docplayer.pub

A L EQUITY--POINT M E T H O D O F JOB EVALUATION263bit 8.11. Byjob will bebed into thebd not onlyhen all jobsBergmann, T. J., and Scarpello, V. G. (2001). Pointmethod of job evaluation. In Compensation decisionmaking. New York, NY: Harcourt.schedule to'. This is onef dollar . 'POINT METHOD O F JOB EVALUATIONcommittee,ind one forment trainresponsibili for operaical effort,mployment sibilityforsponsibilitys instead ofL of the job's2 jobevaluathe organiIse once it isthe master:ates suggestunderstand.IS the assess)b, they mayd main critiout the totalthere are no: of the wagelethod is rel?cause of the11 not undernay have lithis happens,I. Finally, it isjter schedule.s inflation orIIn the point method (also called point factor) of job evaluation, the organizationidentifies the compensable factors and breaks them down into degrees. The organization must also weight the factors, determine the number of complexity levelsor degrees for each factor, and assign points. The result is that the evaluator assigns a numeric score to a job for each factor based on how much of that factor appears in the job. The job's total worth is then determined by adding up the numeric scores across all factors. This procedure, when conducted across all jobs,will result in a relative ordering of jobs based on the number of points that eachjob earns.Although the point method allows an organization to develop one job evaluation scheme for all jobs in the organization, this is rarely done for several pragmatic reasons. First, it is difficult to identify one set of compensable factors that isapplicable for all jobs. For example, the use of working conditions may distinguish among shop jobs, but there is not likely to be any variance among office jobson that compensable factor. Second, creating single definitions of factors in language easily understood by all employees would be nearly impossible. Differentoperational definitions would be needed for the same compensable factor for different clusters of jobs. Third, the fact that different job groups are often anchoredto different labor markets cannot be ignored.29 In an equity sense, comparisonwith job families (clusters) within an organization may be less relevant than comparison with a job family in the relevant labor market. With point methods of jobevaluation, organizations usually have a series of job evaluation plans. For example, there may be one plan for skilled shop jobs, another plan for unskilled assembly work, and still a third plan for office and clerical. The point method can evaluate all jobs simultaneously, rather than limiting evaluation to only key jobs.The steps for implementing the point method of job evaluation are summarizedin Exhibit 8.13.STEPSI NTHEPOINT METHODS T E P 1: SELECT T H E J O B C L U S T E RA N D T H E J O B S T O B E EVALUATED. This is thesame as in other methods of job evaluation.STEP 2: I N P U T J O B INFORMATION. AS with all job evaluation approaches, thejobs must be analyzed and job descriptions/specifications prepared.S T E P 3: S E L E C TC O M P E N S A B L EFACTORS. Just as with other methods or other jobevaluation methods, the point method generally uses a set of factors that has been

POINT METHODCHAPTER 8JOBEVALUATION:DETERMINING INTERNAL EQUITY264Step 1: Selectjobs to be evaluatedStep 2: Inputjob informationStep 3: Select thecompensable factorsStep 4: Definecompensable factorsStep 5: Definefactor degreesStep 6: Determine totalpoints in plan and weightcompensable factorsStep 7: Assign pointsto degrees withinfactors or subfactorsStep 8: Evaluate key jobsfirst if known or evaluateall jobs if key jobs are notknownStep 9: Write thejob evaluation manualdeveloped by cto five factors ators may be meture. However,nalizations formanagement bthey should beevaluation cornzation as most iSTEP4: DEFINthe committeejob evaluationThe more slquently, the ea:whether factor!ered. If the job:narrow. How elcorrespondingjobs.32As an examworking condidefinitions mi;one job evalu;working condjstaring at vide(Some organand B. Exhibit 1vides the perceshows that theucation and jobEach subfactorExhibit 8.15STEP5 : DEFINgrees should b8quate degrees idegrees, the digree, the stepsof defining facnumber of degSTEP6: DETEIvalues to fact01ation plan willA general rule

p l N TM E T H O D O F JOB EVALUATION/265developed by others (referback to Exhibit 8.8). It has long been accepted that threeto five factors are sufficientto capture a desired criterion structure." d d i t i o n afacltors may be merely redundant and do not explain unique variation in the job structure However, it is also important to remember that job evaluation plans are rationalizations for job relationships and the pay structure. Therefore, if employees andmanagement believe that additional factors are important for job worth purposes,they should be included to provide "face validity" to the plan.3' Basically, the jobevaluation committee should select those factors that are viewed within the organization as most important in rewarding work and distinguishing among jobs.STEP 4 : D E F I N EC O M F E N S A BFACTORS.LEIn this step, once factors are chosen,the committee must clearly define what each factor will mean in the context of thejob evaluation plan.The more specific a factor is, the narrower the definition tends to be, and frequently, the easier the factor is to use. One of the important criteria in determiningwhether factors are broadly or narrowly defined is related to the types of jobs covered. If the jobs are from a narrow job cluster, the factor might be correspondinglynarrow. However, if the jobs are from a range of job clusters, factors will need to becorrespondingly broader with more subfactors to capture variability in all theAs an example of this point, suppose an organization is defining the factor ofworking conditions for a narrow job cluster of shop jobs. In this case, the subfactordefinitions might include only noise and temperature. If the firm wishes to useone job evaluation plan to cover office workers as well, another subfactor forworking conditions might be necessary, such as visual concentration (to coverstaring at video terminals).Some organizations use factors and subfactors as illustrated in Exhibits 8.14Aand B. Exhibit 8.14A allots the total percent to the factor, whereas Exhibit 8.14R divides the percent for the factor over several subfactors. For example, Exhibit 8.14Bshows that the skill factor in the context of job evaluation has three subfactors: education and job knowledge, experience and training, and initiative and ingenuity.Each subfactor will have to be operationally defined in specific terms.Exhibit 8.15 gives examples of three general factor definitions.STEP 5 : D E F I N FACTORED E G R E E S The.committee must decide how many degrees should be on the scale for a given factor or subfactor. There should be adequate degrees to make meaningful distinctions among jobs. If there are too manydegrees, the distinctions may be meaningless. Also, if no job falls within the degree, the steps are probably too narrowly defined. Exhibit 8.16 shows one methodof defining factor degrees. All factors or subfactors do not have to use the samenumber of degrees.S T E P 6: D E T E R M I NTOTALEP O I N T SI N PLAN. The process for assigning pointvalues to factors begins with a decision as to how many total points the job evaluation plan will have. There is no magic number of points that a plan should have.A general rule is to have enough total points in the plan to differentiate adequately

CHAPTERJOB EVALUATION:8DETERMINING INTERNAL EQUITY266FncToRs,DEGREES,1A N D WEIGHTEDPOINTV A L U E SF O RO F F I C E E M P L O Y E E greeFourthDegreeFifthDegree--100---SixthDegree- --Job alNote: Total points in plan are 1,000.among the jobs to be evaluated. Under normal conditions, there should be enoughpoints to adequately distinguish among the jobs in the organization.After determining the total number of points that will go into the job evaluationplan, the committee must determine how the points will be divided among thefactors or subfactors. Points may be assigned to factors based on committee judgment or based on statistics. Statistical assignment of points is less common partlybecause of its complexity. Nonetheless, several plans do use regression techniquesto find which factors best predict pay rates for jobs.33One study found that about40 percent of the plans used by responding organizations rely on statisticalweighting, and the balance rely on judgmental weighting.34The assignment of points to each of the various factors is equivalent to weighting each factor based on its importance. As an example, suppose that an organization has a skill factor in its plan and considers it a very important factor, weightingit at 50 percent. In this case, assuming that the plan carries a maximum of 1,000points (see Exhibit 8.17A), the skill factor is assigned 500 points (1,000 x 0.50 500 points). In this same fashion, points are assigned to subfactors. If skill is composed of several subfactors (such as education and job knowledge; experience andtraining), then the points are divided among them. If the organization decides thatthe education and job knc;. ledgesubfactor should be weighted 60 percent and experience and training should be weighted 40 percent, then these subfactors wouldreceive 300 and 200 points, respectively. When the organization is not using subfactors, then the total points in the plan (see Exhibit 8.17B) are multiplied by thefactor weight to yield the factor points at their highest degree (for example, responsibility-1,000 points X 0.25 250 points).

PointsFactors and SubfactorsPercent- eFifthDegreeSixthDegreeWelght inPercent p50Education and job knowledgeExperience and trainingInitiative and ingenuityEffort15Physical demandMental or visual demandResponsibility20Equipment or toolsMaterial or productSafety of othersWork o f othersJob Conditions15Working conditionsUnavoidable hazardsTotal100Source: H. G. Zollitsch and A. Langsner, Wage nnd Salary Adnlinistmtion, 2d ed. (Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing Co, 1970), 234. Reprinted by permission of Herbert G. Zollitsch.