崗位價值評估(英文資料)-Job Evaluation

JobEvaluation

TwoPoint-FactorMethodsFactorEvaluationSystem

Developedin1977bytheOfficeofPersonnelManagementfornon-supervisorygeneralscheduleemployees.Itincorporatesmanyof thecharacteristicsoftheLott,Benge,andNEMAmethods.HayMethod Datesbacktotheearly50'sandisoneofthemostpopularmethodsinusetoday.Itisparticularlypopularforevaluatingexecutive,managerial,andprofessionalpositionsaswellasnonexemptclerical,bluecollar,andtechnicaljobs.UniversalFactors

FourPopularMethods

BASS NMTA Skill Skill (4/0)* (3/15) WorkingCondition Effort (3/0) (2/10) Responsibility Responsibility (1/0) (4/20) JobConditions (2/10)*(SUBFACTORS/DEGREESORLEVELS)UniversalFactors

FourPopularMethods

HayandPurves

FactorEvaluationSystem KnowHow Knowledge PersonalContact (3/15) (2/9) PurposeofContact ProblemSolvingSupvControlPhysicalDemands (2/13) (3/5) WorkEnvironment Accountability Guidelines (3/15) (2/5) Complexity (3/6) Scope&Effect (2/6)

CombiningPoint-Factor

andFactor-ComparisonMethods

AcriticalcheckoftheresultsofaPOINT-FACTORjobevaluationinvolvestheuseofFACTORCOMPARISON.Itisusedtobesurethatthefactorpointsassignedtoeachjobmakessenserelativetoafactorcomparisonprocess.JobEvaluationCommittee

Essentialtothesuccessofalljobevaluationprocessesisthepresenceofexpertjudgment. JobEvaluationCommittee

Expertjudgmentistypicallyshaped bythelevelofknowledgesharedby theevaluatorsoftheworkenvironmentTheirunderstanding ofthenatureoftheworkbeing performed,andTheircapacity toprocessinformation anddataandmakesound judgments.JobEvaluationCommittee

Thequalityoftheoutputofanyjob evaluationprocessusingpoint scoredcompensationfactors relatesdirectly tothequalityof decisionsmade bythosedoing theratings,andJobEvaluationCommitteeItisreasonabletoassumethatgiventhecomplexnatureofworkenvironments,accuracyinjobevaluationrequirestheknowledgeandskillofmorethanoneindividual,andThelogicalconsequenceisthejobevaluationcommittee.JobEvaluationCommitteeAjobevaluationcommitteemayconsistofonetothreepermanentmembers(atleastonefromthecompdepartment)androtatingmembersrepresentingtheunit(s)whosejobsarebeingevaluated.RolesOfTheCommittee

RankAndRateJobs

SelectAJobEvaluationMethodology

ChooseBenchmarkJobsRoleOfTheCompensation

DepartmentProvideCommitteeRepresentationProvideCommitteeWithStaffSpecialistsIdentifyBenchmarkJobsProvideTrainingForCommitteeMembersFactorEvaluationSystem

TheFESdiffersfromtheotherpoint-factormethodsinthatitcontainsthreestagesofdescriptivedatanotsimplyadefinedsetofuniversalcompensablefactors,subfactors,anddegrees. Thethreestagesare:FactorEvaluationSystemPrimaryStandards(9)Factor-levelDescriptionsForTheSeries(60+)BenchmarkJobsThatCoverTheFullRangeOfPayForTheJobsInEachOccupationOrSeries.FESFactorDescriptionTableFACTOR POINTS %TOTALLEVELSKnowledge 50-1850 41.3 9SupvControl 25-650 14.5 5Guidelines 25-650 14.5 5Complexity 25-450 10.0 6Scope/effect 25-450 10.0 6PersContact 10-110 2.5 4PurpOfContact 20-220 4.9 4PhysDemand 5-50 1.1 3WorkEnvironment 5-50 1.1 3 TotalPoints 4480FESExerciseTheFESprocessisdescribedindetailinthetextonpages257through277.

Additionally,ajobdescriptionforaleadprogrammertakenfromchapter7hasbeenevaluatedonpages271through274usingtheFESprocessandtheresultshavebeensummarizedona"factorevaluationsystempositionevaluationstatement"appearingonpage276.FESQualityCheckThereisadirectrelationshipbetweentheselectedleveloftheknowledgefactorandlevelsselectedofallotherfactors.Theknowledgeorskillrequirementsofajobdrivetheevaluationrating,whileothercompensablefactorsprovideadditionalinformationto"finetune"thefinalrating.Reviewfigure9-5"FESknowledgelevelconventions"forfurtherexplanationordescriptionofthispoint.SoreThumbing

Reviewingratingsusingsomekindofspreadsheetlayoutassistsinidentifyingfactorratingsthatdon'tmakesense.Thisanalysisisoftencalled"sorethumbing"becauseaninappropriateratingstandsoutlikeasorethumb.HayGuideChart-ProfileMethod

TheHayGuidechart-profilemethodusesthreeuniversalfactors,eightsubfactors,andforty-threedegreesandlevelstoevaluatejobs.Theyareasfollows:Know-HowPracticalprocedures,specializedknowledge,Andscientificdiscipline. (8levels)Managerial(4levels)Humanrelations(3levels)Plus3degreechoicespergrid.HayGuideChart-ProfileMethodProblem-SolvingThinkingenvironment (8levels)Thinkingchallenge (5levels)Plus2degreechoicespergridAccountabilityFreedomtoact (7levels)Jobimpactonendresults(4levels)Magnitude(4levels)Plus3degreespergrid.HayMethodThedescriptionsthatformtherowsandthecolumnsoftheguidechartsprovideameasureofthelevelofdifficulty,orimportance,ofeachfactor.TheKHandACguidechartsprovideactualscores.ThePSguidechartprovidesapercentagethatidentifiestheamountofKHusedinsolvingproblems.HayMethod

TheGuideChartsHaveBothStandardizedAndCustomizedFeatures:Thegeometricscalesusethesamevalueswitheachstep,reflectingthe15%perceptibledifferenceinvaluestheorydiscussedinchaptersix.Thenumberofrowsandcolumnsofeachguidechartcanbealteredtofitthecharacterandsizeoftheclient.

HayMethod

Theevaluationprocessgenerallybeginswiththehighestvaluedcompensablefactorandproceedsinordertothelowestweightedfactor.KNOW-HOWRowsdescribedepthandbreadthofjobknowledgerequiredtoperformjobassignments.Columnsdescribemanagementbreadthrelativetosuchrequirementsasplanning,organizing,reviewing,andcontrol.Withineachcolumnthereisathirdelementthatmeasureshumanrelationsskill.HayMethodHayMethodPROBLEM-SOLVINGRowsidentifylevelsofthinking.Columnsidentifythinkingchallenge. Whenthemostappropriategridandcorrespondingpercentagehasbeenidentified,apointvalueisdeterminedbymultiplyingtheselectedPS%(x)thepreviouslydeterminedKHpoints.HayMethodACCOUNTABILITYRowsmeasurefreedomtoactColumnsmeasurethemagnitudeoftheimpactofthejobonendresultsInsideeachcolumnisathirdelementthatmeasuresthejobimpactonendresults(4percolumn)HayMethodExampleThesamelead-programmeranalystjobevaluatedearlierinthischapterusingtheFESmethodisre-evaluatedinpages282-294usingthehaymethod.Figure9-10(pg284)isa”HayPositionEvaluationStatement"thatcontainstheevaluationscoresforthelead-programmeranalystinaccordancewiththehayguidechart-profilemethod.HayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatternsPROFILINGKHandPSarecloselylinkedintheguidechartsandtheytendtoparalleleachotherwithrespecttotheiralphanumericlocatorcodes.AsKHrequirementsincreaseforajobPSenjoysaconcomitantgrowth.HayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatternsPROFILINGPSandACalsohavearelationshipthatprovidesinformationaboutthegeneralnatureofjobsthatwhenexaminedeithervalidatestheevaluationorchallengestheresults.HayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatternsPROFILINGJobshigherinPSpointsthanACpointsaretypicallystaffandadministrativeinnature,andJobshigherinACpointsthanPSpointsaretypicallyactionorlinejobs,andHayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatternsPROFILINGJobswithessentiallythesameACandPSpointstendtohaveanadministrative/actionorientation.TheprofileisdeterminedbyidentifyingthestepdifferencebetweenPSandACHayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatterns

Thestepdifferenceisdetermined BylocatingthePSpointsonthe Stepvalueguideandcountingup Ordownuntilyouhavelocated theACpoints.Thenumberof Stepstakeninthis procedureestablishes thestepdifference.The Direction(up+,down-)defines Thenatureofthedifference.HayMethod

QualityChecksAndPatternsPROFILINGToconvertallofthisdataintoaprofileturntopage287inyourtextandfindthePSpercentage,identifiedinthesampleproblem,inthelefthandcolumn(33%)andmoveacrossthatrowuntilyoufindtheKHpointsinthefirstrowthatcorrespondwiththosedeterminedinyoursampleproblem(230)Thenumberfoundatthisintersection(87)becomesprofiling

CONTINUED...HayMethod

QualityChecksAndPat