Introduction
The perspective on choosing the correct job evaluation method mainly depends on the advantages to the specific job position and duties performed. The ability to define and correlate the overall aspects to each method provides an understanding towards the fundamentals on job evaluation. The four methods available are ranking, classification, factor comparison, and point method to choose in utilizing the aspects to assist in job evaluation.
The human management and senior management team incorporates one the methods that is geared to managing the evaluation processing (George and Jones, 2005). The different criteria’s regarding each method outlines the benefits for the management team that reinforces the company’s primary goal.
In the pursuit to demonstrate a functional organization that is able to effectively evaluate the job descriptive identification to balancing the desired outcome. The four areas are ranking, classification, factor comparison, and point method that human resources management team decides on to implement accordingly (Rachels, 1999).
The objective for human resources management team is to connect the internal company departments with the correct methodology for computing a concise measurement of performance (HRM, 2008). Therefore, the senior management team plays a pivotal role to instill to the consensus on the attributes of the job evaluation methods to making effective decisions.
Ranking Method
The ranking method is one of the simplest to administer for jobs that are compared to each other based on the overall worth of the job to the company. The work of a job is usually leveled based on judgment of talent, skill, effort on physical and mental, responsibility, and working conditions. The actual advantages related to ranking are simple to implement towards the specific job descriptions. In addition, the very effective approach related to ranking is when there are relatively few jobs to be evaluated from 1-40 employees that provide a more direct manageable handling of the evaluations (Shermerhorn, 2008). The disadvantages associated with the ranking method details the difficult to administer as the number of jobs increases to rank judgments that are subjective.
There are no standards used for comparison in new jobs would have to be compared with existing jobs to determined its appropriate rank. The ranking process does need to be repeated each time a new job is added to the organization for a better positioning of determination of the rank. Therefore, the ordering process within the content of the ranking method by placing job titles on cards and then order the titles by relative importance to the organization.
The weighting and paired comparison provides the necessary components to effectively grouping procedure to determine the appropriate salary levels. In doing so, the job evaluation method and practices associated with ranking to formulate an ordering of jobs with respect to its value or worth in the organization.
Classification Method
The jobs are classified into an existing category or grade structure within the context of a hierarchy. Unlike the ranking method, the classification method is mostly considered more detailed to the actual job specifics to determine the evaluation outcome. On each level in the category or grade structure has a description and associated job titles. The job is assigned to a specific category or grade providing the closest match to the job.
The classification of a position is decided by senior management by comparing the complete job with the appropriate job grading corporate standards. The measure to ensure the equity in job grading and wage rates, a cohesive set of job grading standards and instructions are used continuously. Because of the different attributes in duties, knowledge and skills or other aspects of trades and labor jobs, for instance, the job grading standards are developed mainly along occupational lines.
The standards do not attempt to describe every job duties assignments of each related position in the occupation covered within the organization. The standards identify and description of the key characteristics of occupations which are significant for distinguishing different levels of work. The human resources management team and senior management team defines the key characteristics in a way as to provide a basis for assigning the appropriate grade level to all positions in the occupation to which the standards apply. The classification method advantages are similar to the ranking method by being simple to implement and processing for the internal management team to access accordingly (Williams, 2002).
However, the category and grade structure exits independent of the jobs that new jobs can be then classified more easily than the ranking method. The disadvantages with the classification method is the subjective processing mindset and the standard used for comparison of the category and grade structure may have built in biases that perhaps affect certain groups of employees, including females or minorities. The jobs may appear to fit within more than one category and grade specifications that defined to resist overlap one another. The overlaps in the descriptions and factors used to identify the grade would lead to problems when assigning jobs to the category and grades where there is an overlap that exist.
The classification method also presents a government classification that relates to positions within the federal government and how they are organized. The position classification section includes information on qualification and job standards for different positions. The section contains messages and memorandums that provide information pertaining to civilian position classification, grade programs, officer classifications, position vacancies, and other detailed information. Therefore, the job evaluation using the classification method provides practices of ordering jobs or positions that identifies the related values to the organization.
Factor Comparison
The set of compensable factors are identified as a determining aspect on the worth of job duties within the organization. The number of compensable factors is around 4 or 5 that provides an assessment regarding the evaluation of the job. For instance, the compensable factors are the indicators that responsibilities, effort, working conditions, and skills outlined the main characteristics necessary. The benchmark range relating to the jobs are identified as such by selected as having certain particular characteristics.
In which, the characteristics are related to equitable pay not overpaid or underpaid as well as range of the factors that each factor on some jobs would be at the low end of the factor while others would be at the high end of the factor. The jobs are identified by priced and the total pays for each job that is divided into pay for each factor (Zaccaro and Kilmoski, 2001).
The matrix to establish a differential aspect of the factors method compared to other methods is in the process regarding rate of pay for each factor and for each benchmark job. The factor adjustments may require to be made to the matrix to ensure equitable dollar weighting of the factors. The other jobs in the organization are then compared with the benchmark jobs and rates of pay for each factor are summed to determine the rates of pay for each of the other jobs.
The advantages associated with factors method are the value of the job that is expressed in monetary terms. It can also be applied to a wide range of jobs and can be applied to newly created jobs. The noted disadvantages are in relation to the pay for each factor that is based on judgments that are subjective, however, the standard used for determining the pay for each factor may have build in biases that would affect certain groups of employees.
Point Method
The point method provides a set of compensable factors that are identified as determining the worth of jobs that is similar like the others methods. The identifiable compensable factors include the major categories of skill, responsibilities, effort, and working conditions that provide an initial assessment. However, the point method takes a more direct descriptive measure to identifying what attribute is required or needed, in order for the senior management team to assign appropriately.
The point method provides a comparable viewpoint to factors method by the usage of the factor comparison to effectively perform a job evaluation. Each of the factors associated will be divided into levels or degrees that are then assigned to points. Each job specific is rated using the job evaluation instrument and the points for each factor are summed to form a total point score for the particular job. The jobs are then grouped by total point score and assigned to wage/salary grades so that similarly rated jobs would be placed in the wage/salary grade level. The comparatives with the other methods are in advantages to the value of the job is expressed in monetary terms (McShane, 2006).
The pay for each factor is based on judgments that are subjective. In addition, the factors are used to define factors for a determination relating to certain groups of employees that are either females or minorities. Although, the stated aspect for point method can be applied to a wide range of jobs unlike the other methods and can be applied to newly created jobs. The at times biases differentiate from the other methods indicated by implying recurring point measures to facilitate the corresponding job evaluation processing.
The Human Resources Role in Determining Which Method Is Better
The pursuit of a corporation is to have satisfied employees that will perform well fort the company to reach its set goals. The human resource management primary objective is to foster a sense of leadership by assisting employees and senior management to working together in a harmonious way in determining the right assigned job evaluation method to utilize. The human resource management must provide a resolution to differences and ensure a correct method is implemented in order to present the company the right assessment. The outcome for accomplishing an accurate return from the job evaluation method provides higher employee satisfaction, low employee turnover, and a greater productivity performance.
The fundamental understanding of the corporate strategy is the need for businesses to be aware that they are dependent on the employees. The corporation will be able to handle situations that are complex and complicated that can involve several entities to reach a resolution towards the appropriate job evaluation method. Therefore, the need for a well organized and structure human resource management objective is imperative to succeeding in organization. The outcome will be for the human resources and senior management team to concentrate on the production of the business objectives within a positive working environment (Williams, 2008).
The human resource management agenda is to address the issues that prevent the productivity of the company’s duties to be performed that plays a pivotal role to determining the right job evaluation method to implement. The issues can range from adequate compensation to limited job description for an actual assessment.
The methodology and decision making plays a pivotal role in how the specific job duties assist in the job evaluation method to use appropriately methods for the process. If the determination is not handled in a well balanced effort the job evaluation method assessment can be negative and taking appropriately action is necessary. When there are too many occurrences of bad resolutions or determination by the human resource department, there can be high turnover rates, and conflict occurs that can hurt the bottom line. Therefore, the need for a good approach and protocol is necessary to handle the most delicate situations to actually detect the right job evaluation method.
The possible impact of specific determination on the method used based on a particular job can result in re-evaluation of the organization employees. This will be mainly due to the reported incidents of activities that are targeted to a small group, in order to remedy the initial situation. For instance, the issue of compensation not being at the current market value encourages unsatisfactory feelings towards the company.
The additional work due to season changes or unexpected shift in additional consumers provided the opportunity for a discussion to compensate the employees. The willingness for human resources to discuss the employee and senior management concerns in the pursuit to balance out what the company can do to resolve the issue is warranted related to processing of each method.
The impact of the final decision from human resources after senior management has signed off the proposal to utilizing the point method that includes the compensation package can make other departments anxious to address their concerns. The need for redirecting the cost to compensate one department actually renders a deficient in another department is a balancing act that opens up additional concerns. The human resource management team must acknowledge the situation to the company to formulate a streamline process.
The issue must be address in a manner that shows leadership to tackle the situation and power to reach a resolution in an effective and timely manner. In addition, the human resources department will showcase the willingness to being open and seeing all sides of the issue and to instruct the directions of going forward accordingly. The actions taken by the human resources department will follow suit to the company’s policy that is in enforce to implement the preferred method that balances out for the preferred job evaluation assessment.
A performance appraisal system cannot always be replicated in another way at a different organization due to the specifics of the initial organization. For instance, the airport organization will be different than a mortgage corporation, so the effort to use a similar performance appraisal will be difficult. The main reason is the particulars of employee’s duties, company goals, and processes that limit a standard performance appraisal. The human resources department will need to create a specific performance appraisal tailored to the mechanics of the organization.
The recruiting process of new hires proposed many challenges to meeting the company’s goals for expanding the workforce with talented, trainable, productive, and exceptional employees. The recruiting situation outlined the importance for utilizing in-house resources to restructure initiatives for aligning projects related to new hires processing on track to a successfully completion (Ebert and Griffin, 2005). The obstacles presented offered an opportunity for utilizing effective communication, organizational, and project management skills that can render desired results.
The key concept is the understanding of fundamentals of a functional organizational matrix in the corporation that empowers recruiters to proactively manage the hiring process. The recruiter benefits from utilizing available resources to assist in meeting the core corporate objectives on time, in compliance, and within budget. The high level concern entails the new hires not conducting mandatory drug screening and potentially no training room for orientation – that if an effective communication model were in place a smother outlook would be present.
Therefore, the factor comparisons are the primary choice to use the method in achieving the results from the corporations. The concern framework for an organizational matrix provides the synergy needed in allowing the factors comparisons method to work effectively. The model used to share resources regarding the training room to resolve internal issues regarding job evaluation effectiveness.
The factors comparison model utilizes the planning advantage to organized ideas and identifies obstacles in a timely manner. The factors comparison model presents the best solution to immediately address the main problems identified by alerting the senior management team to the approach would be taken to meeting the tight deadline.
The factor comparisons certain tasks presented many others not being aware of the recruitment objectives. Therefore, the human resources department will have to arrange the necessary components for implementing the tasks to accomplish the internal goals. The factor comparisons assist in new job screening before orientation that could overload the additional duties from the human resources department. The identified pros within the job evaluation process reach the achievement that presents the factors method as the best one to implement.
The human resources department identification processes reinforce the difficulty to reaching a co-operative and collaboration for formulating an assessment of the job. The characteristics present a descriptive aspect to the occurring situation in most teams that solidifies when different backgrounds of the department needs are not in sync to particular attributes. The choices on how to formulate the method definitely depends on duties specifics and goals of the company to use the right method. Therefore, the factors method provides the most direct balancing aspect to delivering the expected outcome for all entities involved.
Bibliography
- Thill, John V. and Bovee, Courtland L. (2007) Excellence in Business Communication, Seventh Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
- George, Jennifer M. and Jones, Gareth R. (2005) Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior, Pearson, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
- Ebert, Ronald J. and Griffin, Ricky W. (2005) Business Essentials Fifth Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
- Rachels, James. (1999). The Elements of Moral Philosophy, Boston: McGraw-Hill College.
- Human Resource Management, HRM, (2008) Issues in Human Resource Management. University of Phoenix
- Shermerhorn, John, (2008). Organizational Behavior. Wiley, 10 Edition
- Williams, Lloyd C., (2002). Creating the Congruent Workplace: Challenges for People and Their Organizations. Journal of Greenwood Publishing Group, Incorporated. 2002, 1 (2) 17-28
- Zaccaro, Stephen, Kilmoski, Richard J. (2001). The Nature of Organizational Leadership: Understanding the Performance Imperatives Confronting Today’s Leaders. Journal of Business Ebschohost, Joseey-Bass Incorporated Publishers. 3(1) 5-35
- McShane, Steven (2006)Canadian Organizational Behaviour. McGraw-Hill Ryerson Higher Education; CANADN edition (Feb 15 2006)
- Williams, Meri (2008) The Principles of Project Management, Site Point Incorporated
