case study 500 words Apa format 2 sources text attached

3 Job Analysis

H o w m uch sh o u ld yo u p a y an em p lo yee f o r his o r h er jo b ?

W h at kin d o f c riteria sh o u ld you use to s e le c t a p p lic a n ts f o r op en jo b s ?

H o w d o y o u establish a selectio n p ro c e d u r e th a t g iv e s yo u the b e s t chance f o r p ick in g the m o s t qu alified c a n d id a te f o r a p o sitio n a n d a t the sa m e tim e redu ces the chance o f violatin g la w s a g a in s t discrim in ation ?

C an the tasks o f a jo b b e re d e s ig n e d to im prove em p lo yee m otivation a n d /o r qu ality o f resu lts?

H o w d o yo u d e c id e w h a t to include in a training p ro g ra m ?

H o w can y o u p u t to g eth er a c a r e e r m an agem en t a n d d ev e lo p m e n t p ro g r a m ?

These are among the most basic problems with which a human resources management program must grapple. Even though each of these questions deals with a different facet of human resources management, their answers eventually find a common solution in the process of job analysis. This is to say that job analysis is a taproot to virtually all HRM programming and practices (McCormick, 1976; Rohmert & Landau, 1979; Teryek, 1979).

Job analysis is a collection of methods and procedures for defining certain aspects of a job (Gael, 1983; Schuler, 1992). The analysis of a job or set of jobs can feed a number of HRM applications. As elaborated on later, each form of analysis focuses on distinctive features of jobs. Whether the application is compensation, selection, training, performance engineering, or career management, all begin with the process of job analysis.

Perhaps the most widely known version of job analysis is in its use in making com­ pensation decisions (Beatty & Beatty, 1986; Lister & Mercier, 1993). To achieve this purpose, the duties and activities that characterize a given job are identified and described. The result of this kind of job analysis is a job description. In its most comprehensive manifestation, all jobs in an organization are identified and described. These job descrip­ tions are then put through some form of job evaluation. The job evaluation compares jobs on certain criteria (such as the amount of responsibility required or the complexity of the work). By evaluating the typical duties and activities of different jobs using a

2 9

3 0 CHAPTER THREE

standard evaluation rating procedure, the relative worth of jobs in the organization can be determined. Jobs can then be ranked into groups (or grades), and priced accordingly.

Keep in mind here that what is being analyzed are the jobs of the organization, not the people in those jobs. A warehousing wholesale operation may have 30 different jobs with a payroll of 100 employees. Obviously, a number of people do the same job; for example, there could be 20 people in a route deliveryperson job.

In the Job Analysis assignment, you complete an analysis of a job held by an associate. As a result of the interview with this person, you will see how a job analysis procedure can identify the typical duties and activities of a job as the basis for producing a job description.

In the Job Evaluation assignment, you work through the process of evaluating several different jobs in order to determine the relative worth of each. You will use a type of point-factor job evaluation procedure to rate the jobs in question.

The point-factor method of job evaluation has been the subject of some criticism (Lawler, 1986). One criticism (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1985) suggested that there may be a bias in favor of male jobs in the job evaluation system that contributes to the disparities in wages between men and women performing comparable jobs. Many observers would agree that although there is no purely objective method of job evaluation, the possibility that job evaluation programs contribute in any meaningful way to wage differences between men and women is slight (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1985).

In Something’s Just Not Right, an employee approaches her manager requesting a transfer. The problem seems to center around problems, either real and/or imagined, of pay fairness and equity. You are asked to identify what the problems are and how job evaluation systems can handle those issues.

Another important use of job analysis is to define minimum hiring qualifications (Algera & Greuter, 1989; Dipboye, 1992; Douglas, Feld, & Asquith, 1989). Here, a job analysis is done to identify what knowledge, skills, and attitudes an applicant should possess in order to be considered for employment. As a result of this analysis, a set of hiring specifications is established as the basis for evaluating the applicants for an open position.

A third use of job analysis is for training program planning purposes (Nadler, 1982; Rothwell & Kazanas, 1992). What knowledge and skills should an employee possess in order to perform his or her job effectively? How is it possible to identify what competencies a skilled performer should have? Again, job analysis techniques that identify job tasks are used as the basis for establishing what should be taught in a training program.

There can be a trade-off in the costs associated with buying or making talent, that is, between the level of entry-level skills sought in hiring specifications and the competencies produced through training. Take the position of a computer operator. If hiring specifica­ tions for this position are set so high that the new employee must be fully competent, training costs will approach zero. However, in a competitive labor market, the compen­ sation level would have to be set high to attract candidates with those qualifications. On the other hand, compensation costs could be lowered by reducing the entry-level hiring specifications, allowing less fully qualified individuals to be hired. However, the lower the entry-level skills, the greater the likelihood that training expenses would increase.

A fourth use of job analysis can focus on various applications of workflow analysis. In this context, job analysis can be used to identify inefficiencies in the workflow process

JOB ANALYSIS 31

(Harbour, 1994). It can also be used to identify potential selection procedures (as in the case of work sample testing). Finally, this form of job analysis can be used as part of planning for pay-for-knowledge or skills-based pay plans (Bunning, 1992; U.S. Depart­ ment of Labor, 1988).

Another use of job analysis combines all these approaches in the development of career management and development programs (Pearlman, 1980). Different kinds of job analyses could be used to define the duties of different jobs (permitting the formation of job ladders), to establish training requirements for specific jobs, and to identify skills families.

The assignment Where Is Everybody? in chapter 7 focuses on the issues of job analysis for career planning and management program purposes.

Job analysis is an ensemble of techniques that share a common purpose of highlighting certain characteristics of jobs. The output of this analysis may assume different forms, such as job descriptions, hiring specifications, training competencies, or career ladders. Likewise, the fruits of job analysis may be used in different ways to guide compensation, selection, training, and performance management decisions. Regardless of the application, job analysis keeps human resources management grounded in the needs and requirements of the jobs to be performed in the organization.

3 2 CHAPTER THREE

Use the following worksheet to complete an analysis of a job held by an associate (classmate, friend, relative, coworker). Interview that person to answer the questions as specifically as possible.

Job Analysis

Title of Job

1. What is the general purpose and primary function of the job? Answer in three sentences or less.

2. List the typical tasks and activities performed in this job. Once all major tasks are listed, prioritize the tasks in terms of one of these criteria (check one):

[ ] Frequency—how often it is performed [ ] Importance—how critical the task is to overall successful job performance [ ] Difficulty—how difficult the task is to complete

Priority

3. List any equipment used on the job and how frequently it is used (seldom, sometimes, frequently).

4. Describe two typical decisions made or problems solved in this job.

JOB ANALYSIS 3 3

5. Identify the people (either employees or nonemployees) with whom you regularly come into contact.

6. Describe the typical location(s) where the work is done. Note any extreme or dan­ gerous conditions present at the location(s).

7. Is any special education, training, certification, or licensure needed to perform the job? [ ] No [ ] Yes (explain)_____________________________________________

8. How many employees are you officially responsible for supervising? Directly________ Indirectly________

9. Check if you regularly are expected to do any of the following with other employees: [ ] Scheduling employees to work [ ] Assign work tasks [ ] Train others in their job assignments [ ] Resolve specific operating problems [ ] O th e r:____________________________________________________________

3 4 CHAPTER THREE

For this exercise, you evaluate certain jobs. The purpose of this job evaluation is to determine the total point value of the jobs using the enclosed Job Evaluation Rating system. There are five compensable factors that this system uses to rate jobs:

• Job knowledge. • Complexity. • Relations with others. • Supervision of others. • Working conditions.

The rating levels for each factor are provided.

Instructions

1. Review the five evaluation factors and the rating levels for each. Observe how the degree of activity and responsibility increase as the levels increase. Your instructor will give you the point values for each factor; include those values on the appropriate space on the forms.

2. In your group, review each job description to familiarize yourself with the job and to see if you have any questions.

3. Write the name of each job to be evaluated at the top of the columns on the Job Evaluation Summary Worksheet.

4. For the job under evaluation, begin with the job knowledge factor. What is the typical level of job knowledge required for that job? The group should agree on the rating. If there is uncertainty about what the level should be, seek clarification from the job incumbent, or make a reasonable assumption.

5. Once a decision is reached, enter the corresponding point value in the correct place on the Summary Worksheet.

6. Repeat this basic process for each job factor. When you have rated the job on all five factors, summarize the scores for all five factors and create a total point value for the job.

7. Repeat this process for all the other jobs to be evaluated.

Job Evaluation

JOB ANALYSIS 3 5

Factor 1: Job Knowledge

This factor measures the minimum level of knowledge needed by an employee in order to be able to perform the duties of this position. Job knowledge can be acquired through formal education, training, and/or job experience.

Point Level Standard Value

Job Evaluation Rating System

1. Basic ability to read, write, and understand English language, and to per­ form basic arithmetic calculations. Equivalent to high school degree.

2. General knowledge of basic business practices and work procedures for a specific function (such as bookkeeping, data processing, or operations). Equivalent to high school degree plus several years job experience, or associates degree.

3. Comprehensive understanding of a specific field or function like account­ ing, information management, marketing, sales, production, or engineering. Equivalent to college degree or related level of work experience.

4. Thorough knowledge of a professional field, including training in specific professional methods and techniques. Equivalent to graduate degree.

5. Systematic knowledge of several fields related to the functioning of the organization.

Factor 2: Relationships With Others

This factor measures the nature of the working relationship that the employee experiences with others, either inside or outside the organization.

Point Level Standard Value

1. Working relationships are limited to routine dealings with other employees in the same department.

2. Occasional contacts with personnel in other departments or outside vendors or customers. Ordinary courtesy and tact required; supervisor maintains primary responsibility for outcomes of contacts.

3. Regular phone or in-person contacts with other departments, vendors, or customers. Relationships involve moderately complex transactions that requires ability to manage in terms of gains or losses to the organization.

4. Frequent phone or in-person contacts with senior administrative repre­ sentatives of other organizations, vendors, regulators, customers, media, or the community at large. High levels of tact and judgment required to avoid serious losses to the organization.

3 6 CHAPTER THREE

Factor 3: Complexity

This factor measures the complexity of the work performed. Complexity is assessed in terms of the degree to which the work is routine or unpredictable, the amount of inde­ pendent action allowed, and the nature of decisions that can be made.

Point Level Standard Value

1. Work performed is routine and repetitive. Work is continually supervised with little room for choice of method or procedure to follow. Decisions are limited to complying with preset policies.

2. Work is somewhat routine and repetitive. There are general rules to guide decisions. However, employee has some leeway to interpret those rules and make adjustments to improve accuracy or efficiency of work. Employee receives regular supervision.

3. Work is varied, with some routine. Employee is expected to adapt and interpret policies and has broad leeway to act in most appropriate manner. Employee receives general supervision.

4. Work is professional or technical in nature. Employee is expected to apply professional or technical standards to solve the problem or complete work assignments. Employee works according to standards of chosen field.

5. Work is of a broad, varied nature that often involves new and unspecified issues. Independent action is expected and common. Employee involved in establishing policies or formulating new goals and directions for the organization as a whole.

Factor 4: Supervision of Others

This factor measures the degree of responsibility for directing, controlling, and overseeing the work of other employees.

Point Level Standard Value

1. Not responsible for supervising others. 2. Serves as a lead worker in directing others in the work group by assigning

tasks, training, and helping resolve operating problems. No formal supervisory authority.

3. Serves as formal supervisor of others in a group or unit. Has authority to hire, fire, evaluate, and reward.

4. Manages others through subordinate supervisors. Controls others through long-range plans, budgets and forecasts, and general policies.

5. Executive leadership over entire division or business unit. Decides on organizational direction, resources allocation, and general management goals.

6. Top executive management. Responsible for performance of the entire organization.

JOB ANALYSIS 3 7

Factor 5: Working Conditions

This factor measures the physical conditions of the work, including the degree of danger or risk found in the work, the amount of extreme physical conditions experienced, and the amount of physical effort required in the work.

Point Level Standard Value

1. Work occurs primarily indoors. There is little if any risk from dangerous working conditions. Work does not require any strenuous activity.

2. Work requires some amount of time outdoors and/or in somewhat risky conditions. Some amount of physical labor is required in lifting, moving, shift­ ing, positioning, and so on. May require continuous standing.

3. Work occurs primarily outdoors and/or involves frequent or continuous exposure to dangerous or undesirable working conditions. Work requires con­ tinual physical labor.

3 8 CHAPTER THREE

Use the given format to record the conclusions of your job evaluation study. List the jobs evaluated at the heading of the columns along the top line. Then, add in the point value for each factor as evaluated in the study. Finally, create a total point value for each of the jobs by adding up the individual scores.

Jobs Evaluated

Job Evaluation: Summary Worksheet

Job knowledge

Relations with others

Complexity

Supervision of others

Working conditions

Total point value

JOB ANALYSIS 3 9

Something’s Just Not Right

Mary Williams had been supervising the customer operations department for the Provident Services Corporation for almost 4 years. There were five operations specialists in the department who made sure Provident’s various customer accounts were kept accurate and up to date. Mary and the specialists were supported by a secretary. Mary was proud of her ability to establish a work group that was strong in both morale and performance. Building and maintaining a high performance team was particularly important, because there was a constantly high volume of work that kept them continually busy.

One Tuesday morning, Mary’s secretary Jan Franklin knocked on M ary’s door and asked to see her. When Jan entered the office and closed the door behind her, Mary knew there must be a problem. The prospect of a problem worried Mary, because Jan was one of M ary’s favorites. Jan had begun working at Provident shortly after graduating from high school. As an employee, she had earned a reputation as a very good and reliable employee. Mary felt Jan had a lot of potential and took every opportunity to develop Jan’s talents and abilities through special assignments, participation in all departmental planning and problem-solving activities, and outright delegation of various departmental administrative duties (like coordination of production control charts and service quality follow-through). Indeed, Jan now worked more as an administrative assistant than a secretary.

Jan was clearly bothered by something as she sat in the chair across from Mary’s desk. Jan nervously handed Mary a Provident job-posting form. Jan avoided making eye contact.

Mary was stunned. As far as Mary knew, Jan liked her job and working in the operations department. Mary knew that all the specialists liked and valued Jan. Mary couldn’t guess what the problem might be.

Mary stayed composed and after a minute of looking over the form, spoke casually: “So, you want to apply for the executive secretary’s job in the sales division.” Neither person was looking at the other. “To the say the least, I ’m surprised. Could we talk about what’s going on with you, Jan?”

Jan looked at her hands, deep in thought. Mary waited. Finally, Jan looked at Mary and said: “My job is only a Grade 12. When I saw that

position listed last week, I also saw that it was a Grade 14, two full grades higher. That’s a lot of money!”

Jan let the message sink in, then continued: “I think that you know I have a friend Bill Magruder who works near their offices there. Bill told me that he sees the secretaries over there sitting around doing nothing half of the time he is there.”

Jan’s voice began to rise as a tone of anger and resentment become more apparent. “Look, Mary, you know how hard I work, we all work, around here. I mean I ’m always busy. Why should I work so hard in a Grade 12 job when I could move into a job that pays more and requires less work? After all, the requirements for that job are just a little higher than the ones for my current job, and that merit increase you gave me last month didn’t amount to anything.”

Mary waited for Jan to finish, then thought for a second before beginning: “Jan, I’m hearing you say that you’re upset because you believe you’re not being paid enough for

4 0 CHAPTER THREE

the work you do here. I ’m also understanding that you want to move to another job that pays more for less work. Is that a fair summary of your position?”

Jan nodded her head in agreement. As Mary sat there thinking, she knew that Provident’s job evaluation system had been

recently brought up to date and that, as a result, differences in job grades reflected real differences in the background, skills, and responsibilities required of jobs. Mary wanted to help Jan through this issue, because Jan was both a good employee and a nice person. However, Mary was very concerned that Jan might be making a wrong choice if she switched to the executive secretary’s position. Obviously, Mary did not want to lose Jan, particularly if the move would not be the best for Jan’s long-term interests and if it was based on faulty reasoning. Mary wondered what she should do.

Questions

1. What reasons did Jan give for wanting to leave? Evaluate each reason.

2. How should Mary respond to Jan’s request to transfer?

3. How should Mary respond to Jan’s salary complaints?