point ranking method of job evaluation
TRANSCRIPT
Point ranking method of job
evaluation
Presented by:
A. Losa Kayina
Job Evaluation
Analytical
Point ranking
Factor compariso
n
Non- analytical
Ranking Grading
Job Evaluation ? ? . .
AnalyticalUses detailed analysis of job
Non-analyticalNo detailed analysis of job
Job evaluation is the technique to systematically determine the worth of each job and help in establishing basic wage
rates of jobs.
What is point ranking method??..
• widely used method
• Points are assigned to each factor in order of importance.
• Points are summed up to determine the wage rate for the job.
• Jobs with similar point totals are placed in similar pay grades
• Merill Lott developed this method in 1925.
• Uses a point scheme based on the compensable job factors of skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions
Steps in point method
Listing of jobs
Number of factors Definition of
factors
Determination of degrees
Allocation of points to
degrees
Evaluation of jobs
Designing the wage
structure
Adjusting the existing wage
structure
Hay group and point method of job evaluation..??..
About Hay GroupGlobal human resources management consulting firm
Guide charts in existence since 1951
2000 employees world wide
9000 clients in various industries
Partners with client to implement human resources strategies which align with business objective
Leader in compensation assessment and design
The Guide-Chart Profile method :
This method was first developed by Dr. Edward N. Hay in the early 1950s, concerned with decision making and responsibility.
There are 3 factors each having its own guide chart.
Hay Factors
Know-how
Problem solving
Accountability
What is ‘Know-How’ ??• DefinitionAll the amount of knowledge, skills, aptitudes, independent of how it was obtained, needed for a standard performance, acceptable for the job
•Know-How has three dimensions:• Technical and specialized knowledge •Managerial Know How• Human Relationship Skills
38 43 50 50 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 15243 50 57 57 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 17550 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 20050 57 66 66 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 20057 66 76 76 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 23066 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 26466 76 87 87 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 26476 87 100 100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 30487 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 35087 100 115 115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350100 115 132 132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460115 132 152 152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460132 152 175 175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608152 175 200 200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608175 200 230 230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800200 230 264 264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800230 264 304 304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056264 304 350 350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056304 350 400 400 460 528 528 608 700 700 800 920 920 1056 1216350 400 460 460 528 608 608 700 800 800 920 1056 1056 1216 1400
EI+3264
A. PRIMARY:
B. ELEMENTARY VOCATIONAL :
C. VOCATIONAL:
D. ADVANCED VOCATIONAL :
E. BASIC SPECIALIZED:
F. SPECIALIZED SEASONED :
G. SPECIALIZED MASTERY:
H. UNIC AUTHORITY:
ManagementAreaHuman Relationship Skills
TechnicalKnow-How
0 Task
I ACTIVITIE
S
II HOMOGENOU
S
III DIVERSE
IV INTERGATION
COMPLET
B B B B BI I IIIC CCCC
Example of Know-how computation
Explaination of know how computation:
• Know-How points are derived from the matching of the three dimensions described above.
• For example, a Cognitive scoring of “E”, combined with a Managerial scoring of “I” and Human Relation skills of “3”
provides a total Know-How ranking.
What is “Problem Solving”??• Definition“Self intiated” thinking required for the job to evaluate, analyze, develop, think, identify and conclude.
• Problem Solving has two dimensions:• Thinking Environment•Analytical Challenge
1. REPETITIVE
2. PATTERNED
3. INTERPO-LATIVE
4. ADAPTIVE
5. UNCHARTED
A. STRICT ROUTINE:
B. ROUTINE:
C. SEMI-ROUTINE:
D. STANDARDIZED
E. CLEARLY DEFINED
F. BROADLY DEFINED
G. GENERALLY DEFINED:
H. ABSTRACT DEFINED:
10% 14% 19% 25% 33%
12% 16% 22% 29% 38%12% 16% 22% 29% 38%
14% 19% 25% 33% 43%14% 19% 25% 33% 43%
16% 22% 29% 38% 50%16% 22% 29% 38% 50%
19% 25% 33% 43% 57%19% 25% 33% 43% 57%
22% 29% 38% 50% 66%22% 29% 38% 50% 66%
25% 33% 43% 57% 76%25% 33% 43% 57% 76%
29% 38% 50% 66% 87%29% 38% 50% 66% 87%
33% 43% 57% 76% 100%
Analytical Challenge
AnalyticalEnvironmentE
I+3264
D+3(33)87
Example of Problem solving computation
i.e. 33% of 264 = 87
Explaination of Problem solving computation:
• Problem Solving points are derived from the matching of the two dimensions described
above.
• For example, a Thinking Environment scoring of “D”, combined with a Thinking Challenge
scoring of “3” provides a percentage.
• To find Problem Solving points, match the Know-How total score and the Problem
Solving %. This provides the total Problem Solving ranking.
What is “Accountability”??
• DefinitionAccountability is the factor utilized to quantify the jobs results.
• Accountability has three dimensions: • Freedom to Act• Impact• Magnitude
(0) NOT QUANTIFIED
(1) VERY SMALL
(2) SMALL
(3) MEDIUM
(4) MEDIUM-BIG
ll IMPACT
A B C D R C S P R C S P R C S P R C S
A. PRESCRIBED: 8
9
10
10
12
14
14
16
19
19
22
25
10
12
14
14
16
19
19
22
25
25
29
33
14
16
19
19
22
25
25
29
33
33
38
43
19
22
25
25
29
33
33
38
43
43
50
57
25
29
33
33
38
43
43
50
57
B. CONTROLED: 12
14
16
16
19
22
22
25
29
29
33
38
16
19
22
22
25
29
29
33
38
38
43
50
22
25
29
29
33
38
38
43
50
50
57
66
29
33
38
38
43
50
50
57
66
66
76
87
38
43
50
50
57
66
66
76
87
C. STANDARDIZED: 19
22
25
25
29
33
33
38
43
43
50
57
25
29
33
33
38
43
43
50
57
57
66
76
33
38
43
43
50
57
57
66
76
76
87
100
43
50
57
57
66
76
76
87
100
100
115
132
57
66
76
76
87
100
100
115
132
D. GENERAL REGLEMENTED: 29
33
38
38
43
50
50
57
66
66
76
87
38
43
50
50
57
66
66
76
87
87
100
115
50
57
66
66
76
87
87
100
115
115
132
152
66
76
87
87
100
115
115
132
152
152
175
200
87
100
115
115
132
152
152
175
200
E. DIRECTED: 43
50
57
57
66
76
76
87
100
100
115
132
57
66
76
76
87
100
100
115
132
132
152
175
76
87
100
100
115
132
132
152
175
175
200
230
100
115
132
132
152
175
175
200
230
230
264
304
132
152
175
175
200
230
230
264
304
F. GENERAL DIRECTED: 66
76
87
87
100
115
115
132
152
152
175
200
87
100
115
115
132
152
152
175
200
200
230
264
115
132
152
152
175
200
200
230
264
264
304
350
152
175
200
200
230
264
264
304
350
350
400
460
200
230
264
264
304
350
350
400
460
G. GUIDED: 100
115
132
132
152
175
175
200
230
230
264
304
132
152
175
175
200
230
230
264
304
304
350
400
175
200
230
230
264
304
304
350
400
400
460
528
230
264
304
304
350
400
400
460
528
528
608
700
304
350
400
400
460
528
528
608
700
H. STRATEGIC GUIDED 152
175
200
200
230
264
264
304
350
350
400
460
200
230
264
264
304
350
350
400
460
460
528
608
264
304
350
350
400
460
460
528
608
608
700
800
350
400
460
460
528
608
608
700
800
800
920
1056
460
528
608
608
700
800
800
920
1056
Impact Area
Freedom to ActEI+3264
D+3(33)87
D2-P115
ImpactNature
Example of Accountability computation
264+87+115 = 466
Explaination of Accountability computation:
• Accountability points are derived from the matching of the three dimensions described above.
• For example, a Freedom to Act scoring of “D”, combined with a Magnitude scoring of “2” and an
Impact scoring of “P” provides a total Accountability ranking of D2P.
Problems of hay method• Complicated scoring matrix
• Sex bias
• Not concerned with responsibility taking
• Not suitable for colleges and team based education sector
• emphasis on management know how
• Bias reflects Heirarchy and Budget-holding
Partners with hay groups
Merits and demerits of point method
Advantages
(1) Numerical basis for wage differentials by analysing a job by factors thereby obtaining a high measure of agreement on job value.
(2)Can be used for a long time.
(3) Terms and definitions understood by all.
(4) Jobs easily placed in district categories.
Merits and demerits of point method
Disadvantages
(4) Difficult to determine the
factor levels within factors and assign
values to them
(3) If many rates are used, considerable clerical work is needed in recording and summarizing the rating scales
(1) heavy expenditure in development and installing .
(2) Time consuming and difficult task.
• point method of job evaluation is more effective because even the major factors are sub-divided which insures accuracy of evaluation.
• The possibility of inaccuracy of job evaluation is likely to arise if the predetermined point values do not exhibit true values.
• In contrast to ranking and grading methods, which measures jobs as whole jobs , the point system is more analytical in approach
Conclusion:
