Methods of job analysis
After deciding on job descriptors and the level of analysis, the analyst must decide which method is to
be used to collect job information. There are a number of methods of 16 obtaining job information
including Conventional job analysis programs and standardized instruments like Position Analysis
Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, the Critical Incident Technique,
Functional Job Analysis, the Fleishman Job analysis System and the Task inventory method. It will
however be kept in mind that these job analysis methods differ in descriptors, levels of analysis and on
methods of collecting, analyzing and presenting data (Marcus, 1981; Koontz and Weihrich,1988; Clifford,
1994)
Conventional Procedures
Conventional job analysis programs typically involve collecting job information by observing and or
interviewing job incumbents. Then job descriptions are prepared in essay form. Much of the
conventional approach comes from the long experience of the United States Employment Service in
analyzing jobs. The original job analysis formula of the United States Department of labor (DOL)
provided for obtaining work activities. The DOL's 1972 revision of this schedule requires the job title, job
summary and description of tasks.
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
It treats work activities as the primary job descriptor. As a consequence, the use of the conventional
approach by private organizations focuses largely on work activities rather than on descriptors used in
the DOL job analysis schedule (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972). As job
evaluation purports to distinguish jobs on the importance of work activities to the employing
organization, this descriptor seems primary. Using the DOL's original job analysis formula (1946) which
outlined among others the following descriptors, what the worker does, how the worker does it and
why the worker does it.
This may provide 17 reasonable assurances that all the work activities are covered. One of the functions
of this model is to require the analyst to seek out the purpose of the work. In some private use of the
conventional approach, worker attributes required by the job are also sought. Ratings of education,
training and experience required may be obtained, as well as information on contacts required, report
writing, decisions and supervision. In part, these categories represent worker attributes and in part they
represent a search for specific work activities. Some conventional job analysis programs ask job
incumbents to complete a preliminary questionnaire describing their jobs. The purpose is to provide the
analyst with a first draft of the job information needed.
It is also meant to be a first step in obtaining incumbent and supervisor approval of the final job
description. Of course, not all employees enjoy filling out questionnaires. Also, employees vary in verbal
skills and may overstate or understate their work activities. Usually, the job analyst follows up the
questionnaire by interviewing the employee and observing his or her job (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972).
Standardized Instruments
Standardized Instruments are instruments that have been previously tested and utilized which increases
their general validity. They have been found to give similar results from different organizational setups.
They include Position Analysis Questionnaire, Management Position Description Questionnaire, Task
inventory method, Functional Job Analysis, Fleishman Job analysis System and the Critical Incident
Technique. (McCormick and associates, 1969)
The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a Quantitative instrument developed by McCormick and
associates at Purdue University (1969). The PAQ is a structured job analysis questionnaire containing
194 items called job elements. These elements are worker-oriented; using the terminology of the
Dictionary of Occupational TDOL's 1972 job analysis formula would be referred to as worker behaviors.
The items are organized into six divisions: information input, mental processes, work output (physical
activities and tools), relationships with others, job context (the physical and social environment) and
other job characteristics (such as pace and structure). Each job element is rated on six scales: extent of
use, importance, time, possibility of occurrence, applicability, and a special code for certain Jobs
(Richardson, 1971).
The PAQ is usually completed by job analysts or supervisors. In some instances managerial, professional,
or other white-collar job incumbents fill out the instrument. The reason for such limitations is that the
reading requirements of the method are at least at the college-graduate level. Data from the PAQ can be
analyzed in several ways. For a specific job, individual ratings can be averaged to yield the relative
importance of emphasis on various job elements and the results can be summarized as a job description.
The elements can also be clustered into a profile rating on a large number of job dimensions to permit
comparison of this job with others.
Estimates of employee aptitude requirements can be made. Job evaluation points can be estimated
from the items related to pay. Finally, an occupational prestige score can be computed. Analysts can
have PAQ data computer-analyzed by sending the completed questionnaire to PAQ Services. The PAQ
has been used for job evaluation, selection, performance appraisal, assessmentcenter development,
determination of job similarity, development of job families, 19 vocational counseling, determination of
training needs, and job design.
The PAQ has been shown to have a respectable level of reliability. An analysis of 92 jobs by two
independent groups yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.79 (Jeanneret, McCormick and Mecham, 1972).
The Management Position Description Questionnaire (MPDQ) is designed for management positions and
uses a checklist method to analyze jobs. The factors in MPDQ are related to the work and
responsibilities of managers. The common factors in manager’s job would include: Product/service,
market and Financial planning, coordination of other organizational units and personnel, product and
service responsibility, public and customer relations, advanced consultations, autonomy of action,
approval of Financial commitment, staff services, supervision, complexity and stress, advanced Financial
responsibility and broad personnel responsibility. These factors will depend on the organization and
level of managerial position. However, they can be used to determine training needs of those individuals
who are about to move into managerial positions as well as for setting compensation levels for
managerial positions (Gomez-Mejia, Page and Tornow, 1982) The Task inventory method emphasizes on
work activities. In this approach a list of tasks pertinent to a group of jobs is developed. Then the tasks
involved in the job under study are rated on a number of scales by incumbents or supervisors. Finally the
ratings are manipulated statistically, usually by computer and a quantitative job analysis is developed.
Actually any method of job analysis, even narrative job descriptions, could be termed a task inventory if
an analysis of the data can provide quantitative information 20 from appropriate scales. One example of
this type of job analysis is the Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Program (CODAP).
Undoubtedly the best-known task inventory is the one that has been developed over many years by
Raymond E. Christal and his associates for the United States Air Force. The heart of the program is a list
of tasks involved in a particular job. After the task list has been prepared by incumbents, supervisors or
experts, incumbents are asked to indicate whether they perform each of the tasks. They are then asked
to indicate on a scale the relative amount of time spent in performing each particular task. Other ratings
are also obtained such as training time required and criticality of performance (Christal and Weissmuller,
1976).
Method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
The method of Functional Job Analysis (FJA) is usually thought of in terms of the familiar data, people,
things and hierarchies used in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles developed by Sidney A. Fine and
associates, this comprehensive approach has five components; identification of purposes, goals and
objectives; identification and description of tasks; analysis of tasks on seven scales, including three
worker-function scales (one each for data, people, and things); development of performance standards
and development of training content.
FJA data are developed by trained job analysts from background materials, interviews with workers and
supervisors and observation. The method provides data for job design, selection, training and evaluation
and could be used at least partially for most other personnel applications. It has been applied to jobs at
every level (Livernash, 1957). The Fleishman Job analysis System (F-JAS) represents a generic, skill-based
approach. Fleishman factor–analyze large data sets to discover a common, minimum set of 21
knowledge, skills, abilities and others across different jobs. His system of 73 specific scales measure the
following broad areas: Cognitive (verbal abilities, idea generation and reasoning abilities); quantitative
abilities (memory, perpetual abilities, spatial abilities and attentiveness); psychomotor (manipulative
abilities, control movement abilities and reaction time and speed abilities) and physical (physical
strength abilities, endurance, flexibility, balance and coordination; visual ability; and auditory and
speech abilities) (Fleishman, 1992, Fine and Hutchison, 1974).
The other method that can be used to analysis a job is the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) by John
Flanagan who proposed two criteria to define a job activity as critical: it was complete enough to allow
someone to make an inference about a job incumbent’s performance and it was crucial to either
outstanding or poor job performance. When all the critical acts i.e. behaviors in the job are complied,
the results provide an accurate portrayal that can focus on both the action of the worker and the
context in which the behavior occurs. This is an excellent technique when primary purpose is
performance appraisal, training, selection or job design. It is collected through interviews or
questionnaires (Jeanneret and McCormick, 1969).
