Je Slide 160

Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method
of
Job Evaluation
Presented by
John Parr
© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Course Objectives
To provide a context to Job Evaluation
To provide technical training on the Hay Guide

Chart-Profile method of Job Evaluation
To develop practical evaluation skills

Programme Outline
Case Study
Quality
Checks &
Process
The Method
in Detail Theory supported by
practical examples
and case study roles
Programme Overview
Overview Definition, Applications & Methods
The Hay Method
Process Guidelines

What is Job Evaluation?
Job Evaluation is a systematic process for ranking jobs

logically and fairly by comparing job against job or
against a pre-determined scale to determine the relative importance
of jobs to an organisation.
Which is to say that Job Evaluation …..…

IS IS Not
9 Comparative Absolute
9 Judgemental Scientific
9 Structured Unstructured
9 Job Centred Person Focused

Possible Applications for
Job Evaluation
Reward JOB EVALUATION Grading
Succession Career
Planning Development
Link to Organisational Underpin the
market data Analysis framework
Understand Understanding
relationships Identifying ‘gaps’ possible
between roles in the structure career paths

Different Types of Evaluation Method
Method of Analysis Used

Method of
By considering By considering
Comparison Used Job Elements the Entire Job
Comparing Job Point Method Classification

Against Some Scale Method
Comparing Job Factor Comparison Ranking

Against Job Method Method
Hay is a Modified Factor Comparison Method

The Hay Methodology
Established in 1943 by Ned Hay

Continually updated and developed
The most widely used method in the World
Used by more than half the Fortune 500 companies
Used in 90 + Countries
Applied by both public and private organisations
Used to evaluate millions of jobs at all levels and in all
sectors across the world
Our Middle East Clients: Some Examples
Saudi Arabia Kuwait
– Aramco, Sabic, Banawi, Zahid – KPC, EQUATE, Kuwait Airlines,
Tractor, Savola, Xenel, National Bank of Kuwait., Burgan
Amiantit, Islamic Development Bank, Kuwait Real Estate Bank,
Bank, Saudi Hollandi Bank., Sultan Center
Saudi Cable, Dabagh Group, Qatar
Sasref – QP, RasGas,QatarGas, Qatar
UAE National Bank, Qafco, Qafac,
– ADNOC, Emiraat, Emirates Qasco
Airlines, Al Futtaim, Dubal, Egypt
Emirates Bank International, – Savola Sime, Amiral, APCC, BG
Commercial Bank, Mashreq
Bank, Natiional Bank of Abu Lebanon
Dhabi.,CCC, NPCC. – Averda Sibline Cement
Bahrain Jordan
– Arab Insurance Group, Gulf – MobileCom, Housing Bank, Arab
Air, Aluminium Bahrain., Al Bank, ASEZA
Ahli Bank, Bank of Bahrain
and Kuwait
We also have global relationships with some Groups (BAT, Exxon Mobil, Pepsi, Philips, Procter
and Gamble etc.) that also cover this region
Advantages with the Hay Method of
Evaluation
Based on a credible, simple and coherent model of the characteristics of
different levels of work
Sensitive in measuring job differences
Enables comparison of dissimilar jobs
Provides an analytical method which, in principle, satisfies equal value law
Most widely used evaluation method in the world
Provides a rating of differences, not just ranking
Flexible and able to cope with change
A ‘value free’ framework in which to reflect your relativities
Recognises the criticality to business of the concept of accountability
Recognises and assesses job content and context

The Method as Part of a Wider Process
Job Understanding JOB SIZE Judgement
Methodology

Role of Context And Job Understanding
Evaluation requires job information, the knowledge of

the evaluator and other relevant documentation
Context Job
Company Purpose Job Purpose

Financial Structure Dimensions
Structure Accountabilities
Ownership Skills, Knowledge, Experience
Organisation culture and sector Main Challenges
Organisation Structure

Guidelines in Job Evaluation
The Job & NOT Aim for
the Person Consensus
Fully acceptable Disregard
Performance current pay
& status
The job as No understanding
it is now No Evaluation

Checks and Balances
Technical Consistency
Step Difference Principle
Profiles
“Sore thumbing”
Collective Judgement

End of Section One
Case Study
Quality
Checks &
Process
The Method
Underlying Principles
in Detail Know-How
Problem Solving
Overview Accountability
Theory supported by practical

examples and case study roles

The Principles of
Job Evaluation

The Underlying Principle
1 2 3
Jobs exist to achieve To achieve this end Therefore, the job holder
an end result result, job holders must requires a level of knowledge
address problems, create, and experience commensurate
analyse and apply with the scale and complexity
judgement of the deliverables
Know-How
Problem Solving Problem Solving
Accountability Accountability Accountability

Elements of Job Size
PROBLEM TOTAL
KNOW-HOW + SOLVING + ACCOUNTABILITY = JOB
SIZE
Technical Thinking Freedom
Know-How Environment to Act
Management Thinking Area of

Breadth Challenge Impact
Human Relations
Nature of
Skills
Impact

Job Evaluation Elements
Factor 1
Know-How

Know-How
The sum of every kind of knowledge, skill and
experience required for standard acceptable
performance in the role
Technical The requirement for technical

Know-How skills, expertise and experience
Management The amount of planning and

Breadth organising required of the role
The requirement for working

Human Relations with and through others to
Skills achieve the role accountabilities

Technical Know-How
The requirement for technical skills, experience and expertise

Looks at depth and range – however acquired
Experience
Level Example Description & Scale
A Perform simple tasks

B Simple work assignments,often repetitive
C Sound understanding of straightforward procedures
D Practical understanding of methods, systems, processes
E Conceptual understanding
F In depth specialisation, broad experience
G Mastery of concepts, principles : wide recognition

Technical Know-How
Depth And Breadth
Expertise requirements may have Depth
and/or Breadth
Managing
Director
Broad & General
Deep & Narrow

Corporate
Tax Advisor

Management Breadth
The knowledge required for harmonising, integrating and managing activities
and functions. It involves combining some or all of the elements of planning,
organising co-ordinating, directing, executing and controlling - over time.
Planning and organising

Complexity
Functional diversity
Timescale/planning horizon
Scale
Horizon/Strategic influence
Reflects hierarchies where they exist

Management Breadth –
3 Key Dimensions
Planning/Strategic
How much Horizon
management, across
how many functions
and over what time
horizon?
Functional Diversity
And …
Takes account of Elements of

scale Management

Management Breadth
Level Example Description Example Job
O - no planning or organising; Filing Assistant

- short timescales;
- not related to other tasks.
I - individual contributors who plan and organise Financial

their own work; Accountant
or
- supervisors of subordinates whose tasks Call-Centre
are broadly similar. Team Leader
II - co-ordination and integration of services, Head of Major Line/

functions or programmes pulling in broadly Support Function
the same direction; e.g. IS/IT
- one year time horizon;
- managing internal relationships.
III - integration of diverse functions with inherent General

conflict; Manager
- strategic horizons.
NB: Scale can be rated to fit the organisation.

Human Relations Skills
The requirement in Know-How for achieving results with

and through others both inside and outside the organisation
1 Information exchange, asking

questions, exercising tact
Persuasion, assertiveness - based on

2 fact or evidence, empathy to the other’s
point of view
‘hearts and minds - behavior change,

3
negotiating and partnership working

Looking Up A Know-How Score
0. I. II. Related Internal III. Diverse Operational IV.
Task Activity integration of operations or or conceptual integration of Total
Performance of a task or Performance or supervision of services which are generally functions which are diverse
tasks, highly specific as to multiple activities, which are related in nature and in nature and objective
objective and content. specific as to objective and objective, and where there and/or strategically critical
Interaction with others is content. There is a is a requirement for co- to the achievement of
EI+3 264 primarily concerned with
receiving instructions.
requirement to interact with
co-workers and maintain an ordination with associated
awareness of related functions.
overall business goals.
activities.
zzz Human Relation Skills ¿ 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
A. PRIMARY: Basic knowledge of simple instructions, facts and information necessary to perform straightforward
tasks of a repetitive nature. Knowledge is generally acquired through a short period of instruction. 38 43 50 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152
43 50 57 57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 A

50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200
B. ELEMENTARY VOCATIONAL: Knowledge of standardised work routines and methods, general facts and
information and/or the use of simple equipment, machines and materials. Knowledge is usually acquired through 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200
training on the job. B
57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230
66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264
C. VOCATIONAL: Knowledge and insight are required for the application of practical methods and techniques, work
procedures and processes and/or proficiency in the specialised use of materials, equipment and tools. Knowledge is 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264
typically acquired through technical training. C
Technical Know-How
76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304
87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350
D. ADVANCED VOCATIONAL: Knowledge of the practical application of specialised (generally non-theoretical)

methods, techniques and processes is required. Knowledge may be acquired through part professional qualification 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350
or by ‘on the job’ experience.
100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 D
115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460
E. PROFESSIONAL: The requirement is for sufficiency in a technical, scientific or specialised field built on an
understanding of theoretical concepts and principles and their context. Knowledge is normally acquired through 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460
professional or academic qualification or through extensive practical experience. E
132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528
152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608
F. SEASONED PROFESSIONAL: Proficiency in a specialised field or a broad insight into the relationship between
different fields. Knowledge is acquired through deep and/or broad experience built on concepts and principles. 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608
F
z
175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700
200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800
G. PROFESSIONAL MASTERY: Determinative mastery of concepts, principles and practices within a specialised
field and/or authoritative insight into the relationships between multiple fields. Knowledge is gained through deep 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800
development in a specialised field or through comprehensive business experience.
230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920 G
264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056
H. EXCEPTIONAL MASTERY: Externally recognised mastery of concepts and principles and their applications
within a scientific field. This level would normally be associated with ongoing groundbreaking work. 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056
304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920 920 1056 1216 H
350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056 1056 1216 1400

Know-How Step Differences
152 3 steps
132 2 steps
115 1 step
100
Just Clearly Obviously
Noticeable Different Different
15% Difference

Step Differences and Structure Analysis
K-H
400 Boss Boss Boss

One
Step Two Three
Steps Steps
350 Subordinate
“The obvious
304 Successor” Subordinate
“A possible
264 Successor” Subordinate
“An unlikely
Successor”

Factor 2
Problem Solving

Problem Solving
The ‘self-starting’ thinking required by the job for
analysing, evaluating, creating, reasoning, arriving
at and drawing conclusions
Assesses the extent to which

Thinking thinking is constrained by the
Environment context in which it must take
place
The complexity of the

Thinking problems encountered and
Challenge the extent to which original
thinking must be employed to
arrive at solutions

Thinking Environment
The level of thinking in the normal course

of working
Limited by : Direct supervision/guidance

: Procedures/Policy/Strategy
: Nature of the task
: Standards/Precedents
: Existing principles/body of knowledge

Level Example Description

A Sequence and timing of action steps defined: “do it this
way”.
B Selection from well-defined set of action steps based on
‘What’ previous experience.
and ‘How’
defined C Interpretation of established precedents. Nature of problem
and how to solve fairly clearly defined.
D Choose from a number of procedures in response to
different work situations.
‘What’
defined E May need to develop new procedures within existing policies
F Problem not clearly defined: Operating within broad
Both ‘What’ functional guidelines.
and ‘How’ to
G Developing strategy guidelines for the organisation.
be defined

Thinking Challenge
The degree of creativity or original thought required to

deliver accountabilities. It assesses the complexity of
the problem and the extent to which original thinking
must be employed to arrive at solutions
Is there a right or a wrong answer ?

Solution clear cut or judgemental ?
Variables will include, complexity, abstractness and stability
Relationship with Thinking Environment (Freedom to Think)

Relationship between Environment &
Challenge
1 2 3 4 5 Thinking
right judgement Challenge
answers
Solutions A
Defined
Problems E
Defined
H

Thinking Challenge

Level
1 Stable and repetitive situations
2 Multiple choices based on experience; result can be
readily checked for correctness
3 Alternative solutions but a ‘right answer’ exists; may
need analysis to identify
4 Significant evaluative judgement; no ‘right answer’;
may only know if correct with hindsight
5 Speculative judgement; really stretching the bounds of
knowledge

Looking Up A Problem Solving Score zz Thinking challenge
1. Repetitive 2. Patterned 3. Variable 4. Adaptive 5. Uncharted
Identical situations requiring solution Similar situations requiring solution Differing situations requiring the Situations requiring a significant Pathfinding situations requiring
by simple choice of things learned. by the discriminating choice of identification and selection within degree of evaluative judgement creative thinking and the
D+3(33) 87 things learned. the area of expertise and
acquired knowledge.
and innovative thinking to
analyse, evaluate and arrive at
development of new concepts
and imaginative approaches
conclusions. contributing significantly to the
advancement of knowledge and
thought.
A. STRICT ROUTINE 10% 14% 19% 25% 33%

Thinking within precise and detailed rules and instructions
and/or rigid supervision (personal or system).
12% 16% 22% 29% 38% A
B. ROUTINE
Thinking within standard instructions and routines and/or 12% 16% 22% 29% 38%
continuous supervision.
B
14% 19% 25% 33% 43%
Thinking environment/freedom to think
C. SEMI-ROUTINE
14% 19% 25% 33% 43%
Thinking within well-defined, but somewhat diversified,
procedures and precedents and/or subject to supervision.
C
16% 22% 29% 38% 50%
D. STANDARDISED 16% 22% 29% 38% 50%

Thinking within substantially diversified, established
procedures, standards and precedents; generally supervised. D
19% 25% 33% 43% 57%
E. CLEARLY DEFINED 19% 25% 33% 43% 57%

Thinking within clearly defined policies, principles and
specific objectives, under readily available direction. E
22% 29% 38% 50% 66%
F. BROADLY DEFINED 22% 29% 38% 50% 66%

Thinking within broadly defined policies and objectives, F
under general direction.
25% 33% 43% 57% 76%
G. GENERALLY DEFINED
Thinking within general policies, principles and goals, under 25% 33% 43% 57% 76%
guidance. G
29% 38% 50% 66% 87%
z
H. ABSTRACTLY DEFINED 29% 38% 50% 66%

Thinking within business philosophy and cultural norms; H
subject to the general laws of nature and science. 87%
33% 43% 57% 76%

Factor 3
Accountability

Accountability
The answerability for action and for the

consequences of that action.
The measured effect of the job on end results
Freedom Measured by the existence or absence of

personal, managerial or procedural
to Act
controls and guidance
Nature of Impact How much of the organisation does the

role impact upon and what is the
Area of nature of the impact (direct or indirect)

Freedom To Act
Assesses the extent to which the job or role is
subject to personal or procedural guidance or
control which may be exercised from within or
outside the organisation.
Presence of discretion in taking action.
Constrained by : need to refer elsewhere;

: instructions, procedures,
policies;
: precedent, established ways of working;
: nature of the work;
: nature of the system;
: reporting lines - where they are relevant.

Freedom To Act
A Detailed instructions; immediate consequences.

B Specific instructions; some re-arrangement of work
routines permitted; consequences apparent in hours.
C Established precedents; some scope for flexibility/
initiative; consequences apparent within days.
D Latitude for discretion within established precedent/
defined policies; consequences apparent in days to weeks.
E Freedom to decide how to achieve end results;
significant decision making latitude.
F Determining general results; setting major functional policies.
G Establishing organisation policy and direction.

Freedom to Act - In Simpler Terms
Freedom to Act Involvement Subject to Scale
Slot in
A Operational Immediate Supervision
End Results
B Close Supervision
Supervision of Progress & Results

C
Supervisory Review
D Managerial
End Results
Managerial Direction
E
F Strategic General Managerial Direction

End Results
G General Management Guidance

Nature and Area of Impact
Organisation,
Function,
Job
Department
Gauges how much of the organisation, department or

functional area is affected by accomplishment of the
role’s basic purpose and the nature of that impact
(direct or indirect)

Steps in evaluating Nature and
Area of Impact
Is there a relevant and identifiable part of the organisation on

which this job impacts?
i.e. is there a financial value which reflects the purpose of the role?
Or can it be identified in more general (organisation unit or subject)
terms?
YES NO
use Indeterminate scale

use Magnitude and
Impact scales

Area of Impact - Descriptive
May be indicated in descriptive terms such

as ‘large, medium, small’ or …...
2. Department, 1. Small department

3. Large, or team
function or
4. Whole complex L
service
organisation function area

Area Of Impact - Quantitative
May be indicated in quantitative

terms such as annualised moving
amounts of money
Examples would include operating budgets managed,
value added, project costs or revenue
Broad buckets (multiples of 10) to reflect the fact that this is the
least important part of Accountability
Reviewed regularly for “inflation”

Nature Of Impact
Prime : Direct and controlling impact on end results.

Direct
Shared : Partnership or joint accountability with ‘peer’
Impact
jobs or functions inside or outside the
organisation. Cannot share with ‘boss’ or
‘subordinate’.
Contributory: Classical ‘staff’ slot. Advisory or service

Indirect support.
Impact
Remote: Lower level of ‘contributory’; distanced
from area of magnitude selected.

Indeterminate Impact
Some roles have an impact which cannot be expressed

in direct relation to a part of the organisation.
Is there a relevant and identifiable part of the organisation

on which this job impacts?
YES NO
use
Magnitude and Impact use Indeterminate
scales
scale

Indeterminate Roles
A qualitative approach to measuring the impact of the job on end
results where there are no relevant measurable financial aspects
and a descriptive (organisation unit) approach seems
inappropriate. In this case we look at the nature of the role.
Level Example Description In Other Words
A Minimal Incidental Support “File It”
B Limited Informational/Recording “Type It”

within a department
C Important Facilitating/Interpretative “Review It”

possibly across departments
D Critical Advisory/Diagnostic “Present It”

Looking Up An Accountability Score
z z z Magnitude ¿ 0 1 2 3 4
Indeterminate Very small Small Medium Large

D2-P 115
£37,500 - £375,000 £375,000 - £3.75m £3.75m - £37.5m £37.5m - £375m
z z Nature of impact ¿ A B C D R C S P R C S P R C S P R C S P
A. PRESCRIBED: Subject to direct and detailed instructions and close 8 10 14 19 10 14 19 25 14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57

supervision/immediate feedback. The nature of the tasks is totally confining.
9 12 16 22 12 16 22 29 16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66
A
10 14 19 25 14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76
B. CONTROLLED: Covered by instructions and established routines and closely

supervised. 12 16 22 29 16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87
B
14 19 25 33 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100
16 22 29 38 22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115
C. STANDARDISED: Subject to standardised work routines, practices and procedures

and general work instructions. Supervision is of progress and results. 19 25 33 43 25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132
C
22 29 38 50 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152
25 33 43 57 33 43 57 76 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175

Freedom to act
D. GENERALLY REGULATED: Covered by practices and procedures which have clear

precedents and/or operational guidance. Subject to managerial control and review of results. 29 38 50 66 38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200
43 57 76
D
33 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230
38 50 66 87 50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264
E. DIRECTED: Free to determine how to achieve clearly defined medium term (annual)
objectives. Covered by functional precedents and policies and subject to managerial 43 57 76 100 57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304
direction. E
50 66 87 115 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350
57 76 100 132 76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400

F. GENERALLY DIRECTED: Subject to general direction and broadly defined functional

policy objectives. 66 87 115 152 87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460
F
76 100 132 175 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528
87 115 152 200 115 152 200 264 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608
G. GUIDED: By their nature or size these positions are subject only to guidance and broad
direction on the orientation of policy. 100 132 175 230 132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 700
152 200 264

G
115 152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 800
132 175 230 304 175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 700 400 528 700 920
152 200 264 350 200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 800 460 608 800 1056
H.
175 230 304 400 230 304 400 528 304 400 528 700 400 528 700 920 528 700 920 1216
H
200 264 350 460 264 350 460 608 350 460 608 800 460 608 800 1056 608 800 1056 1400

End of Section Two
Case Study
Quality
Checks & Quality Checks
Panel Guidelines
Process
The Method
in Detail
Overview

Quality Process
Checks and

Quality Checks
9 Know-How Step Differences

9 The Technical Guide
Short Profiles
Sorethumbing
Rationales
Also - Hay may have been applied through a number of

processes which may provide further quality checks,
e.g. consensus decision making in panel situations.

Know-how Step Differences
152 3 steps
132 2 steps
115 1 step
100
Just Clearly Obviously
Noticeable Different Different
15% Difference

The Technical Guide
There is generally a logical relationship

in work between the level of depth and range of
Technical Know-How
required and the constraints apparent in the
Which carries through to the degree of latitude or
Freedom to Act
present in the role
Which is to say that …
& EII+3 D+3 D …

? ! EII+3 D+3 E... ? ! EII+3 D3 C...

Short Profiles
Describe The Shape of the Job

And the relationship between
Problem Solving PS
And ACC
Accountability
Measured in 15% Steps

Short Profiles
EI+3 264 How many steps

D+3(33) 87 between Problem
D2-P 115 Solving and
Accountability?
466 A2
132
115
Which is bigger A
Accountability A2 100
or Problem Solving? P 87
76
QA Checking using Short Profiles
‘Research & Development’ ‘Staff/Support’ ‘Line’
Fundamental Research Applied Research Human Resources Production
Maintenance
Legal Sales
Line Supervision
Finance/Accounts
Development Marketing
Call Centres
Strategic Planning Buying
Design Warehousing
Computer Development
Computer Operations
P4 P3 P2 P1 Level A1 A2 A3 A4
Problem Solving Orientation Accountability Orientation

Long Profiles
%
E+II3 350 55 AC
E3+ (38) 132 21

E3C 152 24 PS
K-H
634 100

Examining Long Profiles
PS AC
B+I-1 76
Small Job B2(16) 12
B-0B 16
KH
104 A2
72-12-16
GIV3 920
PS AC
G4+(66)608
Large Job G5-P 920
2448 A3
KH
38-24-38

Sorethumbing - A Reality Check
Reviewing rank order of evaluation to assess:
- felt fair relativities

- technical consistency

Rationales – The Written Record
Record the results and the logic behind an

evaluation:
- key features
- reasons for evaluation judgements
Vital aid for
- sorethumbing
- maintenance

Panel Working
One of the most common ways in which roles are
evaluated is through an evaluation panel. Some guidelines
for consideration under panel working would include:
Typically three to five members
All trained evaluators
Facilitator required
Is the panel representative? e.g. think
about gender mix
Union involvement?
Confidentiality is critical
Agree internal process and timings
Don’t be afraid to ask for more information
Write and agree rationales for each role
Remember the EVALUATION GUIDELINES !
End of Section Three
Case Study
Quality
Checks &
Process
The Method
in Detail
Overview

Case Study Practice

Je Slide 160

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Je Slide 160

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

 To provide a context to Job Evaluation

 To provide technical training on the Hay Guide

 To develop practical evaluation skills

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Job Evaluation is a systematic process for ranking jobs

Which is to say that Job Evaluation …..…

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Reward JOB EVALUATION Grading

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Method of Analysis Used

Comparing Job Point Method Classification

Comparing Job Factor Comparison Ranking

Hay is a Modified Factor Comparison Method

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

 Established in 1943 by Ned Hay

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Job Understanding JOB SIZE Judgement

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Evaluation requires job information, the knowledge of

 Company Purpose  Job Purpose

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Theory supported by practical

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Problem Solving Problem Solving

Accountability Accountability Accountability

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Management Thinking Area of

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Technical The requirement for technical

Management The amount of planning and

The requirement for working

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

The requirement for technical skills, experience and expertise

A Perform simple tasks

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Broad & General

Deep & Narrow

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

 Planning and organising

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

Takes account of Elements of

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

O - no planning or organising; Filing Assistant

I - individual contributors who plan and organise Financial

II - co-ordination and integration of services, Head of Major Line/

III - integration of diverse functions with inherent General

NB: Scale can be rated to fit the organisation.

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

The requirement in Know-How for achieving results with

1 Information exchange, asking

Persuasion, assertiveness - based on

‘hearts and minds - behavior change,

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

zzz Human Relation Skills ¿ 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

43 50 57 57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 A

D. ADVANCED VOCATIONAL: Knowledge of the practical application of specialised (generally non-theoretical)

© 2005 The Hay Group Management Limited. All Rights Reserved

To provide a context to Job Evaluation

To provide technical training on the Hay Guide

To develop practical evaluation skills

Established in 1943 by Ned Hay

Company Purpose Job Purpose

Planning and organising

Is there a right or a wrong answer ?

Presence of discretion in taking action.

Constrained by : need to refer elsewhere;