Solution

4.0 Question 4: Using Job Evaluations for Determining Reward Decisions

4.1 Introduction

Adopting the definition of ACAS (2023), job evaluation is an approach used to determine systematically the relative importance of different jobs. This approach is appropriate since job titles could mislead due to unclear or unspecified and large organisations impossibility for people professionals knowing each job roles in detail. Further, according to Masanja and Kusekwa (2022), through the job evaluation, it is possible to acquire an elaborate framework to assess and manage staff performance. Through an appreciation of the relative value and complexities linked with various job roles, it is possible for entities to initiate appropriate performance expectation, goals setting and targeting different groups of employees. Depending on whether the job evaluation is analytical or non-analytical, whole jobs can be compared through ranking with the other approach including breaking down entire job roles in small defined factors respectively. According to Malik et al. (2020), the outcome of this is comparing the entire total points scoring applied in establishing the entire grade.

4.2 Job Evaluation Example 1- Ranking Method

In job evaluation, the ranking method entail ranking of different jobs on basis of their titles and relevance. According to Pitoura et al. (2022), the ranking method is established through the scope of working and entire responsibilities. This approach is applied for small organisations which lack large numbers of job positions. For the purpose of the ranking method, the examples which are standard competition ranking, ordinary ranking and fractional ranking. For its strengths, it include;
Identifying top performing employees– According to Saffar and Obeidat (2020), through the adoption of ranking method, it promptly identify the top performers of their organisations in regard to ability to achieve set organisation objectives. For instance, in Saudi Aramco case, use of this strategy allows the organisation to prioritise on developing input on people possessing best and maximum potential. From this, an incentive program has been initiated for motivating the best performers for staying in the organisation.

Improving Productivity and Profitability– As noted earlier, through the ranking method of job evaluation, there is a possibility of eliminating employees failing in adding value to the organisation. According to Ahmad et al. (2020), considering the top performing employees, an effective recognition and rewarding them for their fabulous productivity encourage them in repeating performance over time frequently. The outcome of this is an increase in the level of productivity and profitability of the organisation. For instance, considering Saudi Aramco, they eliminate the bottom 5 employees who fail in effectively achieving their job roles.

Forcing managers in thinking about own behaviours– Through an effective use of ranking method, it is possible for the management to think hard on their input that all individuals are making.  According to Sheng (2022), the process need to transition more than the expectations and forcing managers in reflecting on their individual employees performance roles. The reflection are not helpful to underperforming staff who is being forced out or neglected due to low ranking. Besides, in an event the process has uncovered uncomforting truths on the manner in which performance management is pursued, biasness eradication need to be prioritised.

For the weaknesses, they include;

Loosing effectiveness over time- Through all the times eliminating employees from the ranking, arriving at the end of the process is an evidence of lack of effectiveness. This approach is more appropriate as one-time undertaking for differentiating performers and non-performers. Nevertheless, over time, this method ends losing their effectiveness.

Could not improve performance– By ranking, this is an evidence that majority of individuals at 50% are at all times ranked below average. There will always be an individual ranked lowly irrespective of their performance scope. Alternatively, they are passed through capacity development opportunities for the purpose of achieving a pool of highly qualified employees. The outcome of this is identified in Krekel et al. (2019) as freeing up highly talented employees for rising in the entire ranking system.

4.3 Job Evaluation Example 2- Factor-Comparison Method

Adopting the definition of Deng et al. (2020),……..

Please click the following icon to access this assessment in full