitative skills defined as
activities in which it is important to perform calculations; serviceability
defined as activities in which it is important to render service to other
people). These concepts are similar to the "generalized work activities"
and "basic and cross-functional skills" included in the Occupational
Information Network (O*NETTM), the Department of Labor's
replacement for the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. In operation, the
five skill levels crossed with the 13 major skill specializations produce
43 occupational "classes."1 With the invocation of minor skill
specializations, 121 occupational groups are formed, and with the

addition of the 128 "main tasks" criteria, 1,211 occupations are
formed.
United Kingdom
The United Kingdom replaced two earlier classification systems, the
Classification of Occupations and Dictionary of Occupational Titles
(CODOT) and the 1980 version of the Classification of Occupations
(CO80) with its Standard Occupational Classification. This effort was
coincident with the revision of ISCO-68, so an effort was made "to
achieve the closest feasible harmonization" between the British SOC
and ISCO-88 (White, 1993). Beginning with the 350 entities in the
1980 Classification of Occupations, modifications were made to fit with
ISCO classification criteria. These new code groups were tried out
against data from the 1981 census of population and a sample of job
vacancies sent to job centers. The resulting structure had 9 major
groups, 22 submajor groups, 77 minor groups, and 371 occupational
unit groups.
Canada
Canada replaced its Canadian Classification and Dictionary of
Occupations (CCDO) in 1991 with "two classifications described as the
National Occupational Classification and the Standard Occupational
Classification" (Nijhowne and Silver, 1993). The two classifications
share a common framework: a hierarchical structure with 514 "unit"
groups and 139 "minor" groups in common. The minor groups are
organized into 47 major groups in the Standard Occupational
Classification (SOC 1991) and into 26 major groups in the National
Occupational Classification (NOC 1991). Both have 10 broad
occupational categories at the top of the hierarchy.
The SOC 1991 is primarily used for enumeration purposes (e.g., for
the Canadian census coding of occupations). The 514 unit groups are
described in terms of the principal tasks and duties of the jobs in the
unit group. The NOC 1991 also contains other characteristics of the
group, such as educational requirements, consistent with its purpose
of classifying and describing occupations for labor market transaction.
The titles shown as examples are generally the same for the two
systems, "but some are unique to each classification" (p. 305).
Regarding the military, the SOC 1991 includes just two groups,
commissioned officers and other ranks. The NOC 1991 has these two
groups, but they include only those military jobs that do not have a
civilian counterpart. Military jobs with civilian counterparts are placed

in the appropriate occupational unit group within the NOC 1991. The
NOC 1991 is used to classify 25,000 job titles into 522 unit groups and
does not contain the dictionary-like definitions of its predecessor.
Rather, it "serves as a framework whose main function is to provide
structure and meaning to the labour market as a whole (Roberts,
1993:320)." One component of NOC 1991 is a matrix, defined by skill
level (four levels of type and length of education, training, or
experience required for employment in an occupation) and skill type
(broadly organized into 9 broad occupational categories, omitting the
military category from the 10 broad categories). The 139 minor groups
are displayed in this matrix.
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYTIC SYSTEMS

Position Analysis Questionnaire
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) (McCormick et al., 1969)
is a worker-oriented job analysis technique with a long history of
research, development, and use with a variety of human resources
applications. The PAQ consists of 187 items listing work behaviors and
job elements at a level of abstraction that permits work to be
described across a broad range of occupations. Completed by subjectmatter experts (job incumbents, supervisors, or job analysts who are
very familiar with job content), the PAQ reflects a simple model of
work performance following an information input--processing--work
output sequence. PAQ items are organized into six divisions:
information input (e.g., use of written materials), mental processes
(e.g., problem solving), work output (e.g., assembling), relationships
with other persons (e.g., instructing), job context (e.g., high
temperature), and other job characteristics (e.g., work schedule). Fivepoint response scales are used to assess importance, time spent,
extent of use, possibility of occurrence, and applicability of job
elements. "Does not apply" is also provided as an option for all items.
The developers of the PAQ provide computerized scoring services
and a normative database that permits comparisons of jobs in one
organization to similar jobs in other organizations or to all jobs in the
database. In addition to summary statistics for job elements (PAQ
items), factor analytically derived job dimension scores (e.g., visual
input from devices/materials) and estimates of attributes required to
perform the job (e.g., visual acuity) can be obtained. This information
can be used to estimate the validity of tests of job attributes used for
selection purposes. PAQ scores can also be used for job evaluation, to
estimate pay rates based on normative wage data for similar jobs in
the U.S. economy.
The PAQ has been widely used by human resource professionals
and researchers. It has spawned a substantial body of research
studies. Major advantages of the instrument include its broad
applicability across occupations and availability of the normative
database. Numerous criticisms have also been raised by reviewers,
including its advanced reading level (a college graduate reading level is
required, according to Ash and Edgell, 1975), its content geared too
heavily toward manufacturing occupations for an instrument that
purports to apply to all jobs (DeNisi et al., 1987), and results that are
too general in nature to specify the type of work actually done in a job.
In response to the criticism that the PAQ is too heavily weighted
toward blue-collar occupations, in 1986 the PAQ's authors introduced a
second worker-oriented instrument called the Professional and
Managerial Position Questionnaire (PMPQ). Designed for analysis of
managerial, scientific, technical, and staff jobs, the PMPQ consists of
98 items assessing 6 job functions (planning/scheduling, processing of
information and ideas, exercising judgment, communicating,
interpersonal activities and relationships, and technical activities),
personal requirements (e.g., education and training required), and
other information (e.g., personnel supervised). As with the PAQ,
computerized scoring services and normative data are also available
for the PMPQ.
Fleishman Job Analysis System

The Fleishman Job Analysis System (FJAS) is based on extensive
experimental and factor analytic research on the nature of human
abilities (Fleishman and Quaintance, 1984). Conducted over a 40-year
period, this research program consisted of a wide variety of laboratory
tasks designed to elicit performance from subjects drawing on one or
more hypothesized underlying abilities. Task batteries were
systematically varied to hone in on specific abilities and to delineate
the boundaries of their application. Thus, the research linked task
characteristics to ability requirements to produce the Fleishman
Taxonomy of Human Abilities. The Fleishman taxonomy provides
detailed descriptions of 52 abilities, including cognitive (e.g., oral
comprehension, number facility), physical (e.g., explosive strength,
arm-hand steadiness), psychomotor (e.g., rate control, reaction time),
and sensory-perceptual (e.g., depth perception, speech recognition)
domains. Nine social-interactive abilities (e.g., persuasion, persistence)
and 13 job skills and knowledge (e.g., mechanical knowledge, driving)

are the most recent additions (Fleishman, 1992).
A measurement system was also developed to evaluate jobs and
tasks for their requisite abilities. The ability requirement scales
(Fleishman, 1992) provide definitions, additional information to
differentiate each ability from other similar abilities in the taxonomy,
and 7-point behaviorally anchored rating scales to aid subject matter
experts in estimating the amount of each ability needed to successfully
perform a job or task. If tasks are rated, an ability profile for a job can
be taken as an average (or weighted average, e.g., by task
importance) of abilities required across tasks. Reliability and interrater
agreement are well established (see Fleishman and Mumford, 1988),
as is the construct validity of the taxonomy and methods (Fleishman
and Mumford, 1989). The FJAS has been especially useful in the
development of valid tests linked to job requirements (Fleishman and
Mumford, 1988, 1989).
Occupational Analysis Inventory and the General Work Inventory

The Occupational Analysis Inventory (OAI) is designed to be more
relevant to occupational education and guidance, rather than to
applied problems in the work setting, which are the focus of systems
like the position analysis questionnaire (Cunningham et al., 1983). The
inventory includes 617 items, called "work elements," divided across
the five categories of information received, mental activities, work
behavior, work goals, and work context. Each item is rated on one of
four scales: significance, extent, applicability, or a special scale for that
element. The three nonspecific scales are relative ratings with
adjectivally anchored scale points, e.g., "to a very small extent" at the
lower end of the extent scale and "to a great extent" at the higher
end. The OAI is characterized as a research tool and it is stated that it
is "advisable for the OAI job rater to have college-level reading
comprehension, plus some preparatory orientation and practice with
the instrument" (Cunningham, 1988:981).
Empirical work has been completed to evaluate the reliability and
validity of the OAI (Cunningham, 1988; Cunningham et al., 1983). A
study of the reliability of OAI ratings was conducted using 12 job
analysts and 21 trained psychology graduate students who rated 215
jobs using written task descriptions from the U.S. Employment
Service. Correlations were computed between two independent raters
for each OAI work element. The mean correlation was .53 and the
median was .56. Several studies aimed at evaluating the construct
validity of the OAI have been conducted, including the comparisons of

clusters of occupations obtained with the OAI on several tests and
inventories (68 of the 92 measures showed statistically significant
discrimination between the clusters), the prediction of mean
occupational scores on the General Aptitude Test Battery using OAI
factor scores, (median cross-validated multiple correlations were .60
for mental and .24 for motor abilities), bivariate correlations between
OAI attribute-requirement estimates and mean scores of job
incumbents (statistically significant correlations at the .05 level were
found for 38 of 55 analyses), and analyses of variance to relate OAI
need-requirement estimates to job satisfaction scores (12 of 15
analyses provided supporting evidence).
The OAI shows generally excellent measurement characteristics,
when it is applied in the recommended manner--using college
educated, trained analysts. Most of the reported empirical work has
been conducted using "paper jobs," that is, written job descriptions
from the U.S. Employment Service. It is not clear that it would work as
well if used in the field by job incumbents, supervisors, or other
occupational experts, many of whom would not be college-trained or
be available for special training on the OAI.
A replacement for the OAI, the General Work Inventory (GWI), is
shorter and written less technically and could be a more practical
alternative for large-scale data collection. This instrument was
developed for use by "any literate respondent who is familiar with the
job to be analyzed" (Cunningham et al., 1990:34). It has 268 items
organized into 8 sections and uses "part of the job" and "extent of
occurrence" rating scales, both of which have 9 points and are
adjectivally anchored. Research using this inventory in the military
showed mean retest reliabilities (for single raters) of .62 across all
items, and a mean correlation of profiles of ratings (again, for single
raters) of .74, comparable with other similar studies. Ballentine et al.
(1992) used the GWI to create a hierarchical structure of Air Force
occupations that showed intuitive meaning and corresponded to
existing Air Force classifications, although the comparison was
somewhat influenced by artifactual correspondence between the two
systems.
The stream of work represented by the OAI and GWI demonstrates
well the utility of using a descriptive system designed to be applied to
the general population of occupations but still retaining enough
specificity to provide meaningful differentiations between occupations,
to link to assessments of persons, and to form useful occupational

structures based on the information obtained from the system.
Common Metric Questionnaire

The common metric questionnaire (CMQ) (The Psychological
Corporation, 1993) was developed by Harvey as a "worker-oriented"
job analysis instrument designed to have applicability to a broad range
of exempt and nonexempt jobs. It is organized into five major sections
(general background, contacts with people, making decisions, physical
and mechanical activities, and work setting) with several subsections
in each. In addition to general background items that ask about
respondent and job characteristics (e.g., tenure in present job, work
schedule), the CMQ consists of 242 behaviorally specific items (e.g., in
order to perform your job, do you use desktop or personal
computers?). A matrix response format is used, such that if an item is
indicated as performed, the respondent is asked to provide ratings for
up to four additional scales (e.g., frequency, criticality, consequence of
error). Thus, amount of information provided and amount of time
needed to complete the instrument varies according to job scope and
complexity.
A major advantage of the CMQ, according to its author, is the
possibility of comparing even very dissimilar jobs by virtue of the
instrument's common metric of work descriptors. This may be useful
for purposes of establishing job progression and compensation
systems. Broad applicability of the instrument is further supported by
its use of an eighth-grade reading level, so that most job incumbents
can complete it without assistance, and absolute rather than relative
rating scales, so that responses can be compared across jobs. The
CMQ can be scored in terms of 80 factor analytically-derived work
dimensions or at the item level, thus supporting human resource
applications requiring relatively abstract (e.g., job classification) or
specific (e.g., job descriptions) information.
The CMQ is a recent product, and there does not yet exist a
substantial professional literature concerning its usage. The goals that
Harvey set for the CMQ, however, particularly concerning ease of use
and comparability of data across disparate jobs, are laudable and
potentially fill a gap among worker-oriented job analysis instruments
that preceded it.
Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis Inventory-Closed

Ended
Developed by the Office of Personnel Management, the purpose of
the Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis Inventory-Closed
Ended (MOSAIC) is to collect data on a number of occupational
descriptors in a standardized manner across occupations within large
occupational families, and then to provide that information in readily
accessible electronic databases. MOSAIC has been described as
follows: "This system uses an automated occupational analysis
approach that eliminates costly redundancies in the collection of data
and provides technically sound and legally defensible procedures and
documentation to support human resource management (HRM)
decisions" (Gregory and Park, 1992:ii).
The report by Gregory and Park illustrates the use of MOSAIC. The
occupation focus of the research project was executives, managers,
and supervisors. A standard questionnaire was developed and
administered to a stratified random, sample of over 20,000 federal
executives, managers, and supervisors. The questionnaire contained a
diverse set of items, or job descriptors, including: 151 job tasks rated
in terms of importance for effective job performance; 22 competencies
(a human quality or characteristic associated with the performance of
managerial tasks, e.g., knowledge, skill, ability, trait, motive, or selfconcept) rated in terms of importance, and needed proficiency at
entry; and personal and organizational styles. Data were presented
showing the percentage of respondents of various occupational types
indicating they performed tasks, found competencies needed at entry,
or were important for success. No data on interrater agreement were
presented, but a 49 percent return rate was obtained.
Work Profiling System

The Work Profiling System (WPS), a product of Saville and
Holdsworth (1990), is a worker-oriented job analysis instrument
supported by expert system computer technology. The WPS is
organized into two parts: job tasks and job context. The job tasks
section consists of 325 behavior description items (called "tasks")
organized into 8 sections (managing tasks, managing people, receiving
information, thinking creatively, working with information,
communicating, administrating, physical activities) and 30 subsections
(e.g., planning/implementing, working with equipment/machinery).
Examples of items ("tasks") include: planning a course or route for a
journey or voyage; looking after the needs of young children; driving a
car, van, or light truck. Items are rated on scales of time spent,
importance, and effect of poor performance. Part two, job context,
addresses 28 topics, such as education, training, and experience levels
needed to perform the job, responsibility for financial resources, types
of interpersonal contact, and job-related travel.
Goals for the system include providing an integrated and userfriendly system for job analysis and providing a knowledge base that
can serve as the basis for matching people to jobs. Worker attributes
are inferred from task ratings using an expert system derived from
ratings of attribute-task linkages provided by experienced occupational
psychologists. In addition to person-job match, this information base is
intended to support such human resource applications as job
descriptions, job classification, performance appraisal criteria, job
design, and human resource planning.
As is the case with the CMQ, the WPS is a recent product that does
not yet have a substantial professional literature concerning its usage.
Its objectives as stated by its developers are ambitious, providing a
comprehensive methodology for building human resource systems.
Note
Not 65, as might be expected, since some of the possible cells are not used
because of inadequate sample sizes for purposes of statistical reporting. A
lower bound of 5,000 job incumbents in the population was set for inclusion of
an occupation.
1
Uses of the Job Description & Job Analysis

By Amarendra Bhushan
Summary: Many companies and managers use job descriptions and
job analysis to set employee goals and objectives, so they are tied into
the needs of the work unit or company. In this article, you'll learn what
job descriptions (and job analysis) are, their uses and applications,
and how they can be used to improve performance.
What is job analysis? Before we can discuss job descriptions, it is

important to understand the distinction between descriptions and
specifications.
Job analysis is the combination of job descriptions and job
specifications. For simplification purposes, "specifications" are the skills
and background necessary to perform the responsibilities of the job.
Since specifications are often a matter of conjecture and/or judgment,
we have often advised that they not be listed on a job description and,
if they are, that they have been determined by more than one person
with the help of a professional analyst.
(An example is pertinent: Too often we've seen "Bachelor's Degree
required" written on a job description, and just as often a bachelor's
degree is not necessary to do the job. However, three years'
experience in the particular position may indeed be necessary. Even
then we suggest that the specification be listed as "3-5 years
experience required." Always leave yourself "working room." The
former, i.e., B.A., may be "discriminatory;" the latter is acceptable.)
What is a job description? A job description is "simply" a list of
responsibilities and functions that are required in a particular position.
(Job descriptions are often called position descriptions, and more
appropriately so because like jobs can be combined into one
description, i.e., clerk, secretary, executive secretary.) Each
responsibility should start with a verb which describes the activity.
These verbs should be "standardized" or understood by those using
the descriptions and the person doing the job.
Some examples of the more commonly used verbs are: analyzes,
approves, authorizes, conducts, controls, coordinates, develops,
evaluates, expedites, inputs, maintains, operates, performs, plans,
recommends, schedules, supervises, trains, and verifies. There are
hundred of such verbs and by using such terms that most people
understand, one minimizes the chances that the responsibilities will be
misinterpreted or misunderstood.
How do we get the information? Usually, especially for exempt
positions, information about a position is obtained by interviewing the
incumbent. For nonexempt positions, interviewing might take place,

but usually the information is obtained through the use of a
questionnaire.
The questionnaire form cannot be duplicated on this page, but the
contents are as follows:
Name:
Title:
Supervisor's Title:
Branch/Department:
In a brief statement, describe the basic purpose of your job. Why does
it exist?
What are the most important duties of your job and what percent of
your time do you spend on each? Answer what the responsibility is,
how it is performed, and why (the desired results of the performance).
Additional Responsibilities: List all "secondary" responsibilities or tasks
that you perform.
What are the necessary equipment, instruments, and/or materials you
use to perforn your job, and how frequently do you use them?
Assignment of Duties:
( ) Who assigns your work? (Names and titles)
( ) When are your asisgnments made?
( ) How are assignments given. e.g., written, oral, etc.?
( ) Who reviews and approves your work?
Decision-Making
( ) Describe the specific decisions your are required to make in
performing your job.
( ) What kinds of decisions must be referred to your
supervisor/manager?
Reporting/Record Keeping
( ) What records or reports are you accountable for?
( ) For whom and what purpose are they kept?
Supervisory Responsibilities
( ) Do you supervise other employees?
( ) If yes, how many and what are their job titles?
If you were promoted, what type of educational training, job-related
experience or other abilities would your replacement need? How much
time would be needed for the training or experience (6 months, 1
years, 2 years, etc.)?
While most answer this questionnaire seriously, periodically someone
will break the monotony of seeing "how important" various job are by
listing, "Primary Responsibility = Making coffee." "Why does your job
exist? = Because I'm the only one willing to do it." "Who supervises
you? = Everybody." "How long would it take to train a replacement? =
Regular coffee, 1 day; decaf, 1 day; espresso, 2 years plus a B.A. in
coffee management and grounds."
Do not be surprized if some employees, especially in a large company,
do not know who their supervisor is. It's one of the reasons the
question is put at the top of the form. And, the answer or lack of an
answer sometimes points to real management problems such as whu
performance reviews are six month late in being done.
Also, do not be surprized if the responsibilities listed are different than
the perception of the job by a supervisor or manager. Quite often we
find employees assuming responsibilities and authority which is not
theirs: it's how mini-empires are built.
We actually look for such inconsistencies, and when time permits we
do so by have the immediate supervisor answer the same
questionnaire for the position, then compare the answers.
How long does it take to "do" a job description? The employee and
supervisor may take up to an hour (sometimes more) to write a
meaningful job description. When we do have supervisors writing
descriptions for all subordinates, we often give as much as two weeks
to do them so that boredom doesn't overcome the supervisor and s/he

gets sloppy toward the end of the process. It takes another hour,
sometimes up to three hours, to "analyze" and verify the answers.
And, it takes another half-hour to an hour to put the answers into a
usable format (see the sample description below). Therefore, and
perhaps one of the reasons why so few companies write and maintain
them, it can take as much as four hours per description. (The next
time a compensation analyst tells you that the fee for setting up a
compensation system would be $40,000-$60,000, you'll know part of
the reason why.)
How do we use the job description? There are many uses for the job
description. The usual primary reason is to establish wage and salary
ranges and grades. Before one can use a salary survey, one must
know that apples are compared to apples. Salary surveys are always
based on descriptions and specifications. Therefore, we use
descriptions to gain equity in compensation, i.e., paying what the job
is worth. (Paying what the incumbent is "worth" is a matter for another
article...on performance evaluation. Job evaluation with job
descriptions is meant to judge what is done, not how well.) Because
one may reach equity, there is less of a chance for discriminatory pay
policies, just one more reason why job descriptions are important.
A second use is in the performance appraisal. Too often, during a
review, an employee will say, "I didn't know that was expected of me."
With a job description signed by the employee, that excuse cannot be
made.
Scary as it may sound or appear, some of our clients actually do give
the job description to job applicants, job applicants who are seriously
being considered for a position. Here again, the applicant who gets the
job can't come back after several months and say that s/he didn't
know that that was a responsibility. (Of course, descriptions must be
updated as the job changes: in today's electronic age, that may well
be up to four times a year.)
Just ten years ago, most writings about job evaluation stated that the
process existed to "systematically compare jobs in an organization in
order to offer a solution to the problem of pay inequity." Now, in part
thanks to laws and the litigous nature of the workplace, we know that
there are several uses, often "protecting the company" from claims
being primary among them.
So, what's a job description look like when it's done? I am only going
to reproduce one here, this from a bank, used because banks are so
nicely structured and have such a great history of having descriptions.
But, it should be noted that the job description adds order, if not more
structure, to structure...and that's not bad in a chaotic world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------POSITION: SENIOR ACCOUNTANT Rev. 8/31/95 REPORTS TO: VP
Controller
PRIMARY FUNCTION: External reporting including SEC forms 10Q &
10K, OTS TFR, and the Bank's audited financial statements. Maintains
the Bank's departmental budgeting system. Performs complex month
close procedures including testing interest income and expense
reasonableness and accounting for MBS investments. Performs special
projects as assigned.
A. Departmental Responsibilities
Operational Accounting
a. Performs monthly interest income and expense reasonableness
tests.
b. Accounts for monthly P&I payments on mortgaged-backed
securities.
c. Updates monthly departmental budget templates.
d. Reviews fixed asset schedules quarterly.
e. Reviews monthly back reconciliations.
f. Reviews month-close procedures and performs a detailed analytical
review.
g. Updates operating expense budget bi-monthly.
Financial Reporting
a. Conducts quarterly TFR reporting.
b. Prepares SEC forms 10Q and 10K.

c. Completes schedules required for quarterly report to shareholders.
d. Prepares financial statements for the quarterly report to
shareholders.
e. Completes templates for investor publications such as Moodys, S&P.
f. Responsible for completing the Bank's audited financial statements
and annual report.
Other
a. Updates risk assessment requirements for internal audit on an
annual basis.
b. Accounts for executive retirement plans bi-annually.
c. Updates and revises loss study in July and December.
d. Monitors and controls expense items as part of analytical review of
month-end financials.
e. Maintains specific internal control procedures within the department.
f. Conducts daily wire procedures and implements and changes needed
to wire processing.
Information Systems
a. Manages all service bureau maintenance and documentation
requirements.
b. Performs various computer-related tasks including: systems
problems, enhancements or conversions with service bureau;
addresses various ISC related problems.
c. Administers Bank's remote reporting requirements.
Financial Reporting
a. Prepares the monthly Board Report and FRB Collateral Report.
b. Assists in preparing for the Bank's annual financial statement audit.

Cash Management
a. Manages daily liquidity needs.
Other duties as required.
Meet Amarendra Bhushan, A leading Strategic Human Resource
Consultent, MBA from American university of athens, greece, also
editing The European journal of NRI finance magazine TRIBUNE).
As one of the leading article writer, and corporate hotel professional.
Advisor to various organizations and hotels. He is an elected member
of south Indian hotel and restaurant federation. Now staying at city of
Athens Greece

Job Evaluation Guideline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Job Evaluation Guideline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Job Evaluation

Job Evaluation - What is it ?

Some Principles of Job Evaluation

Job evaluation can aid organisational problem solving as it

Job Evaluation - The Future

Job Evaluation - More

Merit Rating - BSI definition (32542)

NBPI Job Evaluation report No. 83 - Supplement

Information on job content is useful to a company for a large number

CUPE/UBC JOB EVALUATION MANUAL

This factor measures the general knowledge and specialized or

Two years post secondary

Partial high school or

Three years post secondary

Full high school or

Four years post secondary

One year post

Five or more years post

comprehensively understand the work elements refers to such

Factor 2 Learning Experience

Assess compressed time by dividing the reasonable amount of

Degree Compressed Time

Elapsed / Real Time

Over 6 months and under 1

Over 1 years and under 3

Over 1 year and under 1

Over 3 years and under 4

Over 1 years and under 2

Over 4 years and under 6

minimum learning experience refers to time spent on related

Tasks are clearly defined.

Little planning required. Tasks arranged by

Assignments are covered by well defined

Most unusual problems are referred to the

Repetitive and identical in

Similar in nature with

Assignments are covered by broadly

Direction is sought when apparent solutions

Assignments frequently involve modifying

Supervisors are available in relation to

Assignments involve development of

Variable in nature, requiring

Consultation will usually take place in a peer

Factor 3 Notes to Raters

Factor 4 Consequence of Error

Consider the consequences on UBC of making judgemental errors in

Degree Incorrect or inappropriate recommendations, decisions,

Little effect on financial costs and/or

Little effect on service to the public.

Obvious consequences on financial costs

Requires intervention to deal with repercussions.

Serious, usually short term consequences

Requires intervention by head of the department to deal with repercussions.

Major, frequently long-term consequences

Factor 4 Notes to Raters

Factor 5 Financial Responsibility

the responsibility for financial processing

Handling or processing cash, purchase requisitions, cheques, bonds, etc.

Responsibility for initiating requests or authorizing the payment of materials delivered or

Signing authority to make expenditures or recoveries according to detailed written

Administering a budget or contract.

Authority to sign official University contracts.

Financial forecasting and making recommendations based on those forecasts.

Factor 5 Notes to Raters