As the recruiter for the data processing department of a large commercial bank,
you have come to the conclusion that it is time to revise the job descriptions for system analysts.The positions have changed significantly over the past years, and it is necessary to reevaluate them for compensation purposes. What factors should be considered in revising the job descriptions? Is it advisable to adopt a new approach? How might you justify the time and expense to your superiors?
Job Evaluation is a technique to rank jobs in an organization on the basis of the duties and responsibilities assigned to the job. The job evaluation process results in a job being assigned to a pay grade. The pay grade is associated with a pay range that is defined by a minimum and a maximum pay rate. The first set of decisions that an organization is required to make when installing a job evaluation plan is to determine which jobs in the organization will be covered by the plan and what factors will be used in the job evaluation process. The following factors should be considered while revising the job description of system analyst:
• Communication EFFORTS
• Mental Effort
• Problem Solving
• Financial Responsibility
• Freedom to Act
• Decision – Making
• Contacts with Others
• Operational Latitude WORKING CONDITIONS
• Mental Demand
• Physical Efforts
• Visual Demand
Is it advisable to adopt a new approach?
The job role of system analyst has been changed over a span of time. In order to cope up with these changes, the job roles of system analyst have to be revised from time to time, so that it can cater the needs of the organisation. The company should adopt a new approach for the following reasons:
• It will remove any anomalies in an organisation’s payment system where the existing grading structure is thought to place jobs in an arbitrary order with no justifiable or logical reason.
• Changes in the job content :
o Employees may not be able to cope with the introduction of new jobs or new skills, with a likely increase in the number of grievances.
o There may be a leap-frogging to catch up with pay rates elsewhere in the company or outside.
• Grading grievances.
• Technological and organisational change. – Such as innovative and creative skills may be required which hitherto were not within the culture of organisation.
The question makes certain assumptions that are not quite correct. Generally it is not the job of a recruiter to decide on the need for revising the job descriptions. Also, reevaluation of jobs is not done piecemeal, one job at a time. Unless there are specific disputes or problems pertaining to a specific position, the job evaluation exercise is taken simultaneously for a group of positions.
However, for answering this question we will assume that the need for job evaluation has been established, without going into details of who has performed this activity, and then consider the main questions raised, that is factors in revising the job descriptions, need for adopting a new approach, and justifying the time and expense of undertaking such an assignment.
The factors to be considered for revising the job description in not any different from the factors considered during the preparation of original job description. Of course it will be necessary to consider all the changes that have taken place in the basic nature of the job.
The need for adopting a new approach will depend on how good or bad the original approach is and what improvement are possible. However, revision of the basic approach is not undertaken for individual positions. If the basic approach is changed, it may be necessary to reevaluate all the jobs.
The justification for revision will again depend on the likely improvements. These may include improvement in areas such as improved understanding of organisational responsibilities and relationships, more equitable remuneration, better employee morale, lower employee turnover and so on.