Compensation & Benefits Review Job Evaluation: Still at the Frontier
Laurent Dufetel Compensation Benefits Review 1991; 23; 53 DOI: 10.1177/088636879102300408 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

Additional services and information for Compensation & Benefits Review can be found at: Email Alerts: Subscriptions: Reprints: Permissions:

Downloaded from by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15, 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.

organization of had its roots in the &dquo. rather than the broad opportunities it offers.commodity&dquo. jobs into strategy workers-the uneducated simplified responsibilities and tasks so that unskilled. Never intended as the only way to structure a reward system. can still help companies move to &dquo. job evaluation has inevitably been misinterpreted and misused. critics do not recognize that this process can still help companies move to "new frontiers" in their development. but its need to specialize when. Without an Job Evaluation: Still at LAURENT DUFETEL the Frontier Managing by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. job evaluation’s disappointed users and academics have begun to revisit old pay-for-knowledge and pricing ideas.sagepub. Hay Group’s Worldwide Compensation Practice Many peoplework. in their development. with its breadth and adaptability. they do not recognize that this frontiers&dquo. these unique specialty jobs were difficult-if not impossible-to price. leading industrial organizations in the United States were developing sophisticated service and production technologies-technologies that required people with new. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. Instead. With few-or no-parallels in business or industry. But the key to using believe that a job evaluation 53 Downloaded from http://cbr.indepth appreciation of the advantages job evaluation provides. job evaluation actually stems not from business’s need to standardize. bulk of the labor market at the time-could execute them. Seeing only its constraints. cutting-edge capabilities and skills. .&dquo.scientific standardized that &dquo. job evaluation emerged as the most accurate and comprehensive means companies had to overcome the limitations and negative effects of pricing these. Without an indepth appreciation of the advantages job evaluation provides. All rights reserved.specialty jobs on the basis of two other compensation systems in use then (as now): pay for knowledge or pay on the basis of the labor market. Because it has been used for so long by so many organizations. in the 1920s.

no matter what level or size. jobs do not need to have fixed. But we all know people who do the right work-and more-even before they are asked for it. o Why Analyze Jobs? Is &dquo.? Some managers naively believe that employees automatically limit their behavior to what is written on a piece of paper.job description&dquo. rigid definitions. Innovation includes these elements: Seeking to use technology. if not. Fearing that job descriptions inhibit employee initiative and restrict organization added&dquo. job evaluation means taking a fresh look at its key concepts: ~ Job evaluation involves management judgments and decisions.sagepub. But to use the job evaluation approach.job evaluation in the current era will be getting back to the basics and innovating from there. still a valid concept? The fundamental argument most often leveled at job analysis is that organizing according to &dquo. job enrichment. All rights reserved. as a tool. develop. many business leaders declare that jobs cannot or should not be defined. and motivate the right people to do the work? And. And we all know people who have a special talent for avoiding work that is clearly their responsibility.job restriction&dquo. ~ Job evaluation stresses that the value of a job is the &dquo. employee involvement. or total quality assurance programs have reinforced this belief for some. that it creates for the organization. After all. . Relearning the basics of . at the same time. ~ Building bridges between quantitative job analysis (the job’s worth) and qualitative analysis (the job’s critical competencies). often subtle compromise between 54 Downloaded from http://cbr. how can we identify those that are poorly designed-and change and monitor them to serve the organization better? Is a &dquo. they are the reflection of a particular job holder-the result of an intricate.job&dquo. is misleading. by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. Recent corporate efforts aimed at freeing up obsolete job hierarchies through delayering. how can we hire. . especially the computer. but not a substitute for decisions. at any given time. we must have some sort of framework to help us understand what needs to be accomplished in an organization. they simply need to have enough content and scope to be analyzed. The point is this: Jobs do not exist as entities on their own. ~ Introducing new evaluation concepts that reflect new organizational realities. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. must be examined with an unbiased eye for the contribution it can make to the organization. a &dquo. Job evaluation sees that every job. without understanding each job’s responsibilities and scope.

measuring not what a the person is most often person actually does at a given time. How do you deal with jobs that change constantly? Some people will argue that their jobs are continuously changing on the basis of company priorities and the workload at the time.) Pressure to see things &dquo. by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. The latter is clearly underscoring the need for instruments that bridge the gap between job analysis and assessment of peoples’ talents and competencies. normally does.) What is sound job analysis? Job analysis is most useful when it successfully discerns a job’s key responsibilities or accountabilities. Done well. work the same way. the you also need to assess the person. . such as engineering.controller. job evaluation can categorize a series of typical project management jobs. obvious more even becomes responsible for. such as research and development. The job analyst must feel free to discover that the important jobs are not.what the organization needs. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. defining the end results required but retaining enough flexibility to let the incumbent figure out how to what an employee is get the work done. with negative effects reflected in reinforcing an existing bureaucracy or &dquo. it is the individual incumbent’s flexible or rigid way of carrying out that job-=-and the internal culture in which he or she works-that broadens or restricts its scope. and value to the organization. All rights reserved. it more difficult task. 55 Downloaded from http://cbr. we want the job analysis to fit what we think a controller should do. or are no longer. dull jobs to save face for their declining incumbents.&dquo. they have always been&dquo. have always worked almost exclusively on a project management basis. can sometimes be quite strong. but the type of work that to assess the job.sagepub. and what the selected incumbent is capable of or is entitled to do. what management thinks is needed. the expected ones. they contribute as called for to projects that may vary in scope. It is crucial to accurately distinguish from what company managereally responsible for and actually accomplishing ment-or even the evaluator-are predisposed to think this should be. But we run exactly the same-if not greater-risks when we simply rely on assessing peoples’ skills or market pricing a job. sometimes criticized for inadvertently or deliberately reinforcing the status quo. because the job title is &dquo. (In this case. by making people more aware of the critical jobs of the future. duration. sometimes painful exercise. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. For such situations. They feel they have no permanent or specific accountabilities . or used to do in the past. A job description does not interpret the work or encourage specific job-related behaviors. sometimes rightfully assailed for lack of insight (failing to capture the real essence of a job). But job analysis often runs the risk of being a complacent exercise. Good job analysis is a delicate.glorifying&dquo. it lends support-not restraint-to organization change. (For example. Some functions. what people are available to staff the position. But many industries.

sagepub. the Hay Guide Chart job-evaluation technology was designed with exquisite flexibility to accommodate business leaders’ needs for both knowledge/ skills assessment and pricing. Balancing Corporate and Market Value At the outset. level of professional proficiency. This imposes an inappropriate rigidity that is actually not inherent in the job evaluation process. How individual salaries should vary within ranges has been adapted in many ways: performance. These new types of jobs simply could not be surveyed on the labor market.&dquo. they were creating their own specialty jobs and teaching their employees unique techniques or processes that did not exist elsewhere. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. But like all concepts. and experts-those with the most comprehensive capabilities for the job-are paid at the top of the range. there were only two ways of rewarding employees: paying for education and skills and pricing jobs on the basis of their value on the labor market. and Eugene Benge introduced a number of innovations. Paying for Responsibility and Talent Pay still needs to relate both to jobs and people-thus the development of the concept of salary ranges. this system is not always properly implemented. For example. Following this lead. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. Edward Hay. it provides the means to integate both. a point-factor process applicable to a full spectrum of jobs.Why Evaluate Jobs? The History of Job Evaluation Job evaluation research started around the turn of the century. and seniority-all criteria related to individuals-have all been taken into account. job evaluation has become the method of choice to help leading companies in business and industry value jobs. Why is there such interest in job evaluation? Before job evaluation. The strength of the job evaluation approach. The approach preferred by Hay incorporates the idea of pay based on employee skills. Up through the 1950s. merit. Over the by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. the charts were custom-tailored 56 Downloaded from http://cbr. which. . with the National Electric Manufacturing Association/Midwest Industrial Management Association (NEMA/MIMA) program-still used in many countries under a variety of names-which was the first widely applied system. Samuel Burk. along with additional improvements. Companies that were leaders in their fields faced a problem: Because they were on the &dquo. All rights reserved. On the one hand. some companies developed their own job evaluation systems. embodied in the Hay Guide Charts. Beginners or apprentices are paid at the bottom of the salary range. ultimately resulted in the Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method. is that it does not ignore the value of pricing or the value of paying for talent. some organizations believe they do not need to (or cannot) differentiate individual pay within the same job.cutting edge.

rather than specific jobs. in fact. . The Alternatives Pay-for-SkiilslKnowledge With education and knowledge increasingly critical to business success. to Understanding Jobs and Identifying Career Paths their Moreover. anticipate recruitment needs. people will broaden their view and be more willing to cooperate. facilitating For example.strategic&dquo. All rights reserved. eight jobs for against this grid. although newer techniques and processes may be used to accomplish these goals.sagepub. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. career development. business and management by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. There are. From this grid. But until now. It is tempting to embrace the pay-for-skills/knowledge approach in the case of knowledge workers who play an increasingly important role in many organizations. Skills-based pay can be the compensation strategy most appropriate during this transition. the But should we be concept of paying for knowledge and skills is very appealing. they featured a standard scale (Hay or Standard Points) to allow intercompany compensation comparisons. skills-based pay has had limited application outside the hourly worker group. top one international company uses job evaluation to executive of the positioned with every career in potential ladders. This does not contradict-but is in complete harmony with-job evaluation tenets that would define pay increase rules below and at the lowest (acceptable) job grade. Furthermore. the company can also prepare nominations from incumbents’ monitor and growth new jobs. skills-based pay inevitable the or attempts to overturn of time. or gauging overall organization effectiveness. This intent has never changed. what with do they know? paying people for what they know or for what they Let’s consider the case for skills-based pay on the shop or blue-collar level-its original application. 57 Downloaded from http://cbr. the flexibility of job analysis and job evaluation goes way beyond not Charts Guide the original intent. 1000 its rank &dquo. consequently. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. many applications of directly related to managing pay-such as mapping the organization. One assumption is that pay for knowledge encourages people to develop their capabilities.reflect the unique internal value system of each organization: On the other. Some industries face the challenge of bringing compensation for their lowest-level jobs and their incumbents’ skills up to a minimum economically viable-and humanly acceptable-threshold. and step in for one another. because it features an incentive that eases the painful process of retraining. division to division in the organization. the system. work as teams. another is that by stressing individuals’ skills. it is difficult to discuss the strengths or weaknesses of taking this approach with this has not yet felt the effects type of employee group.

not Internal Market Pricing surface. Moreover. And if you choose to go without a system to handle equity. reflecting the balance between supply and demand. After high school. The best way to illustrate this is to look at European banks. and does not generate conflicts.lion’s share&dquo. All rights reserved. On the . your position is surely stronger when you have some way to gauge the relative worth of key skills within and across employee groups. of the payroll.sagepub. where systems that are very similar to skills-based pay have been widely used. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. Or does it? The labor market is unlike other markets.regardless of their real ability and willingness to learn.equity and external competitiveness create conflict. for the same reasons. Learning credits often are granted automatically on the basis of seniority. you need some method of comparing your company with other companies. But this does not eliminate tensions and competition around performance and pay. The labor market does not work by the same criteria and rules as Wall Street or the Chicago Board of Trade. there is merchandise that can be easily identified and transferred. yet they often are not the most capable because much of their knowledge may be outdated or their actual learning experience may not be really relevant. pricing jobs this way seems fair and realistic.equal learning opportunity&dquo. It seems as if this pricing method does not require complex methodologies. does not create an administrative burden. and a group of other mechanisms that ensure 58 Downloaded from http://cbr. All this does not help to reinforce an achievement-oriented culture. Here. Their pay rises on the basis of the type and number of in-service courses they complete. an abundance of supply and demand. they exist widely throughout business and industry. a devastating battle may ensue each time you need to correct a deviation. People are primarily concerned with what they have to learn to get more money. Employees quickly learn to fight for &dquo. Pay-for-skillslknowledge can easily be misinterpreted or misused. Skills-based pay does provide a practical solution for salary comparisons across jobs and organizations. 2007 © 1991 SAGE by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. the loudest voices-the most influential and best-organized groups of workers-often will get the &dquo. not what they could do to help the company move ahead. In either case. Because data are assumed to be objective. The problem is similar-if not more difficult-with competitiveness of pay. In an ideal market. The highest-paid people are always the ones who have been with the company long enough to attend the most courses. most banks have their own in-house training programs. Because most banking skills are unique to the profession and not taught in schools or universities. individuals begin their careers with a bank and learn everything within the company. None of these educational efforts have kept some employees’ skills from becoming obsolete. Such examples are not isolated. pricing jobs on the basis of market rates is also very appealing.

a Controlling the &dquo. is not easily efficient markets exist only for commodity goods can tolerate normalization. Organizations that only use surveys are not well equipped to deal &dquo.) to meet the Second.merchandise&dquo.&dquo. Y? especially when that center uses a mainframe brand X with operating systemand (This real request is not unlike many addressed daily to compensation benefits managers around the world. A couple of years later. Many the long businesses cannot survive without the loyalty of their employees over characterized by is if it reciprocal. First. leaving compensation review used to things validity of one argument over the another.mercenaries. welcomed the the work had to be updated. Job evaluation’s greater clarity and rationality has certainly decreased even worse. putting employment opportu59 Downloaded from http://cbr. a be everyone battle. price for many jobs. &dquo. there rarely is an abundance of supply For demand for many key jobs. they usually develop scoring to job evaluation processes.Before using evaluation.) the In fact. Specialty jobs have very narrow markets. this same group executive not only Some years ago out a real The situation. All rights by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. try to price the job of your German manager who heads up your Italian and subsidiaries. Job example illustrates this. market is problem.sagepub. salary surveys circulated market&dquo. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. labor market regulation mechanisms are very slow and but only negotiated prices by both result. a job evaluation system was set up in a large corporation over an the strong objections of one group executive who feared it would introduce when unwarranted level of bureaucracy into the company. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.You helped me sort of dozens were nightmare. (As surveys are those based on job evaluation. but also praised the previous work. &dquo.fair& too familiar with parties on a case-by-case basis. Purchasing talent at market price may be purchasing &dquo.&dquo. there was no way to prove the level of confrontation we were dealing with. theresame Each the thing. As a Finally. the behind compensaflourish to market&dquo. Geneva instance. produced by the job evaluation process. he commented. just allowing a healthy &dquo. French. Procurement specialists are all can rely on this problem. This means that conducting as those pricing survey can be as complex and the results as controversial reliable most the of matter a fact. or cost/benefits analysis techniques that are identical with the same purpose and similar methodologies. computer center that services your English. but for specialty goods and services.) limited. but no two surveys said To make unhappy. accurate an &dquo.that regulation. the labor market meets hardly any of these prerequisites. term. For commodity goods and services. (Practically. But commitment can exist only management indicating strong concern for equity. with bargaining. in the labor market. of following that control to type evaluation serves tion market. they know that they market prices. hiding behind the &dquo. there is no &dquo. .

com by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. some are qualitative and not easily measured. In contrast. Value jobs according to their real outputs. Because it is easier to assess quantities. Accountability means that a must be useful to the organization. When you have such a clear idea of what you want the outcome to be. this may not necessarily mean that job evaluation. Certainly.&dquo. All rights reserved.mercenaries&dquo. disregarding fluctuations in the market. employees start to think what is important is not what they do for the company.accountability. innovative even now as it was when Edward Hay introduced it. with the finance officer providing the main impetus.The purpose of my job is to contribute to improving the working environment for company XYZ’s employees. is the only way to go. and convey a sense of job meaningful. Similarly. many organizations were driven solely by the &dquo. just as it stands. replenishing the vending machines. Job outputs are not all quantitative.bottom-line. all the shifting and changing in today’s work values and job content calls for human resources (HR) professionals and management to look again at the fundamental principles of job evaluation. market pricing means following others. and serving in the cafeteria: &dquo. For example. If you let this go too far. supplying coffee and doughnuts during meetings. they will leave. the organization may end up paying whatever the market dictates for one profession but not another. The driving factor in weighing jobs according to the Hay Guide Charts is the idea of &dquo. purpose. but how much they cost-and the next time they are offered more money for a position elsewhere. but not to their employer. there is a solid chance that you will focus on the right tasks to achieve those results.nities into perspective. pay levels will fluctuate with the market. A good example is the description one employee wrote for a job that included cleaning the officers.sagepub. Companies that too closely follow market trends are likely to attract &dquo.&dquo. Consider the qualitative-as well as the quantitative.-expensive workers who are loyal to their profession and their own talents. not planning your own destiny with a clear view of what is unique about your company. putting them under careful scrutiny to make sure meet the needs of the 1990s. The Guide Chart complied ’ they 60 Downloaded from http://cbr.&dquo. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. in some cases. . in the 1960s and 1970s. By not taking internal equity into account. Rethinking Job Evaluation The Concepts Even if neither pay-for-knowledge/skills nor market pricing provides a widely acceptable solution to rewarding employees properly. This is especially important in light of the growing shortage of skilled workers both in Europe and North America. with little concern for the past or the future. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. job evaluation in the past sometimes overemphasized dollar outputs at the expense of the more intangible contributions. and.

to to What needs to be managed has changed as well. HR but job evaluation is not an exact science. responsibility between for management is more widely shared. Today’s on other assets. control and planning In contrast.sixth sense&dquo.&dquo. In any job or complexity. for opportunity. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.predictable. however. just the important jobs are not always the ones that appear impressive (close reporting are relationship to the chief executive officers or enviable job title). needs to be that as one today’s future is not as much one that can be predicted the ability to invented. and to make sure that the organization gets good return financial and physical assets. Since then. its on return a develop policies. People consists less of (in Hay’s terminology. sound job understanding. over the years and from company to company. . are with managing more tangible assets. evaluation Some job evaluation concepts may need reinterpretation. an experience to share. but a reflection of the values of those times. For time. has changed are certainly managed ranked high among management priorities-with policies. There are fewer boundaries over their own work control more have managerial and nonmanagerial jobs. 61 Downloaded from http://cbr. implement by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. while giving management plenty time. What changes. But it is just as important to get the proper or its customer know-how. above all. on what it wants to emphasize at a given a powerful managerial tool.&dquo.imbedded in with this trend. relevant is that them valuable input or influence information to disseminate. however. or the ability to coach others is an important contributor to the organization. an organiA good example is &dquo. a really but dynamic rediscovered that job output is not a static concept as valuable quantities do not relate to what you own. This quantitative emphasis. problem solving know-how are fundamental and permanent components. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. is the way each is interpreted. but rather they future (see those that can make things happen or really change the organization’s Exhibit 1). and a &dquo. All rights reserved. change.sagepub. procedures. more &dquo. One cannot imagine the way companies zation existing without some form of management system. that recognizes and Charts provide that sound understanding in a framework of latitude values management accountabilities. is not a bias we have the Guide Charts. Now.freedom to act&dquo. The one. and system. Today.). Management todayothers by giving exercising authority and providing directives and more of leveraging with own their employee to Any jobs. over example. but to what you create. and action plans pointing toward the &dquo. knowledge bases. accountability or responsibility. It is still important plan. good management calls for creative imagination. such as the company’s know-how with managing internal and external corporate leaders are just as concerned as they clients’ expectations. but in the 1960s. The Processes The Hay Guide Sound job evaluation is. and the like. behaviors. In addition.

a group of assessors chosen for their credibility. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. such as diving or gymnastics. so crucial in evaluation. Let’s take our example from sports. the original term we are purposefully using here. .Exhibit 1 Job Evaluation Concepts and Their Interpretations professionals and academics appear to prefer the term &dquo. or group judgments and decisions. All rights reserved. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. Deciding on a winning performance usually involves a third party. they are knowledgeable 62 Downloaded from by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15.job measurement&dquo. But measurement does not adequately explain the need for consensus. over job evaluation.

levelers.&dquo. For job evaluation in it. final approval of job have used job from the top managers in the organization. &dquo. . in an attempt to reduce costs. In the 1960s. Most certainly. . The judges in this their or responsiof the organization and participate because of their knowledge bilities in the company. But in the organization because it identifies or reveals previously hidden its role as a powerful conflict resolution mechanism. line managers. or staffing and career purposes the process can serve. evaluated. they as hiring. Establishing career roadmaps . management for facilitating the evaluation process. Computer-assisted job description these of inexpensive. supporting . opinions of the individual judges rules-such averaged. however. additional be introduced as as throwing out the highest and lowest scores-can easily &dquo. involved become and the must both support process when job Job evaluation should not be reduced to a routine task. such planning. HR professionals sometimes be responsible should when actually they that they are responsible for evaluations be to valid. good in devoted to analyzing and understanding jobs before involving top managers has evaluation activities. was effort and time of deal a evaluation began to be used more widely. the participants come to believe misinterpret their respective roles. or some consensus reached. many miss the other fix&dquo. Since then. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. job evaluation doesn’t always within difficulties smoothly. the process and evaluabeen simplified and streamlined. of activity. training. they have to be decisions for explains the rationale for job evaluation committees. Attracting new or more talent in crucial areas career and by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15.quicktion is now readily available. Emphasizing the importance of new jobs. All rights reserved. work Of course. the job evaluation process and respect across functions. or company delegates the evaluation process evaluation still needs to come to the employees themselves. Even if the Management ownership-and affirmation-of the process is to HR professionals. Unfortunately. like any other group activity. In other instances. critical. In organizations that often forget or evaluation for a number of years. 63 Downloaded from http://cbr. The can also generate mutual understanding serve to coalesce comparisons that result from the evaluation process can management around such crucial issues as the following: . Integrating the organization.Even about the sport and often belong to a community that produces champions. The process can create real controversy or political conflicts.sagepub. the need group various the to parts case usually belong by experts is the same. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. job analysis processes are incomplete. jobs cannot simply be measured. need to be backed up with these credentials. Bolstering the credibility of reward systems. This Similarly. .

Only one of these points-that job holders have the best direct analytical insight into their jobs-is correct. CAJE’s application has yet to substantiate these claims.JE does not replace-but leverages-traditional evaluation systems. unlike traditional job evaluation. you apply this evaluation scheme to all other jobs in the organization. All rights reserved. a job evaluation. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. the supervisor. CA. you maintain your system by using your instrument with any new jobs or with those that are modified or changed. In other words. And. and a quality assurance report automatically-all with a significant amount of time saved by the incumbent. provides more accurate information than that provided by individuals. Some years ago. you first set your standards by carefully evaluating a core of key jobs. which needed to be customized. Further. using their analysis with a CAJE system would result in simplification. while the checks and balances built into CAJE applications ensure consistency. It appeared to be able to produce a job description. and reduced conflicts (since group processes could now be dispensed with). however. Because it has emphasized process more than concepts. any kind of job analysis also requires making comparisons to gauge how one job’s challenges compare with others. since on its own it could verify or question the accuracy of the job analysis. job analysis calls for an outsider’s as well as the insider’s perspective. Supporting this notion is extensive experience with CAJE. In fact. and the job analyst. 64 Downloaded from http://cbr. we must also recognize what it cannot-or should not do. they cannot assess accuracy. it was heralded as an important improvement on the process. CAJE simply streamlines and speeds the job evaluation process for &dquo. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. which levels individual biases. Next. Cave assists-but can’t replace-decision makers. finally. the new technology was flexible enough to capture any organization’s unique value system. improved fairness (as evaluation would now be based upon more accurate information). CAJE’s first designers claimed the computer could cut out the decision-making process once and for all. With CAJE. In a traditional job evaluation process. in by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. CAJE will always require human judgment and decision making. you still need a traditional job evaluation system to provide the initial solid analysis of benchmark jobs. indicating that group judgment. . So although we acknowledge what CAJE can or might do. jobs. most accurate source of information on their own jobs. the claim was made that because incumbents are the single. the accuracy of your CAJE system will greatly depend on-the quality of the technique you use to set your standards during the benchmarking phase.nonbenchmark&dquo.Innovations Computer-Assisted Job Evaluation ICAIE) When computer-assisted job evaluation (CAJE) was first introduced. And. Moreover.sagepub.

With this hope&dquo. even when factors such as the three above do predict a current job’s size. claim that unsatisfactory performance in some of them has only &dquo. It is intrinsically paradoxical that to evaluate a particular job grade. one must impose on the time of people whose time is at a premium. and the jobs reporting to you)? This is a &dquo. it will always remain so.questionnaire boxes. (For example. added value-either economic or intellectual-for the In sum. In by producing organization. With CAJE. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. or &dquo. All rights reserved. your boss’s job. since this tool not only serves as a data collection instrument. other top executives. But most companies want answers to such other key questions as these: 65 Downloaded from http://cbr. but we don’t price cars by their weight. Integrated Job Analysis Models: The Next Step Forward Even with well-designed computer approaches.sagepub. the process will transmit messages about jobs that are inaccurate-and even destructive. tial&dquo. whatever the job’s current status is in the organization. job evaluation system. the effect on the organization if your position fails to perform adequately? This is a job evaluation factor abandoned for decades. They allow us to capture and use our knowledge about jobs in new ways. . it simplifies and streamlines the routine work. the CEO. Similarly. leaving time for the humans to attend to the more important value-added tasks. the separate parts of the traditional job analysis exercise-job documentation (description) and assessment (evaluation)-are somewhat integrated. they are static. . So a CAJE system is only as good as its designers and their understanding of jobs.falter-and even fail-if it puts old ideas in its new &dquo.&dquo. fact. effect. that is.inconsequenCAJE can . you don’t increase your job content by spending more time with the CEO or by lobbying for a bigger job title. or division and department heads)? This question implies that to do an important job. What is your organizational authority level (that is. you set this grade from the outset. the job analysis process is likely to seem too cumbersome or expensive if it is only used to determine a pay grade. . on the other hand.minor&dquo. weight is the single factor that best predicts the value of a car. computers do not create new knowledge. They cannot tell you the right way to expand or enhance your job. What is the impact of your by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. what are the grades or status currently associated with your job. We cannot at the same time preach that each and every job is essential to quality and customer satisfaction and then. instead.) but more . If the questions are not sound. Witness some real examples of questions that do more harm than good: How frequently do you have contact with important people (for example. but also embodies the series of criteria that represent the organization’s ingrained value system. board members. through the questionnaire. Designing the questionnaire well is crucial. The machine does not replace the job analyst or evaluator.

It is simple to understand and use and can be quickly and economically customized to any 66 Downloaded from http://cbr. This integrated model works with either jobs or people. framing a professional career ladder to assess personal/job growth opportunity. and process. exercise. accounting. most organizations would be willing to invest more time. computer sciences. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications.sagepub. Other advantages. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. .Exhibit 2 Integrated Job Analysis Model for Knowledge Workers · What is the job worth? · How well does the job holder perform the job? · What critical competencies are required to qualify for the job (or to be an outstanding performer in the job)? o What other jobs may the current incumbent be capable of holding in the future? o What are our staffing needs for this position? Many companies want their job analysis models to be fast and cost-effective. One seven-dimension model that Hay developed for a variety of professional areas of knowledge workers-including those in the engineering. and reflective of values and behaviors that will encourage employees to create added value for the organization. All rights reserved. and allows people and jobs to be matched with ease. effort. If they could achieve this through one instrument. and by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15. or both. or legal fields-is a good example of this approach (see Exhibit 2 above). Integrated job analysis models-those that can respond to all these factors and can apply to both jobs and people-appear to achieve these goals best. easy to understand and explain to nontechnical people. Each dimension can also be broken down into several levels of job accountability or individual skill. This type of scale lends itself well to describing and evaluating a job. and even analyzing staffing needs.

clearly shows that if you want to grow as a professional-or expand your job-you have to create added value for your organization. work. equitable. 67 Downloaded from http://cbr. utor to the development of Hay’s computer-assisted technology He holds a degree in civil engineering from L’Ecole Nationale Des Mines De HayXpert. Similar models can be applied to virtually any kind it job family. in their form. where computers or alternative models are not appropriate. The focus is not on how to knowledgeable you are-a highly subjective judgment-but on the extent which you use your knowledge to help your organization. situation. compensation measurement. All rights reserved. They lend themselves traditional easily to computerization. measures of personal power. Making our assessment systems painful. status symbols. the debate on the various ways subside. never work will probably rewarding But society is making fundamental changes in the way we organize work. and we can continue to apply them. but critical. people in a fair. Paris. Most important. was a key contribDufetel and by Raluca Paraschiv on November 15.sagepub. Conclusion As long as people perceive salary hierarchies-and individual pay-as messages certain recognition. 2007 © 1991 SAGE Publications. New declinjobs are being created. compensation design. quality areas as organization design. of LAURENT DUFETEL is managing director of the Hay Group’s Worldwide Compensation in such Practice. their to talents they bring employees are responsible for and what Point-factor evaluation methods are crucial to its future. He has consulted in the field of management for more than fifteen years in job assurance. . to reward Job evaluation remains the most open and flexible option available what account into and taking competitive manner.of organization or business. or pictures of a and of valuing vision of the order of the world. Some jobs are increasing-and some are actually these reflect changes can be ing-in importance. and Specializing sales administration. for job measurement. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. this type of model sets up a &dquo.