Induction, training, job analysis, job evaluation and compensation
Job analysis yields the job description and specification; job evaluation ranks jobs to set fair pay. Induction and training then build the skills each job needs.
Job analysis methods and job design
| Method | Key point |
|---|---|
| Observation, interview, questionnaire, diary or log | Basic data-gathering methods |
| Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) | McCormick: 194 items in six divisions; worker-oriented |
| Functional Job Analysis (FJA) | Sidney Fine: rates jobs on data, people and things |
| Critical incident technique | John Flanagan (1954): records unusually good or poor job behaviour |
| Job design links | Job enlargement (horizontal), job enrichment (vertical, from Herzberg), job rotation |
| Job characteristics model | Hackman and Oldham: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback |
Job evaluation methods
| Method | Type | How it works |
|---|---|---|
| Ranking | Non-analytical (whole job) | Jobs ranked from highest to lowest as wholes; the simplest method |
| Grading (classification) | Non-analytical (whole job) | Jobs slotted into predefined grades using grade descriptions |
| Point method | Analytical (quantitative) | Compensable factors carry points; total points decide the pay grade; often called the most widely used method |
| Factor comparison | Analytical (quantitative) | Key jobs compared factor by factor and money values assigned; Eugene Benge |
| Hay plan | Analytical (point-factor) | Know-how, problem solving, accountability |
Induction and training
- Induction (orientation) introduces a new employee to the job, colleagues and organisation. Socialisation stages: pre-arrival, encounter, metamorphosis.
- Training needs analysis has three levels: organisational, task (operational) and individual (person) analysis (McGehee and Thayer).
- On-the-job methods: job instruction training, coaching, job rotation, apprenticeship, understudy. Off-the-job: lectures, case studies, role play, simulation, vestibule training, sensitivity training.
- Vestibule training uses a replica of the work setting, away from the actual shop floor.
- ADDIE model of training design: analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation.
- Training builds skills for the present job; development prepares people for future roles.
Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation
Jack Phillips added a fifth level: return on investment (ROI).
Compensation management
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Compensation | Direct pay (basic, allowances, incentives) plus indirect rewards (benefits, perquisites) |
| Wage concepts | Committee on Fair Wages (1948): minimum wage, fair wage, living wage |
| Internal equity | Pay relative to other jobs in the firm, set through job evaluation |
| External equity | Pay relative to the market, set through salary surveys |
| Broadbanding | A few wide pay bands instead of many narrow grades |
| Pay for performance | Merit pay, piece rate, commission, bonus, profit sharing, ESOPs |
| Incentive plans | Taylor's differential piece rate; Halsey and Rowan premium plans share the time saved |
Worked example: Halsey and Rowan plans
Standard time (S) = 10 hours, time taken (T) = 8 hours, rate (R) = ₹100 per hour. Find total earnings under the Halsey plan (50% of time saved) and the Rowan plan.
- Time wages = T × R = 8 × 100 = ₹800. Time saved = S − T = 2 hours.
- Halsey bonus = 50% × 2 × 100 = ₹100. Earnings = 800 + 100 = ₹900.
- Check Halsey: 1 hour × ₹100 = ₹100; 800 + 100 = ₹900.
- Rowan bonus = (time saved ÷ S) × T × R = (2 ÷ 10) × 8 × 100 = 0.2 × 800 = ₹160. Earnings = 800 + 160 = ₹960.
- Check Rowan: 2 × 8 = 16; 16 ÷ 10 = 1.6 hours × ₹100 = ₹160; 800 + 160 = ₹960.
Halsey: ₹900. Rowan: ₹960. Rowan pays more here because less than half the standard time was saved.
NET asks you to classify job evaluation methods, sequence Kirkpatrick's levels, match techniques with authors and solve a quick Halsey or Rowan wage numerical.
Typical MCQ: “Which job evaluation method is the simplest?” Ranking: whole jobs are placed in order. Trap: grading also treats whole jobs but needs predefined grade descriptions.
Typical MCQ: “What is the third level in Kirkpatrick's model?” Behaviour: transfer of learning to the job. Trap: learning is level two and results level four.
Job analysis gives JD + JS; job evaluation values the job, not the person; Kirkpatrick goes reaction, learning, behaviour, results.