Job Evaluation: main types, purposes and problems - Essay Example

of the of the Concerned Management 2 March Human Resource Management: What Purpose does Job Evaluation Serve? What are its Main Types? What are the Main Problems Associated with It? Introduction Simply speaking, job evaluation pertains to a method aimed at evaluating and determining the worth of a specific job in relation to the many other types of jobs existing in an organization (White & Druker 2000, p. 74). Job evaluation involves the conducting of a systematic comparison between varied jobs in a particular organization to have an estimate of their relative worth that plays a crucial role in the establishment of a rational pay structure in that organization (White & Druker 2000, p. 74). One of the objectives of job analysis is to come out with a systematic and credible ranking of varied jobs so as to build such a pay structure that is rational and readily acceptable to most of the personnel employed within an organizational framework (White & Druker 2000). One think that needs to be kept in mind is that job evaluation tends to be a predominantly objective process that in no way intends to assess people, but rather tends to assess the varied jobs. Also the standards adhered to while conducting a job evaluation is mostly relative and in no way pretend to be absolute (White & Druker 2000) . Job evaluation adheres to job analysis to cull out the basic information required during the process (White & Druker 2000). Job evaluations are mostly conducted and carried out by specific groups rather than by individual people. Though, job evaluation is expected to be predominantly objective, a measure of subjectivity does infiltrate in the process of job evaluation (White & Druker 2000). Job evaluation in no way aspires to come out with fixed pay scales, but rather extends a basis, by which a rational pay structure could be, configured (White & Druker). The process of job evaluation serves varied purposes in an organizational context. Advantages of Job Evaluation It goes without saying that a professionally managed job evaluation facilitates varied advantages to organizations. Job evaluation helps organizations reduce the variations between varied salary structures (Sisson & Storey 2000, p. 118). There is no denying the fact that the onus of ushering in apt motivation in the context of personnel deployed within an organization is to a great extent dependant on how that organization determines the salary for its employees. If the employees feel that their job is not considered important and they are not being paid well, it may give way to counterproductive de-motivation. So, the job evaluation helps the managers to usher in a measure of consistency in the salary structures, both in an internal and external perspective (Sisson & Storey 2000). Job evaluation helps the organization to do away with the salary inequalities. With the influx of globalization, the organizations are required to come out with new types of jobs. Sometimes it gets really difficult to estimate the relevance of the new jobs created by an organization. It is a job evaluation that enables the companies to estimate the relative relevance of the new jobs created by them and to come out with commensurate pay structures (Sims 2002, p. 78). Hence, the concept of job evaluation is more important in a contemporary context, than what it was in the past. The current age is the age of specialization. There are many jobs within organizations that require a specialist to handle them. Therefore, as expected the need for specialization creates a plethora of jobs within organizations. This situation gets more complex by the division of labour that makes the personnel structure within organizations more intricate and unwieldy (Shell 2003, p. 182). Under such circumstances its get really difficult to determine the salary structure of employees and specialists operating at varied levels within the organizations (Shell 2003, p. 182). So it gets really pivotal to estimate the relative importance of varied jobs to fix appropriate salary structures. However, this problem gets readily solved, courtesy the concept of job evaluation. The organizations are many a time required to come out with appropriate salary differentials to suit different jobs. The need for standardizing these salary differentials is really crucial to assure motivation and harmony within organizations (Myers 1989). Hence, it is only through job evaluation that some kind of uniformity could be introduced in the salary structures. Therefore, there is no denying the fact that job evaluation mitigates the scope for confusion or restlessness within organizations and helps inculcate harmony, acceptance and peace (Myers 1989). The most crucial job that the companies have to contend with is the selection of employees. The objectives of sustenance and profitability demand that the right job is allocated to the person having just the right credentials. The information culled out by job evaluation procedures comes in real handy during the selection of employees (Kraut & Korman 1999). The factors and results gleaned during the process of job evaluation can be taken into account by the managers while selecting the new employees. Thus, job evaluation helps the managers to allocate the right job to the person having the right academic and experience credentials. Besides, managers in successful organisations are very particular about forging harmonious relations with the personnel working under them (Kraut & Kolman 1999). Job evaluation helps the managers retain harmonious and cordial relations with the employees (Kraut & Kolman 1999). It helps the managers mitigate the salary controversies as per the job status and abilities of the employees. Hence, it goes without saying that job evaluation is a concept that is of immense importance to the modern day organisations employing hundreds of professionals. It helps reduce the proportion of salary controversies and ushers in an environment of harmony within organisations. Thereby, job evaluation is an integral aspect of the Human Resource Management. Types of Job Evaluation Procedures Job evaluation helps retain the essence of compensation management through the establishment of appropriate pay structures. Generally speaking there exist four types of job evaluation procedures. Ranking Method In this method the evaluators establish the relative ranking of each and every job on the basis of its relative value to the organization (Tyson 2006, p. 249). This ranking is primarily done by a committee comprising of HR managers and employee representatives that is entrusted with the responsibility of arranging the varied jobs as per the ranks. This ranking involves the lowest to the highest jobs in an organization. In ranking method no attempt is made by the evaluators to arrange the jobs as per some specific ranking formula (Tyson 2006, p. 249). Rather, they simply observe varied jobs and decide as to which job is most difficult and of more value to the organisation. Consequently, they go on comparing the varied jobs within the organisation to come out with a ranking order. The greatest problem with the ranking method of job evaluation is that it gets impractical in large organizations employing thousands of professionals (Tyson 2006, p. 250). The other big drawback of ranking method is that it tends to be predominantly subjective in its overall approach (Tyson 2006, p. 250). The ranking arrived at could not be justified as per some logical or rational standards. Moreover, as in the ranking method the jobs are arranged according to a straight ranking order, it gets really difficult to estimate the difference between two ranks (Tyson 2006, p. 250). Point Method In this method the quantitative assessment of a job is arrived at by allocating points to the various job components and then adding these points (Tyson 2006, p. 251). This method requires the establishment of job factors in consonance with the specific groups of jobs that are to be evaluated. After identifying the varied job groups, the analysts arrive at job descriptions on the basis of job analysis (Tyson 2006). After that the analysts select the factors required to assess the job value and these factors become the standard as per which a specific job group gets evaluated (Tyson 2006). The weight ascribed to a factor is always in consonance with its value in a job (Tyson 2006). There is no denying the fact that the point method is a more rational and systematic approach towards job evaluation. In this method it is also possible to know the distance between two jobs. Classification Method In the classification method a number of classes or grades are defined by the job evaluators to describe the groups of jobs to be evaluated (Tyson 2006, p. 250). The varied classifications are arrived at by ascribing to some common skills that are considered to be denominators (Tyson 2006, p. 250). The overall objective in this method is that it aspires to establish distinct classes or grades in a job group. Once the varied classifications are established they are further arranged in an order of importance. Then each job is placed in an appropriate classification by comparing the job description of varied jobs in consonance with the set classes or grades (Tyson 2006, p. 250). Again, the major problem with the classification method is that like ranking method, it is not possible to apply it in large organizations having thousands of employees (Tyson 2006). Besides, classification method is also somewhat open to the subjective opinion of the evaluators (Tyson 2006). It fails to ascribe to a consistent or rational method following which the classes or grades are established (Tyson 2006). Besides, it is extremely difficult and complex to write the specific description of each class. It is also cumbersome to allocate specific jobs to specific classes or to determine the class of those jobs, which falls in more than one class or grade (Tyson 2006). Factor Comparison Method In the factor comparison method, the evaluators do not tend to focus on an entire job, but they rather prefer to consider the varied factors associated with a job (Tyson 2006, p. 253). The primary assumption behind this method is that it recognizes five job factors associated with varied jobs that are skills, work conditions, mental involvement, responsibilities and physical involvement (Tyson 2006, p. 253). Each of the jobs to be evaluated is ranked on the basis of the relative degree of difficulty on each of the five universal factors (Tyson 2006, p. 253). Further, the pay rates for each specific job are decided upon on the basis of the relative magnitude of difficulty with regard to the specific factors (Tyson 2006, p. 253). The evaluators assess each and every job with regards to the five universal factors. There is no denying the fact that the factor comparison method is more rational and offers a more systematic approach towards job evaluation. Problems Associated with Job Evaluation It is a known fact that scope of job evaluation is constrained by many human, economic and technical factors (Bratton & Gold 2003). Many a time the managers fail to take the employees into confidence while conducting job evaluation and do not prefer to explain to them the technicalities involved in the process (Bratton & Gold 2003). Hence the employees totally fail to understand and appreciate as to what the concept of job evaluation holds for them (Bratton & Gold 2003). Besides job evaluations are also subject to a great extent to the history of employee-management relationships in the organisations in which it is carried out (Gupta & Douglas 1991). Thereby the ease accorded to job evaluation in one organisation may not be found in some other organization. Besides, many a times there exists no correlation between salary and job evaluations (Gupta & Douglas 1991). The managers prefer to bribe the employees with high salaries to accept and agree to a particular job evaluation. Often, it also gets problematic for the employees to agree to cooperate with the job evaluation process because they fear that once they abide by the system, the system may start exploiting them in the times to come (Gupta & Douglas 1991). The technicalities associated with designing a job evaluation program that may blend seamlessly with the complex structure of the organization in which it is to be implemented may also get to be problematic. It is utterly difficult to come out with a standard procedure for each and every organization and most of the systems need to be customized and altered to suit the needs of specific organizations (Gupta & Douglas 1991). Conclusion As the organization further evolve and get more complex this will pose much challenge to the already existent principles of job evaluation. It remains to be seen that whether the present job evaluation principles will be able to comply with the needs of the future organization that create new jobs on a continual basis, as per their needs and requirements. However, it will be pragmatic to say that organizations simply cannot do without job evaluation. Reference List Bratton, John & Gold, Jeffrey 2003, Human Resource Management, Palgrave MacMillan, London. Gupta, Nina & Douglas, G 1991, ‘Practical Problems in Using Job Evaluation Systems to Determining Compensation’, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 133-144. Kraut, Allen & Korman, Abraham K 1999, Evolving Practices in Human Resource Management, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Myers, Charles A 1989, Management in the Industrial Age, McGraw-Hill, New York. Shell, Richard L 2003, Management of Professionals, Marcel Dekker, New York. Sims, Ronald R 2002, Organizational Success through Effective Human Resource Management, Westport, CT. Sisson, Keith & Storey, John 2000, The Realities of Human Resource Management, Open University Press, Philadelphia. Tyson, Shaun 2006, Essentials of Human Resource Management, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. White, Geoff & Druker, Janet 2000, Reward Management, Routledge, London. Read More