The Hay Job Grading Scheme was developed in the early 1950's by E. N. Hay and Associates. It is a scheme which is based on the "points factor" approach. This is a common approach to job grading. The process has the following basic steps: A description of the job is made including such things as: expertise required, accountabilities, experience required, functions performed, financial impact of the job, freedom to decide and act, number of staff supervised, pre-eminence of the position, influence of the position within the company etc. The various aspects of the job given in the description are usually split into categories. For example, in the Hay system the categories are: Â¨ Know How Â¨ Problem Solving Â¨ Accountability Â¨ Working Conditions (This was included after the initial creation of the scheme in an attempt to enable the Hay system to be applied to blue collar occupations). Other systems may have different sets of categories. For example, the OCR system, uses the following categories: Â¨ Knowledge, Skills and Experience Â¨ Reasoning and Decision Making Â¨ Communication and Influence Â¨ Accountability and Responsibility The description of the job is done under the headings given by the job grading system's categories. This description of the job is then compared with a standard set of descriptors (i.e. a set of statements from the job grading manual which describe the aspects of a job) and the most appropriate descriptors, in each category, for that job are selected from the set. So, for the Hay system, a manual with descriptors in each of the above categories is used to grade the job. The job grader selects the descriptor which (in their view) most accurately describes that category of the job. (An example of a Hay descriptor under the category of "Know How" is: "Jobs requiring procedural or systematic proficiency, which may involve a facility in the use of specialized equipment.") Each descriptor has a score associated with it. For example, in the Hay system there is a point score for each of "Know How", "Problem Solving" and "Accountability". These factor points are then used to calculate a total "points factor" score for that job. This task is repeated for all jobs within the company. The tally score for each job is then interpreted as the importance of that job within the company relative to the other jobs within the company. If the system is related to pay, then a level of pay is associated with each tally score. Often, tally scores are grouped into a single pay level. For example, scores from 100 to 150 may all be paid $35,000. Using this process, the claim is that these systems provide a fair and equitable method of rating the relative importance of all jobs in a company, from the CEO to the part-time janitor. thus it purportedly gives equal pay for work of equal value within a company. In fact, the Hay system was originally designed specifically for the evaluation of managerial jobs. As stated by Hay: "We have seen that the Guide Chart Profile Method was designed for a specific purpose - evaluating managerial and technical jobs in order to get equitable salary standards." In the personnel journals of the time, Hay justified his system as a system that would "fight for better salaries for corporate executives" Right from its inception, the Hay system was designed with a bias toward managerial and executive levels. The Hay scheme has also tried to construct a comparison of pay levels between companies. This is done by including in the Hay scheme: The Hay manual has a set of "common descriptors" which are applied for all jobs in all companies. (Although there is the possibility of including "un-common descriptors" this makes the comparison of jobs difficult and so is avoided whenever possible.) The claim is that the use of these common descriptors means you are comparing "like with like" across an industry. Non use of specialized terms or definitions of terms in the generic descriptors. (For example, the Hay descriptor presented above in step 3 uses very general wording.) So, rather than use words such as "expert in communications theory" the more generic wording such as "determinative mastery of principles" are used. The use of employment market surveys of pay to construct a relationship between Hay Scores of similar jobs in different companies and their corresponding pay. For example, in the information technology industry, a Hay score of 600 may (on average) be approximately associated with a pay of $40,000. Using this approach, an employer may claim that a job with a Hay score of 600 and a salary of $50,000 is over paid. Although this methodology may sound quite reasonable there are, however, many problems with these schemes which are not immediately apparent. Some of these problems, in regard to the Hay System, are discussed below. 2. The 15% Rule The basis for the point allocation in the Hay Scheme is the so-called Weber's Law. This law is based on a range of "psychometric" experiments published in 1948. In these results experimenters noted that when the physical weight of two objects differed by more than 15%, people could distinguish between their weights just by lifting them. Hay xtrapolated this result to the ability to distinguish between human behaviors and based his points factor allocation tables upon this result. The validity of this extrapolation has been questioned. For example, is it valid to extrapolate this rule from weight to the ability to distinguish between job-related activities? 3. It is all in the Application There are two key problems with generic descriptors. Firstly, they are unavoidably vague and secondly, they are culturally biased. Because the descriptors are generic, they are vague. Therefore, the application of these descriptors to a job involves a high degree of subjectivity. This means the biases of the person (or group) implementing the scheme will result in a bias in the rating of jobs. Hay has attempted to address this issue, however, management control of the implementation of the scheme will most likely result in the scheme giving the results management wants whether or not the result is fair. Turning to the issue of cultural bias, as stated above, a "descriptor" is a sentence which is designed to describe an aspect of a job. Just as there is no such thing as a society without a culture, there is no such thing as a "value free" descriptor. Hence, generic descriptors intrinsically favor certain job types. The Hay system suffers at least three aspects of cultural bias. It is techno-centric and hierarchical as well as strongly based on 1950's USA corporate culture. 4. Technology verses the Human Factor Hay is "techno-centric". The Hay descriptor quoted above (in step 3 of the Introduction above) is an example. This descriptor refers to "a facility to use special equipment". A common criticism of Hay is that workers who operate or work with equipment and technology rate higher than those who work with people (eg. customers). This has a side effect of introducing a gender bias into the system, since male workers are more prevalent in technology related jobs and female workers tend to occupy "people related" jobs. The Hay Group is aware its methodology has been criticized on the grounds of gender bias. In an attempt to deal with this criticism it has produced a Code of Practice. However, there is no guarantee an employer using Hay will follow this code. ===
Job evaluation is system that is prepared for the evaluation of the employees. And the performance of the employees according to the evaluation system.
Yes I would like to update my file
Describe briefly the different methods of job evaluation.
The advantages of job evaluation are as follow: Job evaluation is: -Objective and logical -It is fair, it eliminates any managerial bias -It is viewed favourably by industrial tribunals
one is better then the other clearly Answer: evaluation generally precede appraisal , job evaluation is done to evaluate the job and not the job holder but performance appraisal is done to evaluate the job holder on the basis of her performance
Peromnes refers to a job evaluation system which scores jobs on a number of factors such as problem solving, pressure of work, job impact, consequence of judgement, educational qualifications, training and experience required. The aggregate score is applied to a sliding scale to determine job grade.
False - although it depends on what you mean by 'job evaluation' and who is doing it, and for what purpose.
Base and Senior System
If you don't tell the truth and it later emerges then you are going to have another negative evaluation.
Herbert Robert Roberts has written: 'Introducing job evaluation' -- subject(s): Job evaluation
Julie A. Murtha has written: 'Job evaluation' -- subject(s): Sex discrimination in employment, Job evaluation
The performance and evaluation system refers to a tool that is used to measure or evaluate the individual performance of a given employee. The performance and evaluation system is used to develop the employees into high performing individuals.
what the hardware evaluation,begining from the early hardware
Keith L. Scott has written: 'Office job evaluation' -- subject(s): Job evaluation, Office management
The Job Evaluation - 2008 was released on: USA: 14 September 2008 (Estes Park Film Festival)
Job evaluation is a methodical way of shaping the value/worth of a job with respect to other jobs in an organization. It tries to construct a methodical comparison between jobs to evaluate their comparative importance for the rationale of establishing a balanced pay structure. Job evaluation needs to be differentiating from job analysis because JA is a systematic way of congregation of information about occupation. Every job assessment method requires at least some fundamental job analysis in order to provide truthful information about the jobs anxious. Thus, job evaluation begins with job analysis and ends at that point in time where the significance of a job is determined for achieving pay evenhandedness between jobs. Several methods such as job ranking, job grading, and factor comparison are employed in job evaluation.
merit and demerit
it is a project job that involves programe management
Her job on the farm was to bale hay.
Job evaluation is a practical technique, designed to enable trained and experienced staff to judge the size of one job relative to others. It does not directly determine pay levels, but will establish the basis for an internal ranking of jobs.The two most common methods of job evaluation that have been used are first, whole job ranking, where jobs are taken as a whole and ranked against each other. The second method is one of awarding points for various aspects of the job. In the points system various aspects or parts of the job such as education and experience required to perform the job are assessed and a points value awarded - the higher the educational requirements of the job the higher the points scored. The most well known points scheme was introduced by Hay management consultants in 1951. This scheme evaluates job responsibilities in the light of three major factors - know how, problem solving and accountability.Some Principles of Job EvaluationClearly defined and identifiable jobs must exist. These jobs will be accurately described in an agreed job description.All jobs in an organisation will be evaluated using an agreed job evaluation scheme.Job evaluators will need to gain a thorough understanding of the jobJob evaluation is concerned with jobs, not people. It is not the person that is being evaluated.The job is assessed as if it were being carried out in a fully competent and acceptable manner.Job evaluation is based on judgment and is not scientific. However if applied correctly it can enable objective judgments to be made.It is possible to make a judgment about a job's contribution relative to other jobs in an organisation.The real test of the evaluation results is their acceptability to all participants.Job evaluation can aid organisational problem solving as it highlights duplication of tasks and gaps between jobs and functions.Job Evaluation - The FutureAs organisations constantly evolve and new organisations emerge there will be challenges to existing principles of job evaluation. Whether existing job evaluation techniques and accompanying schemes remain relevant in a faster moving and constantly changing world, where new jobs and roles are invented on a regular basis, remains to be seen. The formal points systems, used by so many organisations is often already seen to be inflexible. Sticking rigidly to an existing scheme may impose barriers to change. Constantly updating and writing new jobs together with the time that has to be spent administering the job evaluation schemes may become too cumbersome and time consuming for the benefits that are derived. Does this mean that we will see existing schemes abandoned or left to fall into disrepute ? Will providers of job evaluation schemes examine and, where necessary, modify them to ensure they are up to date and relevant ? Simply sticking rigidly to what is already in place may not be enough to ensure their survival.Job Evaluation - MoreJob evaluation is essentially one part of a tripartite subject, which is collectively referred to as Job Study (other names exist). The three parts are Job Analysis; Job Evaluation - the information collected is evaluated using a numerical scale or ranking and rating methodology; and Merit Rating - BSI definition (32542). BSI definition - 32529 - "Any method ranking the relative worth of jobs which can then be used as a basis for a remuneration system"It is essentially a comparative process.Job evaluation evaluates selected job factors, which are regarded as important for the effective performance of the job, according to one of several alternative methods. The resulting numerical gradings can form the basis of an equitable structure of job gradings. The job grades may or may not be used for status or payment purposes.Explanation:Job Evaluation is concerned with measuring the demands the job places on its holder. Most factors that contribute to this job pressure, e.g. physical strength required, knowledge of mathematics required, are assessed and the result is a numerical estimate of the total job pressure. When evaluations are carried out on all hourly paid personnel the technique's uses include establishing relative wage rates for different tasks. It is possible to use it for all grades of personnel, even senior management.
Job evaluation and ranking technique are HR based. One major disadvantage is the cropping of biases due to the standard of grading used.
Amelia Munson has written: 'Techniques of job evaluation and merit rating in the library' -- subject- s -: Library employees, Rating of, Job evaluation
A job evaluation is a way of determining the worth of a job versus other jobs in an organization to establish rational pay. A performance appraisal is a review of an employee's performance of their responsibilities.