Hay Manual PDF

Table of Contents
HayGroup® .......................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ ................................................. 4
CHAPTER 1: Know-How................................................................... 12 The Hay Advisory Team offers special thanks to Cindy Lukas
The Three Elements Comprising Know How .................................... 14
for her dedication and her thoughtful work that has been the
Job-Specific Knowledge ................................................................... 14
Integrating Know-How ...................................................................... 21 foundation for this manual. The Hay Advisory Team also
Human Relations Skills .................................................................... 24 offers special thanks to Wayne Veum (Chief Classification
CHAPTER 2: Problem Solving ......................................................... 27 Analyst-retired); John Kuderka (Hay rater and Hay historian
The Two Elements of Problem Solving ............................................. 28 emeritus); Sue Wickham (Admin); and others who have
Context ............................................................................................. 28 reviewed past editions of this manual to ensure its accuracy
Thinking Challenge ........................................................................... 31 and usability.
CHAPTER 3: Accountability ............................................................ 34
The Three Elements of Accountability .............................................. 35 2010 Hay Advisory Team:
Freedom To Act/Empowerment ........................................................ 35 Darlene Hueser (MMB) co-chair
Magnitude ......................................................................................... 38
Faith Zwemke (MMB) co-chair
Job Impact......................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER 4: Special Conditions ..................................................... 42 Gwen Aubineau (MnSCU)
CHAPTER 5: FINE TUNING .............................................................. 43 Wanda Barrett (MnSCU)
Job Profiles ....................................................................................... 43 Brent Boyd (Merit System)
Sore-Thumbing ................................................................................. 48 Janice Cano (DEED)
Hay Rating At-A-Glance .................................................................... 49 Cathy Fah (DOC)
CHAPTER 6: Preparing the Presentation ....................................... 50 Russ Havir (Agriculture)
HAY PRESENTATION OUTLINE ........................................................... 50 Loretta Mattson (Lottery)
HAY Presentation Outline Worksheet ............................................... 51 Richard Morey (MnDOT)
HAY Presenter Check List ................................................................ 53 Laura Sengil (DHS)
HAY EVALUATION W ORKSHEET FOR RATERS .................................... 54
Diane Rademacher (DEED)
CHAPTER 7: Quality Assurance ..................................................... 55
Indicators of a Good Hay Rater ........................................................ 59
Hay Rater Training and Development Standards ............................. 61
CHAPTER 8: Hay Ratings and Compensation ............................... 62
CHAPTER 9: Trend Lines and Conversion Charts ........................ 64
4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 1

HayGroup®
“Hay” is not an acronym. HayGroup® is an international Ned Hay died unexpectedly in 1958 at the age of 67, but his
organizational and human resources consulting firm with more company continued to evolve both geographically and with
than 2,000 employees that was founded in 1943 by Edward N. respect to its offerings. HayGroup® now emphasizes three
“Ned” Hay. Hay is considered to be a pioneer in the human broad areas:
resources community, particularly with regard to the
• Organizational Clarity
compensation issue of measuring jobs. Employee surveys, strategy alignment, accountability
assessment, organization analysis and design, role clarity
He started E.N. Hay and Associates while he was the head of • Employee Capability
personnel for the First Pennsylvania Bank of Philadelphia – Assessment and selection, executive coaching, leadership
while in his early fifties and at the height of World War II. development, team development, talent management
During the war, Ned Hay also served as Deputy Administrator • People Commitment
of the Office of Price Administration. At that time, the War Compensation information, employee benefits, executive pay,
Labor Board imposed pay controls that could be lifted only if a job evaluation, performance management, reward programs,
company could show – through a sound job evaluation method total remuneration
– that a particular job’s content put it into a higher control
range. This, combined with a major contract with General Still headquartered in its birthplace – Philadelphia,
Foods in 1945 to study 450 management jobs planted the Pennsylvania – HayGroup® has offices in 43 countries around
seed for what would become the Hay Guide Chart – Profile the world:
Method™ of job evaluation. Argentina Finland Malaysia South Africa
Australia France Mexico South Korea
New
Austria Germany Zealand Spain
Belgium Greece Netherlands Sweden
Brazil Hungary Norway Switzerland
Canada India Peru Thailand
Chile Indonesia Poland Turkey
United Arab
China Ireland Portugal Emirates
United
Columbia Israel Russia Kingdom
Costa Rica Italy Singapore United States
Czech Slovak
Republic Japan Republic Venezuela

The State of Minnesota has had a long-term relationship with
HayGroup® related to job evaluation. Consistent with the
belief that jobs with comparable levels of work should be WHY HAY?
compensated similarly, the State needed an organized, Organized, systematic job ranking system
standardized system for comparing the complexity levels of
very different types of jobs. HayGroup® provided such a Assigns point values to job components
system. Their website at www.haygroup.com states: “It might
be a merger or acquisition, new organization design, changing Widely used - both public and private sector
roles, or simply an outdated job measurement plan. Useful for large classification studies.
Regardless of the reason, organizations need a sound and
straightforward method to measure and value work on an Helps determine appropriate level of a position
ongoing basis, one that effectively reflects their specific within a class series.
organizational culture and values. HayGroup® is the world’s
leading authority on job evaluation and work measurement Used when necessary to create new classes.
and has helped thousands of organizations around the world.
In addition to in-depth consulting expertise, Hay offers an array

of work measurement and analysis tools to help meet a broad
range of organization needs. These include our:
• Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method™ – the most widely-

used and recognized method of job evaluation in the
world
• Comparison/Questionnaire Methods – streamlined
alternatives to our more in-depth Guide Chart approach
• Integrated Models – customized approaches to suit a
client’s unique human resources management needs.”

Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ After much of the initial class clarification work was completed,
the Departments of Finance and Personnel agreed to use
What is the Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ and where some of the funding to contract with HayGroup® to train State
did it come from? employees to become Hay raters. State agencies nominated
employees to attend Hay training and to serve on three seven
The Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ of job evaluation was member committees to evaluate many of the State’s multiple-
developed in the early 1950s by HayGroup® and is used by person classes under the guidance of HayGroup® consultants.
more than 7,000 profit and nonprofit organizations in many Some of the initial Hay raters were Human Resources
different countries. It is the most widely used job evaluation professionals, but many were not. Bettie Lee and Al Bunnett
method in the United States, in companies such as Honeywell, were facilitators for two of the committees. Each committee
Pillsbury and General Mills and in state governments such as emphasized a specialty area and used the class clarification
Arizona, Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon and New Mexico. information to understand the jobs in order to evaluate them.
Presenters weren’t part of the process as they are today. This
The State of Minnesota has used the Hay system of job was a very time-consuming, labor-intensive effort.
evaluation since the 1970s, when HayGroup® consultants
evaluated managerial positions for the State of Minnesota. In When this large group of Hay ratings was completed, the three
the mid – 1970s, $400,000 was allocated to the Department of committees disbanded and the pool of trained State Hay raters
Finance for a Public Employment Study. Part of the study began to expand. Later, when pay equity was raised as an
involved evaluating the State’s classification (and secondarily, issue in the 1980s during the Perpich administration, the State
compensation) system. At that point, classification and of Minnesota was already using the Hay Guide Chart – Profile
compensation decisions primarily relied on the job audit and Method™ to compare very different types of jobs.
salary survey processes we use today – by comparing
positions to each other and to class specifications, with The State’s customized Hay Guide – Profile Charts were
consideration given to how similar jobs were paid outside of revised in 1995, to ensure that they remained up-to-date as
state government. The Department of Personnel’s the State’s needs changed. One aspect, “Magnitude,” is
Classification and Compensation Division provided leadership reviewed annually and revised according to the Accountability
for the resulting broad class clarification project, which Magnitude Index (AMI) provided by HayGroup®. The
involved reviewing position descriptions and class Consumer Price Index, as interpreted by HayGroup®, is the
specifications, interviewing about 1000 State employees primary source for calculating adjustments to the
across the state, and establishing class clarification files. John Accountability Magnitude Index. For example, the current 7.0
Kuderka was the Classification and Compensation Division’s AMI (as of Oct 2009) is a multiplier applied to the baseline of
lead for this project. 1967 dollars; therefore, $100 1967 dollars are now equal to
$700 2009 dollars. 1967 dollars were used as the baseline
because HayGroup® did a major update of the 1950s’ Hay
Guide Charts that year.

The Hay job evaluation system has been used by the State of The Hay Method of Job Evaluation Adds Value by:
Minnesota to evaluate most state job classes, including the
Governor’s and positions in the Supreme Court. Although the 1. Low Administrative Costs. The most expensive
Guide Charts have been updated over the years, there haven’t investment, the initial installation, training and quality
been major changes; it’s been more a matter of fine-tuning assurance, have been paid. The Hay Advisory Team
than full-scale revisions. and other experienced raters now provide training and
quality assurance.
2. A Strong Future Orientation. The Hay Method is used

to measure new jobs or redesigned jobs within new
organizational structures and serves as a useful
consulting tool to guide state managers as they continue
to strive to do more with less. During Fiscal Years 2000
thru 2010 a total of 677 jobs were evaluated by 335
rating committees resulting in 212 new classes, and the
conformation of ratings and levels for exiting classes.
3. A Large Data Base of Evaluations to Guide Current

and Future Class and Compensation Decisions.
Since Fiscal Year 2001, State of Minnesota Hay ratings
have been listed on MMB’s web site. Current rosters of
evaluations, with complete ratings, are available on the
MMB extranet. As of the end of Fiscal Year 2010 the
roster contains Hay ratings for 92% of the active classes.
4. A Solid Track Record of Successful Application of

the Hay Method of Evaluation Statewide. The State of
Minnesota’s application of the Hay Method has received
statewide recognition and use. At the local level,
Minnesota State job evaluations have provided
representative job evaluations for benchmark job classes
to guide local units of government and school districts as
they conduct their review of jobs for pay equity. State of
Minnesota Hay ratings are the foundation/basis for the
State Job Match System available on the internet to over
1500 local units of government.

When are positions Hay-rated?
Positions are Hay-rated when one or more situations occur:
• A new position is established for which there is no readily discernable existing class comparison.
• The appropriate level of a position within a class series cannot be determined or there is significant dispute about
the level of a position.
• The class hasn’t been reviewed for many years and the concept of the class has changed significantly over time.
• A position has been identified as a benchmark position to which others are compared for use in a class study or
class clarification project.
How does Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method work A committee rating process is used to help ensure a broad
perspective and statewide consistency. Committees are made
up of three or five professionals from State of Minnesota
People: Manager, supervisor and employee and/or agencies and Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). All
personnel representative. Hay raters meet training standards established by MMB
Hay Facilitator consistent with HayGroup® expectations and participate in
Hay Raters advanced training seminars.
Process: Manager, supervisor and employee and/or Written materials about each position being rated are provided
personnel representative verbally explain the position to Hay committee members so they can prepare before a
description and other written documentation to the Hay scheduled Hay rating session. Documentation typically
Committee. The Hay Raters use their understanding of includes a memo outlining the need for the Hay rating, an
the position and their knowledge of the Hay guide chart organizational chart, a position description, and anything else
to assign a Hay rating to the position. that might help the raters understand each position. Subject
matter experts provide an overview of each position’s role and
Product: The Hay Facilitator interprets the Hay responsibilities to the Hay raters at a scheduled Hay rating
rating by assigning the position to a current class session, along with information about the position’s
or by recommending a new classification, requirements related to Know-How, Problem Solving and
including salary range, to the State's Accountability. Examples are usually helpful.
Compensation Manager, Labor Relations After the presenters leave the Hay committee begins the rating
Representative and Chief Classification Analyst. process. [See Chapter 6 for information on preparing a
presentation.]

The Hay system is designed to rank positions within the
context of all statewide positions, from the Governor and the
Good Hay Rating Requires...
Supreme Court on down, not just within the context of one
State agency. A single number is assigned to each factor
Skilled (trained and experienced) raters and
consistent with the position’s role and responsibilities.
an accurate understanding of the position,
Available options are listed on the charts. The numbers
through…
increase at a rounded 15% rate, which is based on the
• current, complete position description
scientific concept of “just noticeable difference.” [see Guide
• background memo
Chart Tip]
• organizational chart
• presentation After the Hay committee members use their Hay Guide Charts
to independently evaluate a position, they must reach a group
consensus. Hay committee members are asked to share their
Hay raters look at three major aspects when evaluating a job: individual ratings with the group, which are put on a white
Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. They board or flip chart. The raters discuss their ratings, including
consider a position’s role and responsibilities, and the KSAs any differences among them, and arrive at a group Hay rating
(knowledge, skills and abilities), problem solving and with which everyone can agree. Sometimes additional
accountability required to satisfactorily perform the work information is needed before committee members can agree;
involved. Hay ratings are typically based on when the position the group discussion may be the first indication that raters are
is considered to be “fully functioning,” rather than what making different assumptions about the position that need to
employees know at hire. be clarified. The points are totaled for each factor. The
committee facilitator documents the final Hay rating and
The raters look at each of these three basic factors separately, submits it to MMB
and assign points from the Hay Guide Charts that represent
their weight in the job. Every job that is evaluated receives the
same treatment. This makes it possible to compare jobs that
are very different and place them where they appropriately fit
within the State’s classification and compensation systems.

What are the possible outcomes of Hay rating? However there may be other factors, e.g. turnover, ability to
hire qualified candidates, internal equity, that may impact an
Typical reasons for rating a job agency’s decision to pursue a salary range reassignment
• Level determination within existing classes (e.g. based on the recent Hay rating. If this is a single incumbent
affirmation ratings, reallocations) class the rating could also represent the class rating and a
• New class revised class rating date. [see CHAPTER 8: Hay Ratings
• Salary range review/re-assignment (often occurs jointly and Compensation]
with Level)
• Other (e.g. previously unrated class, new benchmark for The following chart provides samples of possible rating
a current class.) outcomes.
Even though the intent was to rate the position because of one
of four reasons listed in the chart above the rating may not
support the action that prompted the rating.
For example. The supervisor believed that the job in question

had changed over time and should be at a higher level of Hay
points and compensation. After a rating session the raters
determined that the current class rating was appropriate. In
this case the outcome was: “No Change” (see Decision Codes
below).
HAY Quality Assurance Summary Decision Codes

NC = No Change
REC = Reallocation to an existing class
ENC = Establish new class – list proposed class title
RCR = Revised class rating for salary range reassignment
TC = Title Change –
TBD = Final outcome to be determined

No change in rating
Re-assignment
existing class*
Class rating?
Sample outcomes:
Salary range
Hay Quality
Create new
New rating
Assurance
Reason
Summary
Assign to
If yes…
class
* Movement to a new class generally requires a
Is level of position(s) unclear or in X X X Chg
one step or more change in Know How points.
dispute? If yes, confer with MMB
before proceeding. Chg
X X
Level
date
Is this a class that the agency has * Movement to a new class generally requires a
X X X NA
determined to use Hay evaluation one step or more change in Know How points.
for reallocation? If yes, proceed
X X NA
with rating.
No existing class was identified as X X Request a new class and recommend comp level X new
New
a fit . Confer with MMB before

proceeding. No
X X Use an existing class lieu of creating a new class. X
Chg
Salary range review/re-assignment X X Recommend and request a new comp level. X Chg
Salary
(often occurs jointly with Level)

Confer with MMB before No
proceeding. X X X
Chg
Previously unrated class, X Usually no change in comp level X new

Other
New benchmark for a current

X X X May or may not request a new comp X Chg
class.)

How does the Hay rating relate to classification and
compensation decisions?
GUIDE CHART TIP
The Hay method evaluates all positions against the same Step Differences
factors. This makes it possible to compare jobs that are very
different and place them where they appropriately fit within the “The Hay Guide Charts use the concept of Just
State’s classification and compensation systems. A position’s Noticeable Differences to reflect that people perceive
Know-How points and overall Hay rating are used as guides in relative, not absolute, differences. This is incorporated into
determining where the job fits in the State’s classification the unique Hay numbering patterns used in the three Hay
structure and provide a framework for determining the Guide Charts. This concept provides a systematic
appropriate compensation range. This relationship is guideline to assess the relationships among jobs — the
discussed further in the “Hay Ratings and Compensation” and relative distances between jobs, span of control, size of
“Trend Lines and Conversion Charts” sections at the end of accountability, career progression opportunity and chains
the manual. of command, etc…
Can anyone have a copy of the Hay Guide – Profile Source: 2005 HayGroup® Working Paper, Hay Job
Charts? Evaluation Foundations and Applications.
Copies of the Hay Guide – Profile Charts are typically only On the Hay Scale, 15% changes are “steps” to identify
given to trained Hay raters or Hay raters in training. The just-noticeable differences. This conforms to a general
customized charts used by the State of Minnesota are the principle of psychometric scaling derived from Weber’s
copyrighted property of HayGroup®. The State of Minnesota’s Law: “In comparing objects, we perceive not the absolute
Hay Guide – Profile Charts cannot be sold or in any other way difference between them, but the ratio of this difference to
distributed to other private or public organizations because this the magnitude of the two objects compared.” The extent of
violates copyright laws and other contractual agreements difference required in order to be noticeable tends to be a
between the State of Minnesota and HayGroup®. specific constant percentage. A job evaluation committee,
when comparing two similar jobs on any single factor, has
to perceive at least a 15% difference in order to come to a
group agreement that Job A is larger than Job B.

Know-How is the body of knowledge,
skills and abilities an employee needs
to be successful in a particular job.
The most important factor in Hay E.
evaluation is Know how. It defines Basic I. Activity
the boundaries within which the action
will take place. Specialized. .
It is made up of three parts:
CHAPTER 1: Know-How
• Depth and Breadth of Job-

Specific Knowledge (aka
Technical and Specialized Know-
How and Job-Specific
Human
Knowledge). Relations 2
• Integrating Know-How (aka
Managerial Breadth or Know-
•
How).
Human Relations Skills (aka
200
Human Relations Know-How).
Hay raters assign a number to the

total Know-How for a job, which
involves separate choices for each of
these three elements and an overall
assessment. As an example, Know-
How is expressed in a report as EI2
200 (depth and breath level E,
integrating know-how level I, human
relations skills level 2 at 200 Know-
How points).

According to the Know-How Guide Chart, “Know-How is the Figure 1:
total of every kind of skill and knowledge, however acquired, Job Factors (Hay System)
needed to conduct, and to be prepared for, functions that are Approximate % of Total Points
reasonably expected within the role.”
Know-How considers both the scope and depth of a position.

A job may require some knowledge about a lot of things, or a 20%
lot of knowledge of fewer things. The overall Know-How rating Problem
reflects a combination of scope and depth. This allows for the Solving
comparison and weighing of the total Know-How content of Accountabilty
different jobs in terms of “How much knowledge about how
many things?” 50%
Spec Cond
20%
Know-How is the most heavily weighted portion of the overall
job evaluation. [SEE FIGURE 1] In fact, the levels in a Know How
classification structure are primarily determined by the
progression of Know-How levels. In the continuum 10%
established by the Hay system, jobs that are more easily
learned are ranked near the lower end of the scale. As jobs
require more involved and diverse practices and principles,
abstract knowledge, mastery of scientific techniques, greater
human relations skills and/or significant managerial skills, they
are given progressively higher scores. Know-How: 50% - 60%
Depth and breadth of skill and knowledge required to do the job
Problem Solving: 20%

Original thinking required. Analyzing, reasoning, creating
Accountability: 20%
Supervisory and monetary responsibilities, consequences of
actions
Special Conditions: 0% - 10%

Unpleasant circumstances, physical effort, environment,
hazards, sensory stimulation

The Three Elements Comprising Know How: The levels of Job Specific Knowledge on the Hay Charts are:
Job-Specific Knowledge
# of Job
Job-Specific Knowledge includes the depth and breadth of Classes as
knowledge required to be successful in a job. It includes the Practical Procedures Group of Jan 2011
position’s requirements for knowledge and skills related to L Limited Job-Specific Knowledge 1
practices, procedures, specialized techniques, and A Primary 6
professional or scientific disciplines. It also includes basic and B Elementary Vocational 42
job-specific supervisory and managerial KSAs, when
appropriate.
# of Job
Classes as
This aspect of Know-How does NOT make distinctions among Specialized Techniques Group of Jan 2011
differently-sized managerial jobs or include human relations C Vocational 160
skills. However, because all three parts of a KH rating D Advanced Vocational 351
combine to reflect a job’s total KH requirement, the number of E Basic Specialized 545
total points vary a lot within each technical/specialized KH
level (that is, L and A – H).
# of Job
It is important to remember that this element measures Classes as
the requirements of the position, not the qualifications of Learned Disciplines Group of Jan 2011
an incumbent. F Seasoned Professional 496
. G Specialized Mastery 40
H Professional Mastery 2

Practical Procedures Group
NOTE: Examples in blue italics differentiate among levels’ expected roles re: knowing what to do
Complexity
levels Indicators Characteristics of work Examples Fine-tuning
Educatio • “Does the simple tasks s/he is
st th
L. n likely 1 to 6 grade told to do with ongoing work Employees in this job
Limited needed direction” class are expected to
Supported Employment
TOTAL • Basic instructions/very simple have an ongoing job
(added Worker is the only job class
time to Hours to days routines coach employed by a
in this category.
in 1995) learn • Work is very simple, short cycle rehabilitation organization
Skill in nature, and typically involves as a condition of
Unskilled employment.
level manual effort
Educatio Literacy; simple • “Does simple tasks s/he is “Leaning AI1 50
th th
A. n likely arithmetic; 6 to 9 told to do without an ongoing back” AI2 57
Primary needed grade job coach”
TOTAL • Ability to understand simple oral “Solid in the
Several days to 1 AI1 57
time to and written instructions and NR Nursery Field Worker
month box” AI2 66
learn perform simple tasks is required
• May apply basic skills in Student Worker Clerical
Skill “Leaning AI1 66
Unskilled arithmetic, reading and writing Student Wkr -Custodial/
level forward” AI2 66
• Typically same daily routine Maintenance
Educatio • “Does more involved, but still “Leaning
th th BI1 66
B. n likely 9 to 12 grade standardized, work s/he is Food Service Worker
back” BI2 76
Elementary needed instructed to do after basic
Vocational on-the-job training” General Maint Worker
TOTAL
time to • Learns on the job Office Specialist “Solid in the BI1 76
2 to 6 months
learn • Slightly more complex Security Guard box” BI2 87
standardized routines Human Services Tech
• Production and service jobs at
this level require skills in
Skill Unskilled to semi- operating uncomplicated Building Services Lead “Leaning BI1 87
level skilled; apprentice machinery and may include Work Therapy Technician forward” BI2 100
apprentice levels of craft
positions.
.

Specialized Techniques Group
Complexity
Office & Admin Spec CI1 87
C.
Vocational Education “Leaning
th th Customer Svcs Spec Int CI2 100
likely 9 to 12 grade back”
The median needed “Knows there are practical, job- Building Services Supv CI3 115
and mode related instructions about what
Know-How 6 months to to do and applies them”
points at this General Repair Worker CI1 100
2 years - technical
level are positions may require Brings knowledge from some other
115. one – two years of post training or experience
TOTAL Office & Admin Spec Sr
high school education Guided by somewhat diversified “Solid in the CI2 115
time to Personnel Aide
in areas such as procedures and precedents box”
learn
nursing, civil Although tasks are proceduralized
engineering, or office or involve following precedents, EDP Oper Technical Supv
and business employee decides on appropriate Office Servs Supv 1 CI3 132
procedures. procedure or precedent to follow Security Supervisor
based on the situation
Typically require knowledge of Account Clerk Senior
CI1 115
multiple procedures. Transportation Generalist
Semi-skilled to journey-
“Leaning
level LPN 2 CI2 132
Skill level forward”
Building Svcs Manager CI3 152

Complexity
Fine-tuning
levels Indicators Characteristics of work Examples
th th Benefit Recovery Tech DI1 115

D. 9 to 12 grade
Education Buyer 1
Advanced PLUS additional “Leaning
likely Personnel Aide Senior DI2 132
Vocational specialized training, back”
needed Transportation Gen Sr
on or off the job
“Reads, understands and
The median Office Services Supv 2 DI3 152
applies significantly diversified
and mode
practices from books recom- Accounting Technician
Know-How DI1 132
mended by others about what to Carpenter
points at
TOTAL do”
this level are Accounting Supv “Solid in the
152. time to 2 to 4 years Buyer 2
learn Employee is likely to have box”
Information Tech Spec 1 DI2 152
specialized training (which may
Personnel Officer
include a bachelor’s degree) but
State Programs Admin
experience can usually substitute
Skilled technical to Upper level college coursework Offices Services Supv 3 DI3 175
highly skilled trades; that emphasizes theory is usually
paraprofessionals; Accntg Officer
not needed to do the work DI1 152
st
1 level professionals; Planner
nd Work focuses on using
some 2 level Management Analyst 2 DI2 175
substantially diversified procedures
professionals;
Skill level and specialized standards, rather “Leaning
Administrative support
than theory forward”
supervisors; skilled
trade supervisors; Building Maint Supv
supervisory positions DI3 200
st nd EDP Oper Ctl/Shift Supv
equal to 1 and 2
level professionals; and
technical supervisors.

Complexity
Local Govt Audit EI1 152
E. “Understands the underlying
Minimum of bachelor’s Information Tech Spec 2 “Leaning
Basic theory well enough to research
or master’s degree plus Planner Intermediate back” EI2 175
Specialized Education and recommend books that are
professional State Prog Admin Inter
likely most likely to help meet the
experience; or Accounting Supv Senior
The median needed organization’s more complex EI3 200
equivalent exp is Business Manager 1
and mode needs”
required at hire
Know-How Job requires and uses higher-level Chemist 2
EI1 1 75
points at college coursework or equivalent Research Analyst Inter
this level are theoretical or scientific preparation Accounting Officer Sr
200. Work typically involves a Mgt Analyst 3
“Solid in the EI2 200
TOTAL specialized field of knowledge, Pers Officer Principal
box”
time to such as accounting, biology, Planner Sr State
learn chemistry, engineering, Personnel Director 1
epidemiology, information Registered Nurse Admin- EI3 230
technology, management, Supv
nursing (RN), organization
development, psychology, etc. Pharmacist EI1 200
nd
Some 2 level and Jobs need to know more about Accounting Officer Principal
many advanced “why”, i.e., the underlying Engineer Senior “Leaning
Skill level professionals, principles involved EI2 230
Information Tech Spec 4 forward”
supervisors & Advanced professionals are mid-E Personnel Representative
managers to F
Personnel Director 2 EI3 264
As of Jan 2010 the median and mode Know-How value for all 1640 rated state classifications is 200 points and there were 234 classes at
200 Know-How points. Ratings with 200 Know-How points occur in the Know-How levels of D – Advanced Vocational and E – Basic
Specialized.

LEARNED DISCIPLINES GROUP
Complexity
“Evaluates, critiques, Financial Reporting
F. edits and improves Analy Supv “Leaning FI2 230
Education
Seasoned books about what to do Research Scientist 2 back”
likely
Professional needed based on advanced FI3 264
professional expertise”
Architect 2
The median
Personnel Services
and mode Professional positions with
Requires wide Supv 1 FI2 264
Know-How an “F” rating are I
TOTAL exposure, State Prog Admin “Solid in
points at recognized experts within in
time to experience and Coordinator the box”
this level are their specialized field. managerial
350 (median) learn proficiency in Many supervisory and breadth Accounting Manager
and specialized fields managerial positions are Personnel Services FI3 304
304 (mode.) also within “F”. Supv 2
Construction Project
Responsible authority in a Coord Princ FI2 304
Medical Specialist 1 “Leaning
learned discipline forward”
State Prog Admin
FI3 350
Manager Sr
Licensed positions
within professions FII2 304
“Leaning
such as law or Personnel Services
back” FII3 350
Skill level medicine are found Manager
here and many II FII2 350
multi-functional “Solid in
in State Prog Admin the box”
managers manageria FII3 400
Manager Prin
l breadth Dir Governmental
FII2 400
Relations Unc “Leaning
Finance Services forward”
FII3 460
Director

Complexity
“Respected author of GII2 400
G “Leaning
Education scientific or theory-based
back”
likely books about what to do in Exec Dir PERA GII3 460
The median difficult situations, based
and mode needed Senior specialists on deep and broad II
Know-How in scientific or knowledge of the field” GII2 460
points at in “Solid in
learned disciplines
this level are TOTAL Functional experts (aka managerial the box”
who are
700 (median) time to authoritative in their “gurus”), whose substantial breadth Commissioner-
GII3 528
and learn field and senior experience and depth of Mediation Service
608 (mode.) managers with knowledge enable them to
“Leaning GII2 528
substantial “write the book,” and
knowledge about determine functional policy forward” GII3 608
the organization, its and practice
GIII2 528
mission and “Leaning
Commissioners of large Asst Commr Revenue
objectives back”
agencies are found here: Deputy Commr Labor
Mastery of an
Skill level Commr-Admin GIV3 920 III & Industry GIII3 608
abstract discipline,
Commr- Educ GIV3 1056 in
for example, at a “Solid in GIII2 608
Commr-MMB GV3 1216 manageria
university the box”
Commr-Transp GV3 1400 l breadth Commr-Commerce GIII3 700
GIII2 700
“Leaning
Commr-Agriculture forward” GIII3 800
Commr-DEED
Complexity
levels Characteristics of work Examples Fine-tuning
H “Authoritative books are written about him or her” Governor HVI3 1840
VI
National leadership role and authoritative knowledge that is in “Solid in
recognized beyond the state of Minnesota HVI3 2112
managerial the box”
Likely to be selected for national panels and/or be quoted because breadth
of their acknowledged leadership in complex scientific and/or “Leaning
professional activities HVI3 2432
forward”

Integrating Know-How (aka Managerial Breadth)
Integrating Know-How is one of the easiest parts of the total consultatively as well as executively, and involves the areas of
Know-How rating and the 2nd element of a job’s Know-How organizing, planning, executing, controlling, and evaluating.
rating. It considers the need to integrate and manage The overall size of an organization (that is, the State of
progressively more diverse functions and is used to rank Minnesota) directly influences the number of managerial
managerial breadth and scope, from similar to very different breadth categories, because organizational size often reflects
functions. When required, basic and job-specific supervisory requirements for increased managerial complexity and
and managerial KSAs are included in the Job-Specific part of diversity. Columns II – VI are used to reflect additional scale,
a Know-How rating. This Know-How may be exercised complexity, diversity, and size.
IV. Compre- V. Very large VI. Total mgmt

T. Task I. Activity II. Related III. Diverse hensive agency mgmt of state
# of job classes 1 (<1%) 1631 (91%) 275 (15%) 43 (2%) 5 (<1%) 7 (<1%) 2 (<1%)
AFSCME all
B.U./Plans (added in CMR all
1995) MAPE all
MGEC all
MLEA all
MMA 99% MMA <1%
MNA all
MGR 25% MGR 71 % MGR 3% MGR <1% MGR <1% Governor
SRSEA all
MnSCU all Chancellor of
MnSCU
Almost all individual Typically Integrates fields Commissioners of large agencies are
Indicators contributors and managers of with fundamentally found here:
(see more detail supervisors are here; 25% supervisors; different Commr-Admin GIV3 920
below) of the State’s managers more homogen- objectives Commr- Educ GIV3 1056
are, too eous functions Commr-MMB GV3 1216
than at III level Example: Commr-Transp GV3 1400
Emphasize doing the Reconcile the
work…lighter on planning “Do,” but more conflicting
and evaluation emphasis on interests of
planning several hundred
Focus is on next 30 days employees
3 – 12 month
focus 1 – 3 year focus

T Task III Diverse
• Jobs usually focus on completing very simple, routine, • Positions are responsible for integrating several
repetitive tasks rather than integrating those tasks into the unrelated functions
unit’s workflow. • Managers characteristically face diverse objectives and
• There’s little need for the employee to coordinate work goals and competing needs for resources.
efforts with others. • There are few supervisory classes with this rating (see
• Work is structured in such a way that the tasks to be next chart)
completed are presented to the employee in the order in • Broad-scale organizational planning and control assume
which they are to be done. greater importance.
• Examples
I Activity o Assistant Commissioners in medium to large-sized
• The vast majority of positions throughout State agencies
service are placed here. o Deputy Commissioners in medium to large-sized
• Most individual contributors and most supervisors are agencies
here; some managers are, too. o Commissioners of small to medium-sized agencies
• Professional, supervisory and managerial positions are
responsible for a singular function, e.g. Transit planning, IV Comprehensive
budget and accounting. • Positions typically have overall management for a large
state agency or a broad array of functions in a very
II Related large agency.
• This rating is typically used for managerial positions; it’s • Examples:
very rare for supervisors to have this rating. o Deputy Commissioners of large agencies
• Positions typically manage functional activities and tasks o Commissioners of medium-sized agencies
through subordinate supervisors. with broad impact
• Incumbents are expected to integrate or coordinate fairly
homogeneous activities and functions with similar V Very Large Agency Management
purposes, but which have competing needs and Positions typically have overall leadership of one of
interests. the largest and most complex state agencies.
• The number and diversity of functions are increasingly • Examples: Commissioners of large agencies and
important; however, functions are still fairly similar in medium-sized agencies with broad impact (e.g.,
nature. Corrections, Finance, Health, Human Services, Natural
• The emphasis is on organizational planning and diverse Resources, Public Safety, Transportation)
programs integration, rather than doing.
VI Total Management of the State
Examples: Governor, Chancellor of MnSCU

Distribution of State Classes by Know-How Points
Integrating I. II. III. [technical, integrating and human relations]
Know-How T. Task Activity Related Diverse
Depth and Breath
of Job Specific
Knowledge 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
L. Limited
A. Primary
B/ Elementary
Vocational
C. Vocational
D. Advanced
Vocational
E. Basic
Specialized
F. Seasoned
Professional
TIP: Why are there shaded areas on the Hay Guide
Charts?
Shaded areas serve as a boundary or guide for raters. For

example, a position with a “C Vocational” Job Specific
Knowledge rating would not have a “II Related” Integrating
rating.

Human Relations Skills
This is the 3rd element of a job’s Know-How rating: the active, practicing interpersonal skills typically required for productive working
relationships and to work with, or through, others inside and/or outside of the organization to get work accomplished. It assumes that
EVERY State job requires a foundation of (1) Basic Human Relations Skills and some jobs require additional skills on a regular basis.
To be effective, an employee must typically be proficient at the highest level of Human Relations Skill regularly required for the job.
1. Basic 2. Important 3. Critical

# classes 193 (12%) 715 (43%) 745 (45%)
“General effectiveness that is ordinary “Alternative or combined skills in “Alternative and combined skills in
Description for everyday life is a basic work understanding, teaming with, developing, collaborating with,
consideration. Tact and courtesy are collaborating with, and/or influencing persuading, motivating and leading
required, including conduct of other people are important and specific other people are essential and
relationships in which information is considerations to cause action or overriding considerations.”
requested and provided.” understanding by others.”
Tactful, with common courtesy Regularly interact with others and Able to persuade, motivate, lead and
Indicators Factual exchange of information interactions often require understanding accomplish work goals through others
Failure to exercise this level of skill will of and sensitivity to others’ points of view Negotiate, sell, supervise, and
“make waves,” cause problems, and and assertiveness to influence outcomes manage outcomes
eventually interfere with effective job May involve collaboration Strong interpersonal skills are the key
performance Employees who assign, monitor and to success in these jobs – usually
Job-Specific Know-How is relatively review others’ work usually need at least supervisory or managerial
MORE important than Human this level of human relations skill Characterized by constant, daily
Relations Know-How Job-Specific Know-How is relatively interaction with others
EQUAL in importance to Human Job-Specific Know-How is relatively
Relations Know-How LESS important than Human Relations
Know-How
Automotive Mechanic Most professional level positions Most supervisors and managers
Examples Baker Community Liaison Rep Labor Relations Rep Sr and Principal
Carpenter Food Inspector 1 Lottery Sales Manager
Customer Services Specialist Labor Investigator Management Analyst Supv 3
Delivery Van Driver Employee Development Spec Mediator
Food Service Worker Personnel Officer State Program Admin Mgr
General Maintenance Worker Recreation Therapist
Office and Admin Spec and Int
Parks Worker
Zoo Life Support Operator

Human Relations Know-How Q&A commission based on successful sales/changes in behavior.
In some positions, program/salary dollars increase or
Lessons learned from Hay Group consultant, Al Bunnett, as decrease based directly on an incumbent's performance
part of the 2008 Quality Assurance review. The 2008 QA which ultimately effects employment or layoff.
review included several established non-supervisory classes
with a “3” in Human Relations Know-How. A This describes sales-type situations well and the use
of "3" would be typical in most situations for individual
Q Is the following an accurate description of the contributors.
standards the State should be using to determine a
"3" in Human Relations? Q What are the guidelines for using a "3" vs a "2" in Human
‘A "3" in Human Relations is appropriate for supervisory Relations when subordinate staff are unclassified or non-
classes using the Public Employees Labor Relations Act state employees, e.g. Student Workers, inmates,
(PELRA) as a guide for decision making?’ contractors?
A Mostly yes if the job exists for the purpose of A For Inmates and student workers "2" should be
supervising its staff. (see next question) sufficient for the supervisor. In this situation, the State
does not expect to invest much in changing behavior. A
Q What are typical supervisory situations that would argue German incentive plan is in place. (Do as instructed or
for a "2" rather than a "3" in Human Relations? you will be fired. You are easily replaced.) Supervising
contractors might be more troublesome since they are
sometimes more difficult to replace. But in general, I lean
A But when the staff size is small and well-educated (we toward "2" since the contractor usually want to please the
often use bench scientific subordinates as an example), employer, their behavioral vector is to conform to the
consider using "2”. In this example the supervision supervisor's wishes. Good references and perhaps a
element of the job is usually subordinate to some personal follow-on contract create incentives for the contractor not
technical/professional contribution. So as a supervisor the to stress the motivational skills of the supervisor.
job might be kind of ordinary, but the incumbent might be
judged a superior performer based on her super technical In general, where the job must maintain longer term
contribution. HR skills are "2" in such a case. relationships (years, not weeks) with the subordinate, "3" is a
better choice.
Q A "3" is also appropriate for positions/classifications in
State government responsible for changing behavior, e.g.
selling products, services or ideas. In this context, changing
behavior has a very narrow definition and relies on
understanding how an employer measures successful
performance. Changing behavior is so essential to the
classification/position that there's a direct correlation between
performance and salary and/or continued employment.
Typically, a percent of total salary is awarded as a sales

COMBINING THE THREE PARTS OF KNOW-HOW
NOTE: This table is laid out similarly to the Know-How chart used by Hay raters, for ease in use.
(2) Integrating/managerial breadth

V. Very
(1) IV. large VI. Total
Technical/ T. III. Compre- agency mgmt of
specialized Task I. Activity II. Related Diverse hensive mgmt the state
 (3) Human
relations  1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Practical L. Limited <1%

procedures
A. Primary <1%
B. Elementary
Vocational 2% 1% NO! NO!
NO!
Specialized C. Vocational 4% 4% 2% NO! NO!
techniques
D. Advanced MAYBE
Vocational 4% 13% 4%
E. Basic
Specialized 2% 21% 10% <1% 1% MAYBE
F. Seasoned
Learned Professional 4% 12% <1% 12% 2% MAYBE
disciplines
G. Specialized NO!
Mastery <1% <1% 1% 1% <1% <1% MAYBE <1%
H. Professional
Mastery <1%

Problem Solving is the original ‘self-
starting’ thinking required by the job
for analyzing, evaluating, creating, Thinking Challenge
reasoning, arriving at and making
conclusions.
3. Interpretive
CHAPTER 2: Problem Solving
Problem Solving measures the

intensity of the mental process that
uses Know-How to: (1) identify, (2)
define, and (3) resolve problems. It is
a percentage of Know-How,
Context
reflecting the fact that “you think E. Clearly Defined 33%
with what you know.”
This is true of even the most creative

work. Ideas are put together from
something already there. The raw
material of any thinking is knowledge
of facts, principles and means.
Problem Solving includes two

dimensions:
• Context (aka Thinking

Environment)
• Thinking Challenge
In the example on the right, Problem

Solving is expressed as E3 (33%)
(Context level E, Thinking Challenge
level 3 at 33% of the Know-How
points).

The Two Elements of Problem Solving:
A Strict Routine
Context
• As of 7/10, there were 7 active job classes with this
Context includes the influences or environment that limit or rating.
guide decision-making such as rules, instructions, procedures, • Positions are guided by simple rules and detailed
standards, policies, principles from fields of science and instructions.
academic disciplines. • Instructions or orders, usually given orally, usually
specify in detail the sequence and timing of the tasks to
Positions are guided by organizational, departmental or be undertaken with little or no latitude for the employee
functional goals, policies, objectives, practices or to consider alternative procedures.
circumscribed by procedures and instructions. In general,
policies describe the “what” of a subject matter, procedures B Routine
detail the steps needed to follow through on a policy (i.e., how,
where, when, by whom) and instructions outline the specific • As of 7/10, there were approx. 80 active job classes with
aspects of how to perform the tasks, such as the operation of this rating.
a machine or how to select the appropriate letters to use in • Positions are guided by established routines and
particular situations. standing instructions.
• Instructions usually provide the latitude to consider
HayGroup® cautions against the mechanical application of variations in the sequence of procedures based on
organization echelons to determine levels. However, each job situations encountered within the work setting.
is expected to resolve problems to meet its specific
accountabilities within an organizational framework or context. C Semi-routine
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 270 active job classes

TIP: Since Problem Solving is always a percentage of the with this rating. Examples include Aides, skilled
Know-How rating, the letter chosen for Context will generally be administrative support positions, skilled trades,
at the same level or one letter lower than the Job-Specific technicians and some first level supervisors.
Know-How letter chosen for a position. For example, if the Hay
• Positions are guided by somewhat diversified
raters choose E for Job-Specific Know-How, the Context for the
procedures and precedents.
position would typically be E or D; the Context rating would
• While assigned tasks follow procedures, latitude is
never be F or G.
permitted because of changing work circumstances.
Incumbents determine the most appropriate procedure
or precedent to follow.

PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES
D Standardized
D - Standardized Information Tech Spec 1 and 2
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 480 active job classes Forensic Scientist 1
with this rating. The Problem Solving point mode at this Personnel Officer
Pers Officer Sr and Princ
level is 50 points, the median is 57 points. Examples
Pollution Control Spec and Int
include: Psychologist
o Entry level professionals Registered Nurse/Sr/Princ
o Most secondary professionals Registered Nurse Supervisor
o Some third level professionals State Patrol Trooper
o Some first level supervisors State Programs Admin and Int
 Positions are guided by substantially diversified business Warehouse Examiner Supv
or academic procedures and specialized standards. E – Clearly Defined Dentist
 Changing priorities or differing situations encountered in Engineer Admin and Princ
the work environment allow the employee latitude to Finance Specialist 1, 2 and 3
Forensic Scientist 2 and 3
consider which among many procedures should be
Hydrologist 4
followed in what sequence to achieve the required job Hydrologist 5
results. Information Tech Spec 3, 4, 5
Personnel Director 1 and 2
E Clearly Defined Personnel Representative
Planner Principal State
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 710 active job classes Psychologist 2 and 3
with this rating. Examples include: RN Advanced Practitioner
o Some third level professionals Safety Investigator 3 and 4
o Advanced professionals State Prog Admin Supv Sr and Princ
Systems Analysis Unit Supv
o Professional supervisors
o Some managers, directors and executive
directors
• Positions are guided by policies and principles rather
than procedures.
• Incumbents determine how best to accomplish goals or
resolve work challenges
• Many higher level professional, supervisory and lower
and mid level managerial classes are rated at this level.

F Broadly Defined

rating. PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES
• Positions are guided by broadly defined policies and
specific objectives. F – Broadly Defined Assistant Commissioner – DOC
Assistant State Negotiator
• Incumbents determine “what needs to be done” in
Commissioner – Human Rights
applying broad policies, in establishing a plan of action, Demographer State
and in determining the priorities and processes needed Deputy Commissioner – Health
to achieve the objective. Exec Dir – Animal Health Bd
Exec Dir – PERA
G Generally Defined Health Care Program Mgr Sr
Personnel Director 3 and 4
• As of 7/10, there were 20 active job classes with this State Patrol Chief
rating. G – Generally Defined Commissioner – Administration
• Positions are guided by general policies and goals Commissioner – Agriculture
Commissioner – DHS
based on broad public policies.
Exec Dir – Investment Board
• These positions determine the organization’s (i.e., the H – Abstractly Defined Governor
State of Minnesota’s) functional direction; the goal is
specified in only very general terms, such as “increase in
international operations” or “enter new markets.”
H Abstractly Defined
• Positions are guided by the general laws of nature

and/or science, within a framework of business
philosophy and cultural standards.
• The Governor is the only position in State government
with this rating. The Governor determines the strategic
direction of State government, consistent with its charter,
and the requirements for the organization’s survival and
continuity.

Thinking Challenge 1 Repetitive
Hay Guide Chart – Thinking Challenge includes the • As of 7/10, there were 19 active job classes with this
Profile Method: nature of the problems rating.
a 3-level Thinking encountered and the mental • This level has been compared to a true/false test
Challenge process processes used to resolve the situation, with very limited options from which to choose.
problems. The scale ranges • Employees are expected to resolve identical situations
Like the process that from simple problems to very by making simple choices among a limited number of
turns loose complex issues, with the
vegetation into rolls
learned things.
of hay, the Hay
premise that simple issues recur • KSAs are applied directly to the job, with little need to
method of job
regularly in the same form and exercise independent judgment.
evaluation takes after awhile are resolved by rote • Each situation is nearly the same as the prior one and
relevant pieces of or instinct, but very difficult employees make correct decisions through simple
information about a issues require substantial choices, e.g., sorting operations.
job; subjects them to thinking and deliberation. The
an organized, types of situations encountered 2 Patterned
standardized and the processes involved in
process; and results identifying, defining or resolving
in consistent ratings • As of 7/10, there were approx. 200 active job classes
related problems are with this rating, many of them AFSCME positions.
that can be used for a considered. Thinking Challenge
variety of purposes. • This level has been compared to a multiple-choice test
reflects the degree of difficulty in situation with a finite number of choices, but more varied
finding improvements and than true/false.
adapting to changes.
• Employees resolve similar situations by discriminating
between choices of learned things that generally follow a
well-defined pattern.
• These jobs are confronted with multiple-choice
situations, but have learned which choice is most
appropriate for each situation through prior exposure or
experience.

3 Interpretive 4 Adaptive
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 1040 active job classes • As of 7/10, there were approx. 410 active job classes
(about 60%) with this rating. Examples include: with this rating. Examples include:
o More complex AFSCME positions o Some advanced professionals
o Most professionals and supervisors o Higher level supervisors
o Some managers o Most managers
o Some directors and executive directors o Some assistant directors
• This level has been compared to an essay test situation, o Most directors
where more independent thought and creativity is o Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners,
involved. Assistant Commissioners
• Employees resolve differing situations requiring a search • Positions are expected to resolve variable situations
for solutions or new applications within the area of requiring analytical, interpretive, evaluative and/or
learned things. constructive thinking.
• Experience is needed to know the options and make • Situations are often more hypothetical, with the need to
sound judgments. develop alternatives.
• Employees need to be aware of and interpret choices; • Positions deal with situations that are largely new.
they’re expected to have dealt with similar, but not • Employees adapt trends or programs that are known in
always identical, situations before. the U.S. to specific circumstances
• These jobs are confronted with problems that “fall in the • The situation to be resolved includes circumstances,
cracks” and resolve them by “reading between the lines.” facts and issues that are different than those that have
• Solutions result from comparing problem elements to been encountered in the past.
reference points within one’s own experience and then • The employee has to consider various possible courses
using one’s judgment to match the appropriate prior of action and ponder their consequences before taking
decision. or recommending further steps.

In any decision situation, the amount of relevant information
5 Uncharted available is inversely proportional to the importance of the
decision. (Cooke's Law)--Paul Dickson, comp. (The Official
• As of 7/10, there was 1 active job class with this rating: Rules)
Chancellor MnSCU.
• Positions are expected to resolve novel or nonrecurring
JOB COMPONENT PATTERNS
path finding situations requiring the development of new
Know-How points to Problem Solving percentages
concepts and imaginative approaches. KH Problem Solving Percentages
• These positions are confronted with the unknown, in PTS 66% 57% 50% 43% 38% 33% 29% 25% 22%
situations with little or no precedents. 920 x
• The employee must originate new concepts or 800 x x
approaches without guidance from others. 700 x x
608 x x
• Deliberations are often necessarily time-consuming. 528 x x
460 s x x
Job analysts choose between two percentages for each 400 x x
combination of Context and Thinking Challenge (low and high) 350 x x x
to “fine-tune” the rating. For example, a D3 combination could 304 x x
be assigned D3 (29%) for 50 points or D3 (33%) for 57 points. 264 x x x
230 s x x
200 x x
Once the Know-How rating and the Problem Solving 175 x x s
percentage for a position are agreed upon, Hay raters use the 152 s x x s
Point Conversion Table included with the Hay Guide Charts to 132 s x x
determine the position’s total number of Problem Solving 115 s x
points. To use this table, choose the column that matches the X= Typical/Probable
position’s total number of Know-How points, look along the left S = Selectively
side of the table for the % you’ve chosen, then find the number
where these two intersect for the total Problem Solving points.
For example, a 33% Problem Solving for 200 Know-How
points results in 66 total Problem Solving points.

Accountability does not mean being
responsible for getting one’s own work
done. Rather, it reflects responsibility Contributory
for actions and their consequences and
the measured effect of the job on end
results for the organization.
CHAPTER 3: Accountability
It includes three factors: 2 Small

Magnitud
• Freedom to Act/Empowerment
(i.e., freedom to act on D. Generally
decisions); Regulated
• Magnitude (i.e., size of budget
and magnitude of influence); 76
and
• Job Impact (i.e., the way in
which actions affect end results
in the agency).
You will see Accountability expressed

as D2C 76 (D level Freedom to Act, 2
level magnitude, and C level Job Impact
for a total of 76 Accountability points).
These three factors measure the actual
effects of Know-How and Problem
Solving, and are considered together in
the way that makes the most sense
overall for each position.

The Three Elements of Accountability:
TIP: A position’s Freedom to Act rating is
Freedom to Act/Empowerment typically the same letter or one lower than the
Context choice for Problem Solving (i.e., a D in
This aspect is officially titled Empowerment, but it is more Context would result in a D or C for Freedom to
commonly known by its previous title, “Freedom to Act.” It Act). However, in some of the largest jobs,
involves the degree of personal or procedural control or Accountability is one letter higher (i.e., a G in
guidance exercised over the position. For example, what Thinking Context with an H in Freedom to Act).
constraints are put on an employee in this job? Are there set
procedures to follow or does the employee have broad
authority to carry out management’s or the Governor’s B Controlled
direction? How closely supervised is the position? What kinds
of decisions are made higher up in the organization? • As of 7/10, there were approx. 100 active job classes
with this rating.
L Limited • These positions are subject to instructions and
established work routines and/or close supervision.
• As of 7/10, there were 2 active job classes with this • Employees have minor latitude to rearrange the
rating: Service Worker and Supported Employment sequence of completing various tasks or duties based on
Worker. changed work situations, workflow, etc.
• These jobs are subject to explicit instructions covering
simple tasks. C Standardized
• The nature of the tasks are totally confining; instructions
are exact and supervision is continuous. • As of 7/10, there were approx. 310 active job classes
with this rating.
A Prescribed • These jobs are subject, wholly or in part, to standardized
practices and procedures, general work instructions
• As of 7/10, there were 13 active job classes with this and/or supervision of progress and results.
rating. • These employees usually perform a greater variety of
• These jobs are subject to prescribed instructions tasks and duties and clearly understand, on a daily
covering assigned tasks and/or immediate supervision. basis, what results are expected by the supervisor.
• These jobs are given explicit instructions, orally or in • Employees are not permitted to deviate from standard
writing, that state the step-by-step sequence of tasks to practices and procedures, but may be permitted to set
be completed to achieve a specific end result. No their own priorities, subject to the supervisor’s approval.
deviation is permitted without first seeking permission.

D Generally Regulated approved operating plans and objectives and functional
policies and precedents.
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 575 active job classes • The management direction given these employees
with this rating. Examples include: establishes expected results.
o Some entry level professionals • These positions determine how and when the results will
o Most second level professionals be achieved.
o Some third level professionals
o Some first level supervisors F Oriented Direction
• These jobs are subject, wholly or in part, to practices
and procedures covered by precedents or well-defined • As of 7/10, there were 58 active job classes with this
policy and/or supervisory review. rating (e.g. Assistant Commissioners, Commissioner,
• These employees are permitted to determine their own Deputy Commissioner, Executive Directors).
priorities and may deviate from established procedures • These positions, by their nature or size, are broadly
and practices as long as the end results meet standards subject to functional policies and goals and/or general
of acceptability (e.g., quality, volume, timeliness, etc.). managerial direction.
• Supervision over work activities is usually indirect and • Employees usually report to the managers of major
review of work results usually occurs after the fact. operating areas in the agency or are the organization’s
top management and are permitted wide discretion,
E Directed provided that activities are consistent with operating
policies and precedents within that function.
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 575 active job classes • Actions that will impact other functional or operating
with this rating. Examples include: areas usually require approval before they may be
o High level professionals implemented.
o Many supervisors • Commissioners are subject only to guidance from the
o Managers and directors Governor’s Office.
• This option was previously called “Reviewed.”
• These positions, by their nature or size, are subject to G Guided
broad practice and procedures covered by functional
precedents and policies and/or achievement of a • As of 7/10, there were 17 active job classes with this
circumscribed operational activity and/or managerial rating.
direction. • These positions are subject only to broad policy and
• These positions, most often managers of functional general management guidance.
areas or very senior individual contributors, generally • Employees establish functional policy as the
have the independence needed to achieve operational Commissioners and some Deputy Commissioners of
goals, provided that activities are consistent with State agencies.

• This is a major decision-making level in a State agency,
which determines the results to be achieved within that
agency.
• Commissioners are subject only to guidance from the
Governor’s office.
H Strategic Guidance

rating: Commissioner of DHS, Commissioner of DOT
and Chancellor MnSCU.
• These positions are characterized by a comprehensive
and controlling effect on the largest State of Minnesota
agencies and on the people of the state.
• Positions are subject only to guidance from the
Governor’s office.
I Governor/Chief Justice

Magnitude
1 Very Small or Indeterminate
This is the portion of the total organization encompassed by
the position’s primary purpose. It’s most typically indicated by • As of 7/10, there were approx. 990 (about 56%) active
the general dollar size of the area(s) most directly affected by job classes with this rating.
the job, i.e., the resources over which the position has control • The magnitude is a very small or indeterminate portion
or influence. Hay raters consider a variety of issues. For of the Agency mission.
example, what sort of budget does the employee in this • Operational budget influenced is under $700,000.
position control? Does this figure include mostly salaries? • Most State jobs are 1 – limited or indeterminate –
How are others involved in deciding how the money is spent? because either the $ amount controlled is under
If there isn’t any budget, what kind of influence does the $700,000 OR others have a significant effect on the
employee have over what goes on in the agency? decisions made.
2 Small
TIP: The operational budget numbers change as
the Accountability Magnitude Index (AMI) • As of 7/10, there were approx. 420 active job classes
changes. The current AMI is 7.0 (Oct 2009). This with this rating.
means that each of the dollar amounts on the • The magnitude is a small portion of the State or Agency
Magnitude portion of the Accountability Guide Chart mission.
is adjusted in accordance with the current AMI by • Operational budget influenced is $700,000 to
multiplying each number by 7.0 $14,000,000 ($14 million).
• Most State jobs that aren’t placed in 1 above are found
1. Very small or indeterminate (under $700,000) here, either because the $ amount clearly controlled falls
in this area OR a position’s role is very broad and
2. Small ($700,000 - $14 million) contributes to a much larger amount, although others
also have a significant effect on the decisions made.
3. Medium ($14 million - $140 million)
3 Medium
4. Large ($140 million - $1.4 billion)
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 150 active job classes
5. Very Large ($1.4 billion - $14 billion) with this rating.
• The magnitude is a medium portion of the State or
6. (Over $14 billion)
Agency mission.
• Operational budget influenced is $14,000,000 ($14
million) to $140,000,000 ($140 million).

4 Large
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 80 active job classes with

this rating.
• The magnitude is a large portion of the State or major
Agency mission.
• Operational budget influenced is $140,000,000 ($140
million) to $1,400,000,000 ($1.4 billion).
5 Very Large

rating.
• The magnitude is a very large portion of the State’s
mission.
• Operational budget influenced is $1,400,000,000 ($1.4
billion) to $14,000,000,000 ($14 billion).
6 Whole State

rating: Commissioner of Education, Commissioner of
Minnesota Management and Budget, and Executive
Director Investment Board.
• Operational budget influenced is more than
$14,000,000,000 ($14 billion).

Job Impact • This Job Impact option is the least direct of the four
available options.
A position’s Job Impact is considered to be indirect (indirect or
contributory) or direct and measurable (shared or primary). It C Contributory
involves the way in which the position’s actions affect end
results in the agency. For example, how does the employee • As of 7/10, there were approx. 1025 active job classes
influence the business of the agency – directly or indirectly? (About 58%) with this rating.
Does the employee provide advisory or interpretive services • Positions provide interpretive, advisory or facilitating
for others to use in making decisions? Is the job an services for use by others in taking action.
information-recording one? Does it provide a necessary • This type of Job Impact is appropriate where jobs are
service with a relatively small effect on the business of the accountable for providing significant “advice and
agency? “Contributory” and “primary” are, by far, the most counsel” in addition to information and/or analysis, and
frequently used options. The Hay raters often must determine when decisions are likely to be made by virtue of that
whether the position is primary over a smaller or indeterminate counsel.
amount or contributory over a larger amount. To make this • Such impacts are commonly found in staff or support
decision, they consider the position’s primary function in the functions that significantly influence decisions.
organization and reflect that organizational role through the • For example, a “product manager” may provide
rating. recommendations that, when acted upon, materially
influence sales revenues; a labor relations specialist
I Indirect makes recommendations that “contribute” to union
settlements of a given magnitude.
• As of 7/10, there were approx. 110 active job classes • Positions are generally supportive in nature.
with this rating. • Position’s role is to provide advice, counsel or
• This option was previously called “Remote.” recommendations to assist decision-makers and/or
• Positions provide informational, recording or incidental action takers.
services for use by others related to some important end • This Job Impact option is more direct than the “Indirect”
result. option.
• Job activity may be complex, but the effect on the overall
organization is relatively minor.
• Employees typically collect or process information or
data for other positions with more direct impact on the
organization.
• Employees perform tasks with little recognition of the
use to which the end results will be put or what they
influence.

S Shared P Primary
• As of 7/10, there were 10 active job classes with this • As of 7/10, there were approx. 510 active job classes
rating, including the Governor’s position. with this rating.
• Positions participate with peers within or outside the • Positions are directly accountable for making decisions
organizational unit to make decisions and take actions and taking actions, directly or through subordinate
jointly; a basic rule is that “sharing” cannot exist vertically positions, which determine and control the results.
in an organization – it can only exist among peers. • Line management positions are generally considered to
• Shared impacts can exist between peer jobs and/or be controlling their own operating areas.
functions, and suggest a degree of “partnership” in or • These positions control the Job Impact on end results,
“joint accountability” for the results. where any shared accountability with others is
• This option is rarely used; it’s for equal partnership secondary.
situations such as the Governor’s shared decision- • Such impacts are commonly found in operations and
making with the Legislature or in self-directed work managerial positions that have “line accountability” for
teams. key end result areas, whether they’re large or small.
• Responsibility and accountability are shared equally with • For example, a supervisor may be “primarily
others. accountable” for the production or output (value added)
• For example, there may be shared accountability of a unit within the context of available resources (e.g.,
between engineering and manufacturing functions for a human resources and controllable expenses); whereas
successful product. the Minncor Vice-President of Operations may have a
• A committee where each member has an equal vote is primary impact upon the total value added in the
an example of shared accountability. manufacture of products or upon costs of goods
• This Job Impact option is more direct than “Contributory” manufactured.
because these positions share direct accountability fairly • The key is that the job exists to have the controlling
equally. However, since it is shared, these positions influence on certain end results of a given magnitude,
have lower Job Impact than a position that is considered and that accountability is not shared with others, i.e.,
to be “Primary.” “the buck stops here.”
• This is the most direct Job Impact option.
There are also “fine-tuning” decisions to be made in

Accountability, with several options available for each rating
combination. For example, C1P can be assigned 57 points,
66 points or 76 points.

Special Conditions points have much more of an effect on
A fourth factor, special conditions, is
AFSCME-type positions, where the overall number of points
used when appropriate for certain
are typically lower than those of professionals, supervisors and
jobs where physical effort, noxious
managers.
physical conditions, physical hazards
and/or sensory attention demands are
To read existing Hay ratings that include Special Conditions
significant elements. Prior to 1995,
points, it helps to know the following codes. Each of the four
CHAPTER 4: Special Conditions
when the sensory attention demands

elements is assigned 0 – 10 points for relevant situations.
aspect was added, this section was
called “Working Conditions.” These
P = Physical Effort
points are typically not applied to
E = Environment
professional level positions for two
H = Hazards
reasons:
S = Sensory Attention (added in 1995)
• Professional positions are less
likely to spend as much of their
time in conditions that
emphasize physical effort,
noxious physical conditions,
physical hazards, or sustained
sensory attention demands.
• Even if the professional positions

do experience some of these
conditions, the effect of Special
Conditions points on the overall
Hay rating becomes increasingly
negligible as the Know-How,
Problem Solving and
Accountability point values
become higher.

Figure 2:
Proportions of Accountability, Know-How,
JOB PROFILES and Problem Solving
Commissioner: Profile: KH-PS-AC
The job’s size and profile serve as Large Agency 37-25-38
starting points for many job evaluation
applications. Job size is determined by
the total of the factor point values for AC KH
38% 37%
Know-How, Problem Solving and
Accountability, and reflects the job’s
PS
relative value to the organization. The 25%
CHAPTER 5: Fine Tuning
relative proportions of Know-How,

Problem Solving and Accountability that
make up the job determine its profile Commissioner: Profile: KH-PS-AC
(see Figure 2). The job profile concept Small Agency 43-25-32
provides a better understanding of how
jobs fit into organizations.
AC
32% KH
The balance between Accountability 43%
and Problem Solving reflects the extent
to which the job is primarily concerned PS
25%
with achieving results or is focused on
research and analysis.
The balance among Accountability, Office and Admin Spec Profile: KH-PS-AC
Know-How, and Problem Solving 74-12-14
reflects the level and type of work in an
AC
organization. For example, entry-level 14%
positions typically focus on Know-How. PS
12%
Accountability focus grows through
career development into jobs that KH
74%
impact the organization more broadly
through application of acquired
experience and problem-solving S In entry-level jobs, Know-How may account for 70% of job
capability. content, while at the CEO level Know-How may only be
30% of job content (even though, of course, it is significantly
more important than Know-How for an entry-level position).

Short Profiles
There are “Short Profiles” that describe the relationship of the Written Verbal Interpretation
point factor values for a single position or classification. Accountability is four steps higher
+4 Up 4 than Problem Solving
In some positions, “Accountability” is higher than “Problem Accountability is three steps higher
Solving”. These positions have an “Up” profile. This means +3 Up 3 than Problem Solving
that deadlines and end results are more important to Accountability is two steps higher
successful job performance than analysis and research. As +2 Up 2 than Problem Solving
the gap between “Problem Solving” and “Accountability” Accountability is one step higher than
increases (greater “Accountability”), deadlines and end results +1 Up 1 Problem Solving
take on greater significance. Usually, jobs of this nature are Accountability and Problem Solving
supervisors and managers. = Level are equal
Accountability is one step lower than
Up profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as +1, +2, +3, -1 Down 1 Problem Solving
etc. (EI2 230 E3(38) 87 E2C 100 = 417 + 1)
Accountability is two steps lower than
-2 Down 2 Problem Solving
In some positions, “Problem Solving and “Accountability” are
Accountability is three steps lower
equal. In these positions, analysis and the search for answers
-3 Down 3 than Problem Solving
to difficult work issues is as important as deadlines. These
jobs are called “Level”. “Level” profiles include positions such Accountability is three steps lower
as Research Analyst, Planner, and Auditor. -4 Down 4 than Problem Solving
Level profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as “=”.

(EI2 200 E3(33) 66 D1C 66 = 332 =)
In some positions, “Problem Solving” is greater than

Accountability. In these positions, analysis and the search for
answers is greater than deadlines and end results. These
positions are called “Down” jobs. Down profiles are often
found among positions responsible for scientific research. The
State’s Research Scientist classification illustrates this
concept.
Down profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as -1, -2, -
3, etc. (FI2 264 E4(43) 115 E2C 100 =479 -1)

Guide to Hay Evaluation Profiles
Based on Problem Solving %, Know-How Points and total points.
PS Short Know-How Points
% Profile 115 132 152 175 200 230 264 304 350 400 460 528 608 700
25 = 173 198 228 261
25 +1 177 203 233 268
29 -1 177 203 233 268 307 353
29 = 181 208 238 275 314 362
29 +1 186 213 245 282 323 372
33 -1 186 213 245 282 323 372
33 = 191 218 252 289 332 382 438
29 +2 191 220 252 291 333 383 440
33 +1 298 342 393 451
38 -1 298 342 393 451 519 597
38 = 307 352 404 464 534 614
33 +2 308 353 406 466 536 617
43 -2 353 406 466 536 617 707 812
38 +1 363 417 479 551 634 727 835
43 -1 417 479 551 634 727 835
43 = 430 494 568 654 750 860
38 +2 432 496 571 657 752 865
50 -2 432 496 571 657 752 865 992 1142
43 +1 511 588 677 775 890 1022 1176
50 -1 511 588 677 775 890 1022 1176
50 = 528 608 700 800 920 1056 1216
43 +2 531 611 702 805 924 162 1222
57 -2 611 702 805 924 1062 1222
50 +1 725 830 954 1096 1262 1450
57 -1 725 830 954 1096 1262 1450
57 = 750 860 988 1136 1308 1500
50 +2 755 864 994 1142 1312 1510
66 -2 864 994 1142 1312 1510
57 +1 894 1028 1182 1358 1560
57 +2 934 1074 1232 1418 1628
66 +2 1768
= total points of common evaluations

Long Profiles
Long Profile Short
The Long Profile describes the relationship of the three Hay Classification KH% PS% AC% Profile
factors for a single position as well as the vertical relationships Student Worker
of positions within an organization. Clerical 79 8 13 +3
Food Service
Long Profiles break down the three factors into percentages. Worker 76 9 15 +3
Long Profiles can be determined from the Hay charts under Office Specialist 76 10 14 +2
the section titled: “Characteristic Hay Profiles.” Microfilmer 72 12 16 +2
Account Clerk 70 13 17 +2
The Hay rating FI2 264 E4(43) 115 E2C 100 = 479 has a Personnel Aide 68 15 17 +1
long form profile of: 55-24-21. Translated, this means that Office Services
55% of this position is Know-How, 24% of this position is Supervisor 1 63 16 21 +2
Accounting
Problem Solving and 21% of this position is Accountability.
Officer 64 18 18 level =
Long Profiles also give raters valuable organizational
Management
information. Typically, when analyzing the vertical Analyst 3 60 20 20 level =
relationships of positions within an organization, positions at Planning
higher levels have greater Accountability. This permits raters Director State 53 20 27 +2
to use the “Long Profile” to determine a rating’s accuracy. For Financial
example, a managerial position with the above profile Services
supervising employees with a profile of (55-21-24 with 24% of Director 52 22 26 +1
the subordinates’ profile in Accountability) is probably Chief Information
incorrect. Raters then use this information for further analysis. Officer 46 23 31 +2
Asst
Commissioner –
Economic
Security 43 25 32 +2
Commissioner –
Transportation 38 24 38 +3
Governor 32 27 41 +3

These long profiles illustrate that as positions become more
complex, the emphases on problem solving and accountability
become greater and the emphasis on Know-How is
correspondingly decreased. For example, the Governor’s
Problem Solving is high – 41%. This reflects the Governor’s Long profile information can also be found in the annual Hay
significant responsibility for results and the organizational Evaluation lists provided by MMB that contain the current
reality that the Governor must often rely on others’ Know-How Hay ratings State of Minnesota job classes. These numbers
and Problem Solving due to the scope of the job. are sometimes slightly different than the percentages on the
“Characteristic Hay Profile” table. The table provided in the
The Personnel professional series class examples below all Hay Guide Charts is the official document, but the additional
have “level” profiles, which mean that the positions’ roles in columns on the Hay Evaluation lists are provided for Hay
Problem Solving and Accountability are considered equal or raters’ use in the “Sore-Thumbing” process described below.
balanced. Their short profiles would be identical. However,
their long profiles reflect the increasing emphases on Problem
Solving and Accountability as the job requirements become
more complex:
Long profile Short

Classification KH% PS% AC% profile
Personnel Officer 64 18 18 =
Personnel Officer Sr 60 20 20 =
Personnel Officer Princ 60 20 20 =
Personnel Rep 56 22 22 =
The “Characteristic Hay Profiles” table on the reverse side of

the Accountability Guide Chart provides a straightforward way
to identify a position’s long profile. Columns A4, A3, A2, A1
and LEVEL are used for most State of Minnesota Hay ratings.
In these situations, Accountability is higher than Problem
Solving (A1 – 4) or equal to Problem Solving (level). Because
the State has very few “down” jobs, where Problem Solving is
higher than Accountability, the P1, P2, P3 and P4 columns are
rarely used.

“Sore-Thumbing” Know- Problem Account- Total
Class How Solving ability Points
“Sore-Thumbing” is primarily used during a class study or (KH) (PS) (AC) &
quality assurance review, after multiple positions in an short
organization have been Hay-rated and before the ratings are profile
finalized. In this process, the job evaluations are put in order Personnel
from high to low and reviewed in relation to each other. This Dir 3 FII3 400 F4(50) 200 F3C 200 800 =
process is called “sore thumbing” because the raters check the Personnel
Services
ratings to see if any aspects of the ratings “stick out like a sore Manager FII3 350 E4(43) 152 E4C 175 677+1
thumb.” If irregularities or discrepancies are discovered during Personnel
this process, the raters discuss the rating(s) in question and Program
decide whether any changes are needed before the ratings Manager FI3 304 E4(43) 132 E3C 152 588 +1
are considered final. This is an example. Does anything Personnel
Dir 2 EI3 264 E3(38) 100 E2C 115 479 +1
stand out?
Personnel
Rep EI2 230 E3(38) 87 D2C 87 404 =
Personnel
Officer Princ EI2 200 D3(33) 66 D1C 66 332 =
Personnel
Officer Sr DI2 175 D3(33) 57 D1C 57 289 =
Personnel
Officer DI2 152 D3(29) 43 C1C 43 238 =
Personnel
Aide Sr DI2 132 C3(25) 33 C1C 33 198 =
Personnel
Aide CI2 115 C2(22) 25 C1I 29 169 +1

“Hay Ratings At-A-Glance”
Non-Managerial*
Managerial
Between 600-100 Total Hay Points
Between 1400-480 Total Hay Points**
Total
Job Specific Know-How and Know Typical Hay Total
Integrating Know-How -How Problem Points Job Specific Know-How and Know Typical Hay
“Alpha” notation; points Solving (rounded) Integrating Know-How -How Problem Points
“Alpha” notation; points Solving (rounded)
Seasoned Professional FI 304 38% 570 Specialized Mastery GIII 608 57% 1400
264 38% 480
230 33% 390 528 50% 1150
Basic Specialized EI Seasoned Professional FIII
200 33% 330
175 29% 280 460 50% 950
Advanced Vocational DI
152 29% 240
Seasoned Professional
132 25% 200 FII 400 43% 800
Vocational CI 115 22% 170
350 43% 680
100 19% 140
Elementary Vocational BI 87 16% 120 Seasoned Professional FI
304 38% 570
264 38% 480
76 14% 100
Primary AI ** Representative Managerial ratings from Executive Directors of
Limited LI 66 12% <99 Boards to Assistant Department Commissioners
*At least 85% of all state employees are in job classes with total Hay
points between 600-100

PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Hay Committees look at three key
elements when they rate a position: Know-How
Know-How, Problem-Solving and • A brief explanation of the services or products the position
Accountability. An effective Hay provides.
presentation communicates essential job • A brief description of the functions the position manages.
information in each of these areas in a • List of employees manage and their job classifications (this
CHAPTER 6: Preparing the Presentation
clear and concise manner (most sessions is supported by the org chart).
are scheduled for an hour, the suggest • Critical technical and/or specialized knowledge required by
time for the presentation is 15 minutes). the position.
• The position’s role in planning and prioritizing work and the
The facilitator should work with the
work performed by subordinates.
presenters prior to the Hay session to
• Unique factors affecting the position such as customers
assure that the presentation covers the
served; geographic area the position affects, special
most relevant material in the time
characteristics of the programs or services the position
provided. A rehearsal is recommended
provide to others, political/social influences.
for the best results. [See Hay Presenter
Checklist below] • Specialized equipment routinely used.
. • If applicable, the position’s role in dealing with the media,
It’s helpful to give the Hay Committee a general public, other governmental jurisdictions,
copy of the presentation so they can refer consultants, community groups, contractors, committees
back to the information as they conduct and related organizations.
their evaluations.
Problem-Solving The easiest way to communicate problem
solving is to provide examples of complex problems routinely
The following outlines are provided as solved in this job and how the incumbent must go about
guides. The raters may also find these solving these problems. Two or three examples are usually
outlines useful in when following along at sufficient. Describe the problem, who was involved, the
the presentation to be sure all the area position’s role in its resolution.
are covered.
Accountability
• Provide separate annual totals for salaries, equipment,
contracts and related activities. Explain the position’s role
and discretion in developing and managing that budget.
• If the position doesn’t have a budget, explain how this
position’s services/products help the agency achieve its
mission?

• Key decisions routinely made in the performance of the • Describe other constraints on the position such as
position’s job duties. administrative review, laws, regulations, procedures and
• Federal, state and local regulations and laws and special technology.
procedures that affect the way job duties are performed.
HAY PRESENTATION OUTLINE WORKSHEET

I.BACKGROUND
Briefly describe the nature of the work performed in your unit of the
agency.
II.KNOW HOW
a. MANAGERIAL SKILLS (Integrating Know-How)
Do you manage more than one functional area – e.g. accounting
and food service? If so what areas?
b. TECHNICAL SKILLS (Depth and Breadth of Job-Specific

Knowledge)
Discuss any special technical knowledge and/or skills that you or
your subordinates need to know for successfully completing their
work assignments (e.g. required certifications or degrees,
specialty areas of knowledge, rules and laws, unique
processes/systems and/or products). How is this knowledge/skill
obtained?
c. HUMAN RELATIONS SKILLS
Elaborate on your supervisory responsibilities. Do you hire, fire,
resolve grievances, and assign work among work crews or
geographical areas, etc.? If you do not supervise what kind of
relationships do you have with your customers?
III. PROBLEM SOLVING
Provide two examples of difficult, but typical problems that you
face on your job (problems should be recurring, not one time
situations). What types of problems do you deal with? How are
problems solved?

IV. ACCOUNTABILITY
Provide the amount of your annual budget. Include your role in
developing the budget, allocating money for salaries and
materials.
a. FREEDOM TO ACT
What constraints limit your actions – e.g. laws, policies,
supervisory approvals, etc.? What kind of direction do you
receive from your supervisor? What kinds of decisions are made
higher up?
b. IMPACT ON END RESULTS

What is the primary purpose of your job? Describe how your job
impacts the goals of the agency. What is your role in the agency
– e.g. advisory/interpretive, leading/guiding?

Determine how well the presenter is prepared: Yes No
1. The presenter can clearly explain the job, its place in the
HAY Presenter Checklist organization, how the job has changed (if rating already exists) and ____ ____
can provide documentation to support the changes.
2. The presentation incorporates the key elements of Hay: Know
How, Problem Solving, Accountability and Special Conditions, ____ ____
A Dozen Tips
especially related to changes.
3. The presenter has prepared a written outline and done a trial run
Each Hay session is a “Moment of ____
with the appropriate supervisor and/or facilitator of the Hay ____
Truth” for the Hay job evaluation session.
process. All at one time and place, 4. The presentation has been “culled” to weed out extraneous ____ ____
customers (State Managers and content.
Supervisors), partners (Agency 5. The presentation has been timed and is not longer than about 15 ____ ____
personnel), and technical service minutes.
providers (Hay Raters) come together 6. The presenter understands the context and framework of the
to produce a quality Hay rating. This position in relation to other classes that already have Hay ratings. ____ ____
checklist will aid HR in guiding the
7. The presenter has been briefed on existing class possibilities. ____ ____
presenter and toward a high quality,
8. An anticipated timeline has been explained to the presenter as to
efficient process and result. ____
when the results of the Hay session may be available. ____
9. The presenter has been “schooled” as to how compensation may be
determined in terms of conversion tables, internal ____ ____
relationships/equity and market conditions.
10. Visual materials are in order such as:
• Position description ____ ____
____
• Org. chart with Hay ratings ____
____
• PowerPoint or Handouts ____
____
• Work Samples if appropriate ____
11. The presenter is aware that the Hay committee will ask questions ____
and possible questions have been anticipated. ____
12. The presenter is aware that he/she will not be present when the Hay
Committee actually discusses and comes to consensus about the ____ ____
rating.

HAY EVALUATION WORKSHEET FOR RATERS
Know-how Problem –solving Accountability Special

Initial Ratings Slot Points Slot (%) Points Slot Points Profile Conditions Total pts
Before presentation ( ) ___-___-___
( ) ___-___-___
( ) ___-___-___
After presentation ( ) ___-___-___
( ) ___-___-___
( ) ___-___-___
After committee discussion ( ) ___-___-___
( ) ___-___-___
Your final rating ( ) ___-___-___
Committee final rating ( ) ___-___-___
JOB TITLE EVALUATION RATIONALE/COMMENTS

KNOW-HOW
Clarification, additional data not covered in job description, etc.
PROBLEM SOLVING
ACCOUNTABILITY
Freedom/Empowerment
Impact/Magnitude
SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Hay Quality Assurance Summary
R R
The three or five person committee Date(s) of Rating(s) : Location:
design, Job Profiling and Sore-Thumbing
are three quality assurance elements R Title R
Facilitator name : Agency
that are built into the Hay committee
rating process itself. After the Hay rating Delegated to Agency
R
: Yes No
committee finalizes the rating(s), the
facilitator documents the findings in a Quality Assurance Measure - Effectiveness: Number of Hay raters and
standardized format provided by MMB agencies (statewide perspective). Certified/provisional – encourage raters to
CHAPTER 7: Quality Assurance
called the “Hay Quality Assurance be active? Presenters (Subject matter experts). HR involvement in the
process?
Summary” or “385” for the old form
number. Hay Committee (There must be at least 3 raters. Five rater teams are
recommended)
R R
The 385 form is MMB’s primary record Name Department
R
that a Hay rating has taken place. It is Rater 1
R
used for many reasons including Quality Rater 2
Assurance and as of 2003 also used to R
Rater 3
document and track individual Rater 4
participation on rating teams for the Rater 5
annual Hay Certification. [R = required
fields] Observers (Please list name(s) & Department(s) of each observer)
Observer 1:
An excerpt of the form is provided here. Observer 2:
Observer 3:
NOTE: All ratings must be recorded on Presenters (Please list name(s) & title(s) of each presenter)
the 385 form regardless of the outcome. Presenter 1:
See Chapter __ for more discussion on Presenter 2:
Outcomes. Presenter 3:
Presenter 4:
POSITION(S) RATED/RESULT(S)
Quality Assurance Measures – Efficiency, Effectiveness and Accuracy:
Number of Hay ratings completed by committee. # of Hay rating completed in
one session or rescheduled to another session. Results in use of an existing
class (managing the classification system)? Do the rating numbers add up? Is
the slotting based on the long and short profiles? Does the rating compare to
other rating in the same class series? [NOTE: Position ratings may differ from

the class rating. Under Classification Decision please list the class title and Comments (Use this section to provide additional information regarding any of
class rating.] . the fields above):
Position 1
Department
Current Class
R R
Class Code Submitted by: _____________________________-- Date : ____________
Incumbent (name), new or
vacant Phone number: _______________________
Position Hay Rating points and profile Agency_______________________________
Rating (e.g. EI2 230, E3(33)
76. E1C 87) Decision Code
Total points (e.g. 393+1) NC = No Change – list class and class rating
Profile (e.g. 59-19-22) REC = Reallocation to an existing class – list class rating
Classification Decision – Class Title/Class Rating ENC = Establish new class – list proposed class title
Decision code (see below) RCR = Revised class rating for salary range reassignment – list class
Class Title TC = Title Change – list new title and class rating if different from the
Class Hay Rating position rating
Class Code TBD = Final outcome to be determined –explain further in the comments
Bargaining Unit section.
SEMA4 Update Update the Job Code record to reflect new
rating date: Y__ N__
Quality Assurance Measure - Documentation:

(Please check the appropriate boxes for documentation available regarding
this Hay Evaluation):
R
Position description(s) :
sending electronically sending through interoffice mail
R
Organization Chart(s) :
R
Memo explaining background/reason for determination(s) :
Recommended Change in Classification Plan form (class establishment, title

change, salary range reassignments, etc. ):
MMB Representative is preparing
If a new class, is there a draft class specification attached?

Not available

Shortly after the facilitator’s documentation arrives on her/ his no rating changes. Only two ratings were identified as needing
desk, MMB’s Chief Classification Analyst (CCA) provides the corrections to the total rating points.
first external quality assurance review of each rating. S/he
reviews the documentation of the Hay committees’ work and There’s also an ongoing quality assurance component external
compares the findings against his or her own knowledge of the to the State of Minnesota. Al Bunnett was the Personnel
Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method and the State’s classification Director of the Department of Public Safety in the 1970s, when
structure to ensure that each rating makes sense. HayGroup® began creating customized Hay Guide Charts for
the State of Minnesota. He was heavily involved in facilitating
The Hay Advisory Team also reviews this documentation in an the committee process for a team of seven State Hay raters
internal quality assurance review. In 2010 the Hay Advisory after the new charts were finalized in 1978, then became a
Team introduced the use of Quality Assurance Teams to consultant for HayGroup® shortly afterward. He has been the
provide more up-to-date feedback to raters. Ratings were State’s account representative ever since.
reviewed to see if the raters met the guidelines set by the Hay
Advisory Team. A “Hay Evaluation Internal Quality Review A certain number of the State’s Hay ratings undergo external
Checklist” was developed for this review process. The checklist quality assurance inspections by trained consultants every two
covered the following: years. MMB’s Chief Classification Analyst compiles
A. Documentation (includes the 385 form, background documentation for the Hay consultants’ review. The ratings
information/explanation write-up, position description have remained remarkably consistent over time.
and organizational chart, draft class specification if
required, and total points adding up correctly). There was a more extensive quality assurance review process
B. Effectiveness (includes subject matter experts as after minor modifications were made to the Hay Guide Charts in
presenters and the use of 5 member rating committees) 1995. Al Bunnett and Dr. Ron Page, PhD, independent HR
C. Efficiency (includes the Hay/Comp Level Decision form consultant, reviewed most of the State’s Hay ratings in 1994,
and consultation with the MMB rep.) 1995 and 1996, to ensure that previous and new ratings would
D. Outcomes (includes a discussion of the outcome of remain consistent on a statewide basis with the updated Hay
rating in the write-up) Guide Charts. The revisions to the Hay Guide Charts were not
E. Sore-thumbing (evaluates the components of the rating, extensive; they reflected the State of Minnesota’s
e.g. Know-How, Problem Solving, Accountability, organizational growth and needs. For example, “sensory
Special Conditions, and the Profile. attention” considerations were added to the Special Conditions
section in 1995, so this aspect needed to be applied to relevant
The 2010 Hay Quality Assurance Review was conducted by positions.
teams of trained raters led by members of the Hay Advisory
Team. Each team was assigned a one or more ratings that In 1998, the State of Minnesota considered whether it was
were conducted in FY 2008 and 2009. A total of 21 ratings practical to invest in a computer-assisted job evaluation
were reviewed. The teams determined that 19 ratings were process designed by HayGroup® or a competitor, or to
incomplete, e.g. some recommendations for improvement but continue using the paper Hay Guide Charts that had just been

updated in 1995. Dr. Ron Page was helpful during this process
because he had worked for both companies and was familiar
with their systems. The end result was that it was more cost-
effective to continue with the manual process that the State of
Minnesota still uses today.
Another external quality assurance review process occurred in

1999, when the Legislative Auditor performed a comprehensive
review of the State of Minnesota’s compensation practices.
Since the Hay Guide Chart method is used to evaluate all State
jobs so a standard frame of reference can be used when
determining salaries, the Legislative Auditor’s Office thoroughly
reviewed the State’s job evaluation process. They told Chief
Classification Analyst, Wayne Veum at the end of the review
that they had never seen more thorough documentation in any
program they had ever evaluated and that they were
impressed!
A final quality assurance element involves the Hay rater

certification process. After his 1999 Quality Assurance
inspection, Dr. Ron Page recommended the establishment of
an internal State of Minnesota Advisory Committee to review
and revise the 1995 Training and Development Standards. In
fiscal year 2000, MMB delegated Hay Rater Training and
Development Standards to the resulting Hay Advisory Team, a
multi-agency team of volunteer Certified Hay Raters, which
continues to administer and update them. HayGroup®
consultant and State of Minnesota account representative, Al
Bunnett, endorsed the new State of Minnesota State Hay Rater
Standards in fiscal year 2002.

Indicators of a Good Hay Rater • Able to sort out the facts that relate to the different scales in the
Hay process (i.e., the formula that is applied to a position
A good Hay rater is a skilled job evaluator and an inquisitive, description and verbal description of a position)
analytical and critical thinker with good communication and • Looks beyond first impression (or solution) to make sure it’s
collaboration skills, who is objective, motivated, prepared, and accurate (or the best solution)
proud to be a rater. • Can identify potentially hidden problems (i.e., understands the
charts well and how to apply them)
Critical thinker
 Indicator
• Comfortable with often ambiguous concepts and complexity
Skilled job evaluator • Able to effectively and efficiently combine analysis, wisdom,
• Understands the job audit process and how the Hay process can experience and judgment in “gray” areas
be a valuable tool for doing audits • Understands how people and organizations actually function
• Performs job analysis/classification on a regular basis • Somewhat of a big picture thinker to make judgments about
• Understands the State’s classification system, including in-depth specific positions within the context of the total organization
knowledge of one or more class series or group of classes • Able to understand and accurately apply Hay rating concepts
• Understands the types of jobs being evaluated and practices to real-life situations
• Experienced auditing a wide variety of jobs and classes • Looks beyond the obvious while quickly grasping the “forest” and
• Realizes the importance of evaluating jobs within their the “trees” of a particular organizational situation
organizational context; understanding the agency helps Hay • Can see through the “fluff” and focus on the most important
raters to avoid misperceptions and accurately slot positions in information
that agency • Balances the need to avoid assumptions while accepting the
• Recognized for performing quality job audits in complex reality of some uncertainty
situations at the agency level Skilled communicator
• Viewed as a knowledgeable, credible job evaluator by HR staff • Attentive and active listener
and managers • Shows understanding, courtesy, tact, empathy, concern, and
Inquisitive learner politeness during interactions
• Inquisitive and willing to ask relevant (and sometimes difficult) • Articulate; asks relevant questions and explains the basis of
questions one’s own job evaluations/Hay ratings
• Continuous, curious and agile learner • Comfortable meeting and communicating with senior managers
• Open to arguments on “why not” and welcomes feedback about complex organizational roles and relationships
• Listens well and comprehends presentations that can be long • Helps explain the “why” to less experienced job evaluators/Hay
and/or complicated to understand raters
Analytical • Willing to have good discussions with other Hay raters
• Practical, logical, analytical (sometimes leaning towards “debate”)
• Enjoys determining how a job fits within the larger organizational Collaborative
context in relation to other jobs that have been Hay-rated; • Able to interact effectively with other Hay rating team
comparing jobs that may be very different in overall size, members and work towards a consensus rating; in other
complexity and level; and ranking them within a class series and words, demonstrate good human relations skills in a
classification system

committee setting • Has the desire and ability to participate in Hay rating sessions
• Interested in and able to work effectively as part of a team on a regular basis
• Comfortable with a committee process that involves listening • Pursues opportunities to perform Hay ratings (practice does
to subject matter experts provide information about a job’s make raters better)
role, responsibilities, and requirements; developing individual Prepared
ratings; and then working together to reach consensus on a • Willing and able to make Hay rating a priority and arrive
final rating prepared for rating sessions (for example, read materials
• Able to represent one’s own perspective and be a ahead of time, set aside enough time to be at the entire
collaborative team member session, come prepared with thoughtful questions)
• Willing to stand up for own side of an issue (i.e., not back • Willing and able to spend time reviewing written materials
down right away without a good reason), but not so stubborn (sometimes a large volume) in advance of a Hay session to
as to be unable to change one’s mind prepare for the rating process; willing to put own work aside to
Objective do so
• Separates people from their positions • Reads all data ahead of time and does research on the
• Able to evaluate jobs as they stand without regard to current internet
job holders
• Not pre-disposed to any particular outcome, with legitimate Proud to be a Hay rater
reasons for one’s own individual Hay rating • Understands that Hay rating jobs for the State of Minnesota is
• Willing to take and articulate unpopular stands, when a privilege, not a right
appropriate, with grace • Respects the statewide implications of being a Hay rater and
• Open-minded; able to set aside bias and look at all sides of the importance of being a role model during Hay sessions
the situation • Understands the role of Hay rater in relation to other HR
• Has integrity systems
Motivated • Agrees to the responsibilities involved, including helping to
• Exhibits the willingness to learn document the sessions and completing 385 evaluation forms
• Has a genuine interest in the Hay process and what it in a timely basis
represents for the State’s classification system
• Expressed interest in and has made efforts to become familiar
with the Hay job evaluation process, including the willingness
to attend training sessions
• Has the desire to learn a systematic process for identifying
and analyzing information about work performed and to rank
jobs using charts and graphs by assigning alpha and numeric
values to job components based on specific factors
• Interested in how the classification system is applied beyond
one’s own agency
• Willing to learn about classifications outside of one’s own
agency
• Continues to attend training to improve one’s skills

Hay Rater Training and Development V. Reinstated
A Non-Certified Hay Rater who has previously completed all
Standards required Basic, Intermediate and Advanced Formal Hay
Training. The Non-Certified Hay Rater must request
I. Certified (Fully)
reinstatement by the MN Hay Advisory Team understanding
A Hay Rater who has completed all required Basic,
that the Hay Rater intends to become a Provisionally or Fully
Intermediate and Advanced Formal Hay Training and during
Certified Hay Rater.
the most recent calendar year:
• Has attended at least one Hay Topics Seminar/Workshop
(when offered) and
• Completed any combination of two of the following Hay
rating experiences: Hay Rater, Hay Committee Facilitator,
or Quality Assurance Team.
II. Provisional (Partially Certified)

Intermediate and Advanced Formal Hay Training. However,
during the most recent calendar year met some, but not all, of
the training and experience requirements to be fully certified.
III. Inactive
Intermediate and Advanced Formal Hay Training. However,
during the most recent calendar year, did not meet any of the
training and experience requirements to be either fully or
partially certified. The Inactive Hay Rater’s name remains on
the List of Certified Hay Raters for the current year to provide
an opportunity for provisional or full certification.
IV. Non-Certified (No-Longer Certified)

Intermediate and Advanced Formal Hay Training but remained
Inactive during the most recent calendar year. A Non-certified
Hay Rater’s name is removed from the List of Certified Hay
Raters unless Reinstated.

Minnesota Statute 43A.18, Subd. 8 (e) Compensations bear reasonable relationships to one
states that in preparing management another within the meaning of this subdivision if
negotiating positions for compensation compensation for positions which require comparable
and in establishing, recommending and skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions is
CHAPTER 8: Hay Ratings and Compensation
approving total compensation for any comparable and if compensation for positions which
position within the plans, the require differing skill, effort, responsibility and working
Commissioner (of MMB) should assure conditions is proportional to the skill, effort, responsibility
that: and working conditions required.
(a) Compensation for positions in the Internal consistency is extremely important to the State’s
classified and the unclassified system because four of the five points above speak directly to
service compare reasonably to the importance of internal equity. The State must now comply
one another; with pay equity or the notion of equal worth for equal pay.
(b) Compensation for state positions The State of Minnesota’s compensation system must maintain
bears reasonably relationship to a reasonable level of consistency between and among its
compensation for similar positions various classes. The State’s compensation system is based on
outside state service; the statutory requirement that the compensation of job classes
must bear ‘reasonable relationship’ to one another, and the Hay
(c) Compensation for management point system is one of the ways the State attempts to comply
positions bears reasonable with this requirement.
relationship to compensation of
represented employees New classes are not automatically placed on the trend line.
managed; There are five levels where a class may be placed, which is
commonly known as the trend line conversion. Salary
(d) Compensation for positions within placement in one of these five levels is deemed appropriate
the classified service bears compensation for a particular class given its Hay points.
reasonable relationships among
related job classes and among
various levels within the same
occupation; and

The trend line shows the relationship between Hay points and
compensation. Classes are assigned to a salary range within On work to pay:
the corridor. The corridor is a range of two ranges above to two "The law of work does seem utterly unfair--but there it is,
ranges below the trend line conversion. The goal is to assign a and nothing can change it: the higher the pay in enjoyment
class to one of the five salary ranges within the corridor. This the worker gets out of it, the higher shall be his pay in cash,
allows the employer to take into consideration other factors also."
affecting its decision, such as: - Mark Twain, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
• The actual Hay point conversion;

• ‘Past practice’ (e.g., 238 Hay points in MAPE are
generally assigned to range 5L); and
• Where the class fits into the organization and within the
State, including classes above and below a rated class
(e.g., compression, some classes are paid more than the
Hay points are worth – for example, Electricians).
The employer may consider the following additional factors for

determining the salary range assignment for a class:
• Ability to recruit (e.g., how many vacancies, how long the

vacancies have remained unfilled, recruitment efforts,
pool of candidates, difficulties versus other classes);
• Turnover rates (e.g., voluntary resignation rates for the
class, whether turnover is due to inadequate salaries or
other factors);
• Market data (e.g., what other employers pay for similar
work in the industry, whether current employees have
received job offers from other employers to perform
similar work for higher pay, whether candidates have
turned down job offers due to salary); and
• Salary ranges of related classes in State government.

This information was prepared within MMB in A second trend line is calculated and is based on all classes
April 1990 and was updated in 2007 and
with four or more incumbents.
2010 for this manual.
CHAPTER 9: Trend Lines and Conversion Charts
What is a trend line? How are the salary conversion charts constructed?
A trend line is a measure of central The salary range maximum predicted by the trend line formula
tendency like a mean, median or mode rarely matches actual salary ranges. There’s additional work
and is the result of performing regression that must be done to determine the actual salary range that is
analysis on sets of data pairs. It is also the “best fit.” The calculations are performed to find “best fit”
a graphic illustration of the relationship for existing classes. The power regression formula that is
between two variables, in this case, generated from using the salary ranges maxes and Hay ratings
salaries and Hay ratings. The trend line of all classes with four or more incumbents is used to find the
(or best fit line) demonstrates the ideal actual range with the maximum closest to the predicted
compensation assignment for a given maximum. The conversion chart is simply a user friendly tool to
number of Hay points when no other determine the best fit for a class when Hay ratings are
salary assignment determinants are considered.
considered.
Why doesn’t a given Hay rating result in the same salary
How is the trend line used in salary range on different salary schedules?
setting?
Because salary schedules reflect differences in bargaining over
A trend line for male-dominated classes the years, no two schedules are the same. Since the goal is to
is calculated during the preparation of find the actual range that is the “best fit” for a given rating, that
the biennial Pay Equity report. It is used best fit will be slightly different on each unique schedule.
to identify female dominated-classes that
are relatively underpaid for their Hay When and why do the conversion charts change?
ratings.
The trend line itself, described earlier, changes slightly at the
It is used to determine the trend line end of each even-numbered year, when the Pay Equity report
conversion for all existing rated classes. is produced for the Legislature. These changes are due to
The trend conversion is used in changes in the State’s classification and compensation plan.
considering requests for salary range Classes may be created, abolished and assigned to different
reassignments in bargaining of contracts salary ranges over the course of two years. Changes in the
and preparation of compensation plans. trend line salary conversion charts have been minor.
It is also a consideration in assigning
new classes to salary ranges.

Does the conversion chart dictate which salary range will be Equity within state service is a consideration that may
used for a new class? override assignment to the compensation code represented
by the trend line conversion. If existing classes with the
No. The trend line is one consideration and the natural starting same or similar Hay ratings are typically at a compensation
point once a Hay rating is agreed to for the class. Current code higher or lower than the trend line conversion
policy is that any class within two salary ranges of the compensation code would indicate, it is normally more
compensation code identified by the trend line conversion chart appropriate to establish the new class at the same salary
is adequately compensated. This policy has been used to level as the preponderance of existing classes.
determine whether female-dominated classes are underpaid for
purposes of the Pay Equity report. The same policy is used in
Determinants in Assigning Compensation Levels
determining the salary range of a new class. Therefore, it is
possible to establish a new class as many as two ranges below
The State has long-used the Hay job evaluation system in
and as many as two ranges above the trend line conversion’s order to evaluate and rate a new or revised class. Although the
compensation code. Hay rating is often used as the primary factor, and sometimes
only factor, in a compensation request, the fact is that a Hay
What are some other factors that are considered when rating and subsequent trend line conversion is just one factor
assigning a new class to a salary range? in establishing the compensation level for a class. Just as
importantly, and in some cases even more importantly, the
There may be labor market conditions that make it following additional factors also need to be considered:
impractical to compete for qualified candidates at the • Organizational structure and the relationship to other
compensation code represented by the trend line conversion classes within a division or agency
chart. In order for labor market conditions to be considered, • Relationships to other classifications in all state agencies
there must be some demonstrated inability to recruit similarly • Effect on salary compression to subordinate, like, or
superior classes and relationship to the salary of the
qualified employees, a connection to other classes that have
agency head
been raised up due to labor market conditions, or some other • Market factors including recruitment, availability of
demonstrated basis for the exception. Speculation that applicants, wages paid by other employers; etc.
higher rates are needed is not sufficient. • Workforce planning factors including anticipated
retirements, turnover, anticipated hiring, retention, critical
nature of positions
• Assignment of class to the appropriate bargaining unit or
plan
• Budget implications/Affordability
• Timing

Hay Manual PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Hay Manual PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table of Contents

HayGroup® .......................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 1

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 2

In addition to in-depth consulting expertise, Hay offers an array

• Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method™ – the most widely-

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 3

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 4

2. A Strong Future Orientation. The Hay Method is used

3. A Large Data Base of Evaluations to Guide Current

4. A Solid Track Record of Successful Application of

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 5

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 6

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 7

For example. The supervisor believed that the job in question

HAY Quality Assurance Summary Decision Codes

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 9

a fit . Confer with MMB before

(often occurs jointly with Level)

Previously unrated class, X Usually no change in comp level X new

New benchmark for a current

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 10

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 11

• Depth and Breadth of Job-

Hay raters assign a number to the

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 12

Know-How considers both the scope and depth of a position.

Problem Solving: 20%

Special Conditions: 0% - 10%

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 13

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 14

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 15

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 16

th th Benefit Recovery Tech DI1 115

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 17

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 18

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 19

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 20

IV. Compre- V. Very large VI. Total mgmt

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 21

Examples: Governor, Chancellor of MnSCU

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 22

Shaded areas serve as a boundary or guide for raters. For

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 23

1. Basic 2. Important 3. Critical

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 24

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 25

(2) Integrating/managerial breadth

Practical L. Limited <1%

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 26

Problem Solving measures the

This is true of even the most creative

Problem Solving includes two

• Context (aka Thinking

In the example on the right, Problem

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 27

• As of 7/10, there were approx. 270 active job classes

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 28

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 29

• As of 7/10, there were 89 active job classes with this

• Positions are guided by the general laws of nature

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 30

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 31