Job Evaluation and Renumeration Strategies

JOB EVALUATION
AND
REMUNERATION
S T R A T E G I E S
FRANS POELS
JOB EVALUATION
AND
REMUNERATION
S T R A T E G I E S
HOW TO SET UP AND RUN

AN EFFECTIVE SYSTEM
YOURS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD
BUT NOT TO COPY
The publication you are reading is protected by copyright law. This means that the
publisher could take you and your employer to court and claim heavy legal
damages if you make unauthorised photocopies from these pages. Photocopying
copyright material without permission is no different from stealing a magazine from
a newsagent, only it doesn’t seem like theft.
The Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA) is an organisation which issues licences to

bring photocopying within the law. It has designed licensing services to cover all
kinds of special needs in business, education and government.
If you take photocopies from books, magazines and periodicals at work your
employer should be licensed with the CLA. Make sure you are protected by a
photocopying licence.
The Copyright Licensing Agency Limited, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London,

W1P 0LP. Tel: 0171 436 5931. Fax: 0171 436 3986.
First published in 1997
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criti-
cism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988,
this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any from or by
any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of
reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the
Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those
terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
Kogan Page Limited

120 Pentonville Road
London N1 9JN
© Frans Poels, 1997
The right of Frans Poels to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by
him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN 0 7494 2280 7
The masculine pronoun has been used throughout this book. This stems from a
desire to avoid ugly and cumbersome language, and no discrimination, prejudice or
bias is intended.
Typeset by Saxon Graphics Ltd, Derby

Printed and bound in Great Britain by Biddles Ltd, Guildford and King’s Lynn
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the relevant copyright,
designs and patents acts, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior
permission in writing of the publisher. eBooks Corporation
Contents
List of figures 7
List of tables 8
Preface 9
1.1 Introduction 9
1.2 For whom is this book intended? 12
1.3 The function of job evaluation and remuneration in
personnel management 13
1.3.1 General principles of a pay policy 17
1.3.2 Conditions of a pay policy 18
Part I JOB EVALUATION 19

2 Evaluating jobs 19
2.1 Introduction 19
2.2 Objectives 25
2.3 Procedures 28
2.4 Communication 31
2.5 Business characteristics 34
2.6 The job description 40
2.7 Analysing a job 46
2.8 Evaluating a job 54
2.8.1 Construction and use of evaluation tables 54
2.8.2 Evaluating jobs with the Hay method 57
2.8.3 Evaluation procedure 61
2.8.4 Computerised job evaluation systems 61
2.8.5 The job level matrix 63
2.9 Ranking of jobs 68
2.10 Checklist for job evaluation 69
3 Job evaluation systems 71
3.1 Introduction 71
3.2 Hay Guide Charts, Hay Management Consultants 78
3.3 Evaluation Framework, Towers Perrin 91
3.4 European Factor Plan, Watson Wyatt 109
6 Job Evaluation and remuneration strategies
Part II REMUNERATION 134

4. Salary structures 134
4.1 Introduction 134
4.2 The set-up of a salary structure 137
4.3 Application of the salary structure 141
4.4 Parameters of a salary structure 146
4.5 More than one job evaluation method 150
4.6 Implementing a pay policy 152
4.7 Performance-related pay 162
4.8 Preconditions for a new salary structure 165
4.9 Towards a flexible salary structure 167
4.10 Relative salary position: The CompaRatio 169
4.11 Performance-related pay integrated into the salary
structure 172
4.12 Career remuneration model 178
4.13 Checklist remuneration 186
5 Salary surveys 190
5.1 Introduction 190
5.2 Conditions and requirements 194
5.3 Salary surveys 197
5.3.1 Hay Management Consultants 197
5.3.2 Towers Perrin 200
5.3.3 Watson Wyatt 205
6 Summary 210
7 Definitions 214
Appendices 223
Bibliography 264
List of figures
1.1 The integrating model 14

1.2 Subjects discussed in this book 16
2.1 The process of job evaluation – consecutive steps in the job evaluation process 22
2.2 The process of job evaluation – objectives 25
2.3 The process of job evaluation – procedures 29
2.4 The process of job evaluation – communication 32
2.5 The process of job evaluation – business characteristics 35
2.6 The process of job evaluation – the job description 41
2.7 The organisational chart, showing hierarchical and functional relationships 44
2.8 Accountability areas versus tasks 47
2.9 The process of job evaluation – analysing a job 48
2.10 Relationships between characteristics of the Hay Guide charts 50
2.11 Short profile 51
2.12 Comparison of profiles versus total score 53
2.13 The process of job evaluation – evaluating a job 55
2.14 Hay Xpert modules 62
2.15 The process of job evaluation – ranking of jobs 69
3.1 Basic layout of a matrix table 76
4.1 The formal set-up of the salary structure 137
4.2 The traditional model of a salary structure 137
4.3 The traditional model of a salary structure 142
4.4 Difference in salary increase after review/appeal and promotion 146
4.5 The parameters of a salary structure 147
4.6 Parameters, slope and intercept 148
4.7 The parameters: grade width and pay range 151
4.8 Shape of the pay practice line 153
4.9 The scatter diagram: clusters of job scores and deviations 154
4.10 The scatter diagram: individual job scores within a band of +/- 20 per cent cut 155
4.11 Connecting the highest and the lowest salary level 158
4.12 Pay practice, cluster of job scores 158
4.13 Salary pay practice, proportional structure of grades 159
4.14 Parameters for a salary structure 161
4.15 Set-up of performance-related pay 163
4.16 Shape of a flexible salary structure 167
4.17 Adapting the salary policy line in an ‘open structure’: effect on individual pay 170
4.18 Set-up of integrated performance-related pay 172
4.19 Annual assessment of performance 173
4.20 Example of individual salary development 174
4.21 Set-up of the career remuneration model 179
4.22 The career remuneration model: steps through the various grades 184
4.23 The career remuneration model: re-evaluation and promotion within the same job family 185
5.1 Meaning of the concepts decile and quartile 194
5.2 Base salary of all participants 201
5.3 Basic salary of Profit Centre Manager related to sales 201
5.4 Product manager, annual base salary against company sales 207
7.1 Concepts of deciles and quartiles 216
A6.1 Main organisation structure of the company 236
A6.2 Market shares 239
A6.3 Market shares 239
A6.4 Strategic issues 242
A7.1 Organisation chart sales department 244
A8.1 Organisation chart personnel department 247
List of tables
2.1 Characteristics and factors/aspects of the Hay Guide Chart and Profile method 49
2.2 Simplified matrix table 56
2.3 A more extensive matrix table 56
2.4 Know-how chart 59
2.5 Example of a Job Family System 65
2.6 Example of a Job Family System 66
2.7 Rank order of jobs 68
3.1 Various methods for job evaluation classified according to characteristics 72
3.2 Classification of the job evaluation methods discussed according to characteristics and the
benefits and disadvantages 73
3.3 Analytical model for comparing job evaluation systems 77
3.4 Characteristics, factors/aspects of the Hay Guide Chart and Profile Method 78
3.5 Evaluating know-how 86
3.6 Comparing the job evaluation under consideration with other (or selection of) job
evaluations 87
3.7 Comparison model to judge the validity of the score for know-how 88
3.8 Characteristics, factors/aspects of framework 91
3.9 Example of Framework set-up for a financial organisation 92
3.10 Example of Framework set-up for a retail organisation 93
3.11 Sample of an evaluation using Framework 102
3.12 Second sample evaluation 103
3.13 Framework: Available reports 104
3.14 Framework: Factor points and job profile 105
3.15 Framework: Adding or amending job profiles 106
3.16 Framework: Actual and proposed salary structures 107
3.17 Framework: Summary of total points 108
3.18 Characteristics, factors/aspects of EFP 109
3.19 Classification table for job knowledge 111
3.20 Classification table for business expertise 112
3.21 Classification table for problem-solving capacity 113
3.22 Time spent on most important responsibilities 114
3.23 Sample organisation chart 114
3.24 Main Menu 125
3.25 Selecting factors 126
3.26 Definition of aspects of factor A (functional knowledge) 127
3.27 Definition of aspects of factor D (problem solving) 128
3.28 Evaluating job impact (areas of influence and time-scale) 129
3.29 Evaluating contacts 130
3.30 Logic checks and reporting 131
3.31 Comparison of answers 132
3.32 Comparison of job evaluations (report) 133
4.1 Salary scale – traditional model 138
4.2 Proportional relationship within the salary scheme 141
4.3 Jobs ranking list 153
4.4 The parameters of a salary scale 162
4.5 Amounts of salaries in grade 11 at separate performance levels 165
4.6 Example of an open scale structure 171
4.7 Relative salary position: the CompaRatio of the minimum salary 171
4.8 The CompaRatio per employee and for the department as a whole 171
4.9 Differences between maximum salaries of pay lines and the progression within the grade 180
4.10 Level indicators and sample summaries on which Figures 4.22 and 4.23 are based 181
4.11 Progress of an employee through various grades 183
5.1 Set-up of the model for comparing salary surveys 192
5.2 Comparative model of the salary survey by Hay Management Consultants based on
job evaluation 198
5.3 Formulae for calculating individual positions on the pay policy line form Figure 5.2 199
5.4 Comparison of differences in remuneration of functional areas of job families 200
5.5 Comparative model of the salary survey by Towers Perrin – the standard job of Towers Perrin 202
5.6 Position comparison table 203
5.7 Some examples of job summaries that Watson Wyatt uses in its surveys 208
A5.1 Quantitative information 232
A6.4 Strategic issues 242
1
Preface
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Job evaluation and remuneration are two core aspects of the vast area
of personnel management. Job evaluation is defined here as the
process of examining, describing and evaluating the content of the
function and ranking of related functions. Remuneration is the process
which takes place after functions have been ranked and through which
a salary structure will be established.
The final word on remuneration and pay is definitely not yet written
or spoken. We all nurture our own beliefs and opinions, because the
subject has direct personal consequences for each of us. Remuneration
is an important basic ingredient of our existence as it is an essential
element of our working life and governs the very existence of our
organisations.
By far the greatest part of the remuneration people receive is based
on job-specific pay with the weight of the job as one of the deciding
factors. A systematic framework is required to manage differences in
pay in such a way that they support the objectives of the organisations
and result in a fair remuneration for the individuals. A host of such
systems is currently available, but their workings, possibilities and
limitations are unclear to many. An interesting trend is that ‘employa-
bility’, ‘potential’ and ‘competencies’ play an increasingly important
role as a basis for remuneration. The value of the job attached to it on
the basis of its weight is increased by a reward for the broader employ-
ability of the employee in multiple jobs. Also the competencies an
employee demonstrates and the potential he possesses become more
and more important and consequently deserve higher rewards. A
major challenge is how the level of these rewards should be estab-
lished.
To match the remuneration policy to the culture of the organisation
and the developments in the labour market, regular comparisons must
be made and the level and structure of pay must be modified where
10 Job evaluation and remuneration strategies
needed. The question is, how these comparisons can or should be

made?
This book does not provide ready-made answers to these questions.
That is neither its purpose, nor would it be possible. In order to arrive
ultimately at some solutions we first of all have to master the basic
techniques of job evaluation and remuneration. This book therefore
presents these techniques systematically and discusses the tools for
evaluating jobs, constructing a salary structure and comparing
salaries.
All over the world a substantial number of methods for evaluating
jobs is in use. Most of these are marketed by commercially operating
organisations, but some large companies have developed their own
method. Some big corporations have generated an internal system in
co-operation with an external consultancy firm. Other organisations
have developed an entirely separate methodology, because externally
acquired methods did not match sufficiently specific views held
within the organisation.
A separate approach, which in Great Britain has been adopted by
Thomas Cook, is gradually to substitute ‘role evaluation’ for ‘job eval-
uation’. This approach based on competence seeks to align the skills,
know-how and training necessary to perform a specific function
within an organisation. By determining the content of this ‘role’ and
comparing it with the profile of the employee, it can be established to
what extent he meets the requirements. Remuneration can also be
tackled differently from what is customary. Instead of basing the pay
on the weight of the major responsibilities and tasks of the job, an
analysis is made of the required skills. Examples are:
ᔢ professional qualifications;
ᔢ attitudes;
ᔢ the ability to work in a team;
ᔢ leadership;
ᔢ communication skills.
Whatever method is used, most organisations hire job evaluation
specialists. The human resource professionals generally do not
perform job evaluations themselves because traditional education in
the field of personnel and personnel management at college or univer-
sity level unfortunately does not cover the subject of job evaluation
sufficiently.
A substantial number of pay systems is based upon the weight of
the job and the number of years in that job. The weight of the job is
Preface 11
determined by means of the job evaluation system, whereas the
number of years is translated in a salary band on which the basic pay
is situated. This weight is calculated mainly through mathematical
techniques that take into account the broader context. In contrast to
other aspects of personnel management this dealing with numbers and
relationships between numbers has no foundation in behavioural
sciences. The purpose of these operations is to provide a quantitative
basis on which policy decisions can be based. In practice these calcu-
lations and techniques remain the province of specialists.
A similar situation occurs in developing salary structures. Here, too,
external firms have gained substantial expertise which may be made
available to organisations. Implementing a (new) method of job evalu-
ation or designing a salary structure is not a routine task of the person-
nel professional.
A salary structure is a ranked series of salary amounts distributed
over a number of columns which are based on certain mathematical
relationships. Without such relationships a salary structure is not able
to cope with salary measures which have been agreed within the
context of a policy for levelling off or rather increasing income differ-
ences. Other measures such as extending or shortening salary scales
may (unintentionally) cause considerable distortions within a salary
structure. A current issue, which may also create problems, is the way
in which an amount below the level of the lowest salary group should
be established.
Greater flexibility is called for with regard to both job evaluation
and remuneration. Is it still necessary to make a formal description of
each job? In the literature the concept of the ‘jobless organisation’ has
been introduced. Is it necessary that every salary amount of each
employee can be derived from the salary scale that is in use? These are
recurring questions in the professional literature – also major develop-
ments are taking place in this respect. Automation is spreading and
management allocation methods are being introduced. These develop-
ments too will be discussed.
Before job evaluation methods can be adopted, information on the
commercially available systems needs to be collected. What are the
differences between these systems? What is being measured? Broadly
speaking, job evaluation methods can be divided into two main types
according to the means of comparison used:
ᔢ Non-analytical methods in which the whole jobs are examined
and compared, without being analysed into their constituent parts
or elements;
ᔢ Analytical methods in which jobs are analysed by reference to one

or more criteria, factors or aspects.
By far, analytical methods are the most used systems. A well-known

method is the so-called point factor method in which the relative
weight of the job is represented by a number. Comparing a function
on the basis of a description of a standard job or level – so-called
reasoned comparisons – has also become a common method. To help
make your choice, this book compares a number of methods which are
being extensively applied. This comparison will also facilitate an
evaluation of the usefulness to an organisation of methods which will
not be discussed in this book.
Similarly, quite a few aspects and issues concerning comparing
salaries need clarification. If a pay policy needs to be developed or
modified, it is important to know how competitive this policy will be
in the labour market. In qualitative terms a comparative analysis of
salaries – so-called salary survey – should be directed at both the pay
practice and the salary policy, two items which are frequently
confused. Of the two, comparing pay practices is the one used most
often. The ways in which consultancy firms try to clarify and explain
this analysis (usually through mathematics) may differ substantially.
As a consequence the results are certainly not always comparable and
need to be interpreted carefully. In addition, the quality of analyses
currently available in the market needs to be improved. We therefore
describe the parameters and constraints to determine the requirements
of organisations and jobs to be included in these analyses as well as
the requirements to be met by the firm that performs the analysis. This
book aims to provide insight into the techniques on which job evalua-
tion (Part I) and remuneration (Part II) are based and which result in a
flexible pay system. To that end, first the traditional form of both
elements will be discussed and then their more flexible varieties. Each
part will conclude with a comparison of the major job evaluation
methods and comparative analysis of salaries (salary surveys). Both
comparisons provide basic information on systems that are currently
available on the market.
1.2 FOR WHOM IS THIS BOOK INTENDED?

Time and again it appears that many line managers and professionals,
and personnel professionals in particular, need a more broad and
profound insight into the complex area of remuneration. Carefully
Preface 13
designed training programmes on the application of job evaluation,
whether or not in conjunction with the owners of systems, generally
achieve only marginal results. To a large extent this is due to a too
narrow perspective on job evaluation. In other cases the participants
have insufficient access to relevant literature. In general, job evalua-
tion is solely treated with the technical aspects of remuneration in
mind. As a result the richness and feasibility of the issue do not
become evident.
An additional problem is that the technical aspects of personnel
management (which includes job evaluation, designing and develop-
ing a salary structure and comparing the pay policy of the firm with
the external labour market) does not receive sufficient attention in
higher education. The book is therefore intended in particular for the
personnel practitioner who wants to extend his knowledge and skills
of the technique of job evaluation and remuneration. The interested
line manager, however, who seeks to broaden his knowledge, may find
it a source of useful information,
1.3 THE FUNCTION OF JOB EVALUATION AND

REMUNERATION IN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Major elements of the conditions for the existence of an organisation
are:
ᔢ The rationale behind its existence. Important questions are: Why
does an organisation exist? How can an organisation survive?
ᔢ The design. The question to answer here is: How may the work
within the organisation be divided and co-ordinated?
ᔢ The quality of working life. The essential question on the quality
of working life is: Through which organisational measures can the
organisation be made attractive to the stakeholders, and in particu-
lar to the employees, to such an extent that they want to commit
themselves permanently to the organisation?
Figure 1.1 shows the role of the personnel function within the interac-
tion of these conditions for its meaningful existence. The main reason
for referring to this vision on organisations is to stress the fact that
these three elements constitute the background against which the
design, development and evaluation of functions and jobs and their
position within the organisation must be viewed.
The relationship between design and rationale of the organisation
determines the content of the job. The relationship between rationale
QUALITY OF WORKING LIFE
Coordinated by
O Personnel Management
Management
Personnel Planning
Education/training on the job
POLICY
ADMINISTRATION
ORGANISATION
Appraisal
ASSIGNMENTS
PERSONNEL &
Terms of employment
RATIONALE
Career planning
Benefits/regulations
TASKS
PERSONNEL
Recruitment/selection Individual
Heath & Safety
Job allocation in his job
TARGETS
PI-systems
Job description
Time recording
Job evaluation
Remuneration
Manpower Planning
Coordinated by
P Organisational Development
Management
DESIGN
pp\kogan_11
Figure 1.1 The integrating model
Preface 15
and quality of working life constitutes the basis for the pay policy. In
Figure 1.1 the total scope of the personnel function is divided into two
main blocks: assignments – the main tasks of the personnel function –
and personnel administration – the administrative task in support of
the function as such. It will be clear that both job description and job
evaluation constitute different assignments. The job description needs
to be separated because it is a basic function that serves other assign-
ments and may not simply be seen as part of evaluating jobs.
On the basis of the ‘integrative model’ in Figure 1.1 the three
elements of the existence of an organisation can be more precisely
defined:
Rationale
The compilation of objectives and the strategies derived from these
objectives which constitute the foundation for the design and quality
of working life of the organisation.
Design
Objectives are translated into job requirements on the basis of which
jobs can be constructed. The design in turn can be used for measuring
the quality of working life within the organisation.
Quality of working life
Optimising the co-ordination between job, organisation and holder
of the job in order to achieve the objectives of the organisation.
Figure 1.2 illustrates which aspects will be discussed. It demon-
strates that the technical aspects of the human resource function are to
a large extent dependent upon the opinions held in the environment of
the organisation.
Thus it is important to have a proper picture of what views are held
on general concepts as well as on specific subjects, in particular by
consultancy firms. Ample attention will therefore be paid to the defin-
itions of various concepts.
Numerous books and articles already exist on developing remuner-
ation strategies, therefore the book is not intended to assist in formu-
lating a pay policy. Its purpose is to help to translate an integrative
strategy for the various functional areas into clear descriptions of jobs
and departmental tasks, as well as of the characteristics of the organi-
sation. It also provides insight into the role of job evaluation within
personnel management.
The book will support the reader in making job descriptions as a
starting point for analysing and evaluating jobs. To this end two differ-
ent jobs – head of the personnel department and a secretary – are
INTERNAL COMPARING EXTERNAL
JOB CONTENT
Jobs Jobs
Job evaluation system/

Job evaluation
benchmark positions
ORGANISATION
ORGANISATION
LABOUR MARKET/CONSULTANT
LABOUR MARKET/CONSULTANT
Level of
Remuneration remuneration
COMPARING
REMUNERATION
Figure 1.2 Subjects discussed in this book

Preface 17
presented; the former as an example of a supporting (policy-making)
function, the latter an operational job. Both descriptions are based
upon the requirements of the Hay Guide Chart and Profile Method.
Next, assessment is made of the way in which methods analyse and
evaluate jobs. After this practical exercise a number of job evaluation
methods are discussed in more detail. With this insight the personnel
officer should be able to enter a meaningful discussion on the subject
with an external consultant.
Chapter 2 – Job evaluation – treats such subjects as: objectives of
the study of job evaluation, procedures and education. The demand for
more flexible applications of job evaluation is growing steadily. The
reason is that management wants to perform job evaluation itself with
only a little support from the personnel department. Job families and
the job level matrix are also presented in this chapter.
The chapter on ‘Remuneration’ discusses the technique of building
a salary scale. Central questions are: Which parameters and
constraints determine the relationships within a salary scale? How can
the results of a job evaluation exercise be translated into a pay policy
and a salary structure?
One of the aspects which deserves close attention in formulating the
pay policy is comparing this policy with the salary level in the external
labour market. To illustrate this, some external salary surveys will be
analysed and contrasted. What do the results of such studies tell us? Do
we now know what salaries are being paid in the market?
1.3.1 General principles of a pay policy

The quality of (working) life within an organisation depends not only
on having constructed jobs with, for example, some freedom for
taking decisions (‘empowerment’), but also on acceptable relation-
ships between salaries. In practice the pay structure appears often
to be merely decorative, like the stars and stripes on a uniform.
The scale is equivalent to a ‘rank’ and expresses recognition and
appreciation.
If employees are assigned to a lower scale as a consequence of new
results from a job evaluation, for example after a major restructuring,
it is not always sufficient if the pill is sweetened by maintaining the
former salary (acquired rights). Frustration arises because a stripe is
removed from the arm. The employee perceives that he has been
demoted to a lower rank.
It can be said that generally accepted relationships in pay prevail
over the absolute level of the remuneration. To the outside world the
amount of the salary is usually the most important basis for compar-
isons of status and achievement.
In order to obtain a proper view into all aspects that influence the
development of a remuneration policy, we start with a discussion of
the general conditions of such a policy. In this way we avoid the situa-
tion where, in a final stage, it becomes evident that certain (obvious)
issues and aspects have been omitted. In addition the connection with
external studies and salary surveys will thus not been hampered,
because elements which determine the level or status of the remunera-
tion, have not been properly dealt with.
1.3.2 Conditions of a pay policy

Though the book includes a checklist for both job evaluation and
remuneration it seems useful to state here some general conditions for
the entire pay policy. As these conditions determine the total area of
job evaluation and remuneration, they provide the background for the
discussions throughout the book.
ᔢ The methodology must be logically sound and fit closely to other

types of rules within the organisation.
ᔢ The internal relationships of the organisation must be reflected in
the relative differences in pay which result from the established
pay policy.
ᔢ The pay policy must be in accordance with what the employees
perceive as fair.
ᔢ The methodology that is being constructed must comply with
legal requirements and obligations, such as the conditions of the
collective labour agreements, social security laws, etc.
ᔢ The pay policy must contribute to the rationale of the organisation
and must be in accordance with the design and the quality of
working life of the organisation. In addition it must be kept in
mind that the personnel costs must never exceed what the organi-
sation can bear.
The conditions will serve as a guideline for the discussions throughout

the book.
2
Evaluating jobs
2.1 INTRODUCTION
After the Second World War job evaluation underwent profound
developments. As experience in this area grew, criticism of the
methods used increased as well. A scientific basis still does not exist
and the whole field is under attack from academics and in particular
from psychologists. Job evaluation methods, however, have evolved
in practice and the embedded values and standards have been
developed by trial and error. As a consequence the discipline of
job evaluation is self-affirmative; it feeds on itself. Organisations
are flexible and change with some regularity, which makes it diffi-
cult for job evaluation systems to remain up to date and not to
inhibit further developments. The latter, though, is actually seldom
the case. If we take job evaluation in a narrow sense as a form of so-
called ‘ascertaining job analysis’, much time is wasted with repeat-
edly describing and evaluating jobs. However, job analysis can also
be a useful tool during the starting stages of reorganisation
processes if a structuring approach of job analysis is applied. The
purpose of the job analysis is in this case not to record a factual
situation (afterwards), but to make models and to help in shaping the
desired outcome in advance; not to provide an exhaustive stocktak-
ing of a job including as much detail as possible, but short, output-
oriented job descriptions.
In tracing the development of job evaluation methods, it is interest-
ing to note that:
ᔢ In general methods have been simplified continuously so that they

are more easily understood by individual employees;
ᔢ Increasingly, system owners adapt their methods to the demands
and culture of the organisations for which job analyses are carried
out (customisation);
ᔢ Differences in views are clarified and are better understood;
ᔢ Methods have been tested for their gender bias and modified
accordingly;
ᔢ The personal computer is increasingly being used to support the
job evaluation process;
ᔢ Employees increasingly demand a say in what is going on within
the organisation and therefore also in the evaluation of jobs. More
and more attention is being paid to the process of job evaluation
and the way in which this is communicated to employees.
ᔢ The way in which individual capabilities of employees can or
should be evaluated as an element in determining pay levels is
under critical scrutiny.
Though the latter issue is, in fact, separate from the evaluation of a
position independent of the person, it will become a major pay factor
in a growing number of organisations. The same consultancy firms
that introduce job evaluation methods on the market will increasingly
address the issue of how competence should be rewarded.
As a consequence of changing views on the place of human
resource management within the overall strategy of the organisation,
there is a trend in which line management perceives job evaluation as
its ‘property’ and not the domain of a specialist department. However,
it does not in general take the customary approach and apply expert
systems by itself, but uses adapted versions of job evaluation meth-
ods. As such Job Family Systems are coming into use, but computer
supported versions of job evaluation methods also assist in simpli-
fying the practice of job evaluation. We will discuss this at a later
stage. Whether these views and approaches will be generally accepted
and adopted, will depend to a large extent upon the culture and the
management style of organisations.
In the vast majority of organisations job evaluation will be carried
out in the traditional way for a long time to come.
Job evaluation methods can roughly be divided into two large
groups:
ᔢ Methods that have been developed and introduced commercially
by external firms;
ᔢ Home-grown methods (Michael Armstrong, Job evaluation –
doing it yourself; issue nos. 62 and 63 in Croner’s Pay & Benefit
Briefing, September 1994).
The advantage of external methods is that they are being applied in a
large number of organisations and that they have to be flexible so that
Evaluating jobs 21
they can be adapted to the differences in organisation structure,

culture, type of jobs, business processes, etc. Home-grown methods
are attuned to the specific features of the individual organisation and
in general do not allow for external comparisons. The advantage of
internally developed methods though, is that they are more familiar to
the employees and thus will be more readily accepted. As the methods
of consultancy firms are being applied in different organisations,
these firms can take into account developments in society and fine-
tune and/or adjust their methods or improve the process of job evalua-
tion accordingly. However, it is quite possible for home-grown
methods to acquire flexibility as well. Trade unions are not particu-
larly fond of internally developed methods, firstly because they are
not always up to date and secondly because it is obviously difficult to
test their suitability for the context within which they will be applied.
Adequate testing criteria have not yet become available.
Job evaluation consists of the following elements:
ᔢ A clearly defined method which includes precise definitions of
characteristics and entries to tables;
ᔢ Benchmark jobs that have been defined and evaluated according
to the requirements of the method;
ᔢ Procedures, which clearly prescribe the course of the whole
process. Careful attention needs to be paid to the appeal procedure;
ᔢ Plain, easy-to-understand communications on the method.
Restraint on methods, procedures and such may cause more harm
than benefit. Knowledge and insight increase the confidence of
the employees.
Job evaluation is the process through which jobs are described,
analysed and ultimately weighted or evaluated by means of a job eval-
uation method. The outcome, a total score in points, expresses the
weight of a particular job in relation to other jobs. In that way a job
can be ranked.
It should be noted that this outcome is only an approximation,
though it is the result of a systematic procedure. Job evaluation is in
fact a procedure for making a subjective (estimating) process objec-
tive. It is not a science, but an instrument that has proved its practical
usefulness.
Job evaluation is thus a process which consists of several steps (see
Figure 2.1). In order to duly carry out this process, these steps need to
be carefully executed. Jobs are not isolated, but every job can ulti-
mately be traced back to the objectives of the corporation.
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.1 The process of job evaluation – consecutive steps in the job
evaluation process
Organisation
Jobs
Because jobs or functions are part of an organisation, job eval-

uation must take all elements of the organisation into consideration;
what belongs to the responsibility and authority of one
department/job must not be attributed to another as well. The
Evaluating jobs 23
coherence and interrelationships should therefore be clearly estab-

lished. Only then is it possible to compare and weigh functions.
Objectives
Before any investigation is started, the objectives of that investigation

must have been unambiguously formulated. Organisations often
neglect this requirement and thus have to conclude later on that the
sole results of their efforts is that only the existing relationships
between salaries have been established. A tedious side effect of this
narrow approach is that the interest of the employees for job evalua-
tion suffers. The embedding of the methods in personnel management
as a whole, which is required for developing and maintaining such
interest, is lacking. Section 2.2 discusses some applications of job
evaluation that have to be considered in formulating the objectives of
the process.
Procedures
The success of job evaluation depends to a large extent upon the avail-
ability of clear procedures (see section 2.3), as these procedures allow
the employee or the union representative to know the process and to
check its progress. The procedures make clear what is expected from
all parties.
Procedures not only describe the course of the process, but provide
information on the content of job evaluation, its methods and prac-
tices. This information is very important for the acceptance of the
(results of) job evaluation.
Communication
This is why communication is such an essential element (see section

2.4).
The next step is obtaining information on the organisation. From
the start of the investigation, the interrelationships between depart-
ments and functions within departments need to be clearly
established. This avoids repeated discussions on basic responsibilities,
the allocation of tasks, etc beyond the jobs and job-holders under
consideration. If these issues have not been made clear on department

level, how would that be possible on the level of individual jobs?
Business characteristic
The business characteristic is an excellent instrument for bringing

clarity on the interrelationships between departments and their func-
tions (see section 2.5).
Job description
When the interrelationships within the organisation have been

identified, individual job descriptions can be made (see section 2.6).
The procedure indicated above applies mainly to producing job
descriptions.
Job analyses
A next logical step is making a job analysis based on the criteria of the
method used (see section 2.7). The job analyst must be able to estab-
lish if, and to what extent, the job reflects the various criteria. The
resulting document is the link between the job description and the job
evaluation.
Job evaluation
With the results of the job analysis, and referring to the benchmark
jobs and evaluations (as reflected in the tables and definitions of the
job evaluation method), the job evaluation, in a more strict sense is
made (see section 2.8). This evaluation determines finally the relative
weight of the job.
Ranking of jobs
When all jobs have been evaluated, they can be ranked according to
their weight. This ranking concludes the process of job evaluation
Evaluating jobs 25
(see section 2.9). Next, the final result can be used as a basis for
designing a salary structure.
2.2 OBJECTIVES
In many organisations job descriptions are used exclusively to evalu-
ate jobs (see Figure 2.2). The reason is probably that the organisation
is not aware of alternative uses. Usually the purpose of the job evalua-
tion exercise is limited to creating a basis for a pay policy. Also the
assignment of an external consultancy often does not include addi-
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.2 The process of job evaluation – objectives

tional considerations or applications. If, at a later stage, the organisa-

tion still wants to use the job description for other purposes, it is often
hardly suitable or its set-up has to be modified. The latter, though, is
not as difficult as it would seem. If the design of the job description is
properly thought out, the description itself can be adjusted to the new
demands.
The possibilities of job evaluation can only be fully exploited if the
results of the weighing process are available for comparisons.
In this context it is necessary to point to the differences between a
job description and a task description. First we give a definition of the
job concept and of the concept task.
A job is a collection of tasks in conjunction with certain

responsibilities and competence
A task is a collection of similar activities
The job description is therefore first of all aimed at recording the

responsibilities and competence that the job contains. Information on
details and task are only included as a clarification.
If we concentrate on the objectives of a job description project, we
may choose from the following possibilities:
Remuneration
Remuneration is the most common purpose for which job descrip-
tions are made. This process provides the basic information for devel-
oping a pay policy. Most remuneration systems are based on
differences in the weight of jobs. Job evaluations express these rela-
tive weights in a specific ranking of the relevant jobs.
If the jobs and job levels are clustered in a well-thought-out way,
we obtain job families which can be linked to salary groups (See
Chapter 7 – ‘Definitions’).
Recruitment and selection

Recruitment and selection benefit if a proper overview of job require-
ments can be used. If detailed information from job evaluation has
also been made available, these requirements can be substantiated to a
further extent as personnel officials have insight into the level of
required knowledge, social skills, etc.
Evaluating jobs 27
Training and development

The results of the personnel evaluation can be compared with the job
demands that have been established in the job descriptions. This
provides insight into the gaps that have to be bridged through targeted
training and development.
Personnel assessment
Job evaluation can be used for quantitative personnel review and more
specifically for performance appraisals, though not for qualitative
reviews. The job description records the ‘contract’ between the boss
and the employee: what is expected of the performance of the
employee in his job. It is an excellent starting point for a discussion on
the shortcomings/gaps in the performance, conspicuous qualities of
the employee, etc.
Career counselling and personnel planning

If employees show interest in different aspects of a similar job at a
higher level, a job description is again an excellent and objective tool
for examining opportunities for training and development. In this way it
constitutes a sound basis for career counselling and personnel planning.
Organisational analyses
Many agree that making job descriptions is an excellent tool for
becoming thoroughly familiar with an organisation. But that type of
knowledge mainly concerns details. When participating in the evalua-
tion process, insight is needed into the interrelationships between
functions, or the lack of these. In this way it can be established
whether a certain responsibility or competence does indeed belong
only to one job and is evaluated within the context of that job.
Following this line of thought, job descriptions may be used as a start-
ing point for analysing an organisation.
A general knowledge of job evaluation and insight into the evalua-
tion methods being used are essential for a broader approach. It makes
a substantial difference whether supporting jobs or operational jobs
are being evaluated. Sometimes, therefore, different methods of job
evaluation are being used for different types of jobs, eg one method
for higher level jobs and another for jobs at lower levels. Then,
however, these different methods are not only used for remuneration
issues, but for other purposes as well.
In this section job evaluation has been reviewed in a much broader

context than in the following chapters. The emphasis of the book is on
the technique of job evaluation and remuneration and does not intend
to elaborate on other applications. Job evaluation will be discussed
insofar as it is useful for designing and developing a salary structure.
Having made this choice we can proceed to the next step: the
procedures required for a proper execution of the entire process of job
evaluation. Procedures are important issues in the early phases of the
process, as they inform the employees of what they may expect. In
addition, these procedures are an important subject for discussions
with (formal) representatives of the employees.
2.3 PROCEDURES
Procedures for job evaluation concern primarily two issues (see
Figure 2.3):
ᔢ the implementation of the job evaluation system, and
ᔢ appealing against the outcome of job evaluation.
Like good education thorough procedures are very important to the
organisation. They provide certainty to the employees with regard to
their fixed salary position. In addition, they are a measure for the care
and meticulousness with which the examination will be carried out.
The appeal procedure is of particular importance. In most cases
employees do not say what they think during the job analysis. It is
only after they have been informed of the results that they give their
reactions. However meticulously the analysis has been carried out, at
that moment the individual employee has to know what stage he has
reached and how he can appeal against the outcome of the analysis.
Depending upon the type and size of the organisation, procedures
may be simple or elaborate and comprehensive. The procedure for the
implementation of job evaluation should comprise some carefully
defined elements.
Procedures for carrying out examinations for evaluating jobs may
differ with respect to the amount of participation from both the
employee concerned and his boss. The basic procedure generally boils
down to the following steps:
Completing a questionnaire
Each employee whose job will be examined will be asked to
complete a questionnaire. The information in this document gives
Evaluating jobs 29
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.3 The process of job evaluation – procedures
some idea as to content of the job. It is also a good preparation for the
subsequent interview with the job analyst. When the job description is
made by the employee himself, the questionnaire is an excellent
instrument to obtain the necessary information in a systematic way.
Interview with the job-holder

Next the interview is held with the holder of the job or with a repre-
sentative from the holders if the same job is performed by several
employees. The purpose of this interview, which is based on the
characteristics of the organisation or the department and on the

completed questionnaires, is to ensure that job analyst and job-holder
have the same picture of the job. If the employee makes the descrip-
tion of his job himself, the characteristics of both the organisation and
his department provide useful information on the interrelationships
between department and jobs. This may lead to a proper view on the
boundaries of responsibilities and competence.
Job description
The job description needs to comply with the demands of uniformity.
The emphasis is on a proper representation of most of the essential
characteristics of the job, the level of the job (not through a descrip-
tion of the required education and training), the importance of the
activities for the organisation and the results the job is aiming for.
Approval of the job description

Obtaining approval is in essence reaching agreement between the
employee and his immediate superior on whether the description
defines the content of the job properly. It is essential that the depart-
ment manager bears ultimate responsibility, because the set up of his
department is closely related to the responsibility of the boss for real-
ising the objectives and achieving the ultimate results. On the other
hand the function-holder is the one who is confronted with the daily
problems in the work assigned to him. Ultimately this part of the
procedure should result in the holder of the job and the immediate
superior both signing the final job description. One observation needs
to be made. In a substantial number of cases the immediate boss tends
to agree with the job description after having assured himself that it
does not contain any errors or omissions. The holder of the job is
usually not asked whether in his opinion the job description provides a
correct and complete picture of the job and its responsibilities and
competence. It is therefore recommended that the job description is
also signed by the next higher superior. This manager is also the
person who decides if the holder of the job and his boss cannot reach
agreement on the job description.
Job analysis and job evaluation

The analysis and evaluation of the job are carried out by the person
who has been appointed, resulting in an overall score and a classi-
fication in a grade.
Evaluating jobs 31
Procedure for appeals

According to the rules that have been established, an appeal can be
made against both the job description and the job grade. The appeal
may be put before an external or an internal official. An internal appeal
will usually follow a course as described in Appendix 3 of the book.
However, it is perfectly possible that on the basis of the provisions of
the collective agreement, individual employees will involve experts of
the trade union. A joint committee may then consider the appeal on
condition that both parties agree to accept the decision of the commit-
tee. The factual arrangement may vary in different industries.
In addition, the procedures need to be explained to the employees.
What is the purpose of different steps? Who can be consulted if the
employee does not agree with the course of action? The procedure
also requires the establishment of committees, rules and regulations
for these committees, forms, etc. Proper education and communica-
tion here is indispensable. The next section gives some guidelines and
examples.
2.4 COMMUNICATION
Adequate communication is therefore of great importance to the
success of job evaluation projects (see Figure 2.4). The ultimate goal
is to ensure that employees have a proper understanding of the whole
process. Information may be provided in personal meetings, or
through a brochure containing the following elements:
ᔢ an explanation on why job evaluations are carried out (objec-
tives);
ᔢ a short discussion of the methods of job evaluation that will be
used;
ᔢ instructions on how to make a job description;
ᔢ model job descriptions;
ᔢ an explanation on how the system of job evaluation will be
implemented (see Appendices 1 and 2 in which some accompa-
nying forms have been included);
ᔢ a description of the appeal procedure (see Appendix 3);
ᔢ rules and regulations for supervising committees (see Appendix 4).
Also included may be an additional questionnaire and, if possible,
‘blind’ evaluation charts from the job evaluation method to be used.
Blind evaluation charts do not contain any figures for weighing jobs.
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.4 The process of job evaluation – communication
With these charts the employee is not able to evaluate his own job, but
has some idea on what basis his job will be evaluated. Using blind
charts as an illustration is usually an acceptable compromise if the
owner of the method does not want to provide all details of the
method.
The amount and content of the information should, of course, be
attuned to the employees involved. General guidelines are inappropri-
ate and useless. In most cases the owner of the system has sufficient
documents on the basis of which an informative brochure can be put
together.
Evaluating jobs 33
This certainly does not complete the communication process.

Experience teaches us that only a small proportion of the employees
involved will read the brochure, at least before their own evaluation
project starts. Thus it is important that the employees will be involved
in the analyses as much as possible right from the start. The best
results will be obtained through oral communication. However, this
type of communication requires, on the part of the person who is in
charge of this task, a profound knowledge of the method of job evalu-
ation to be used. In addition, it should be realised that to many indi-
viduals job evaluation is a difficult subject. Another problem is how
job evaluation can be made comprehensible to the different groups
and levels of employees. It should be realised that job evaluation is
not a science, but a practical technique. Moreover, the employees
involved generally show only a limited willingness to really under-
stand the job evaluation method. Usually they are only interested in
the results of the investigation and analyses.
In the communication process, therefore, emphasis needs to be
placed upon the various aspects of the way in which job evaluations
are carried out. The focus therefore should be primarily on the proce-
dures and practices which must ensure that the analyses and evalua-
tions are executed as carefully and as meticulously as possible, and at
the same time are flexible enough to respond to the problems and
queries of the individual employee during the process.
The subjects which the communication process needs to deal with
include:
ᔢ procedures and practices;

ᔢ composition and objectives of the supervising committee;
ᔢ explanations of the questionnaire and its function for the job
description;
ᔢ a broad outline of the job evaluation method;
ᔢ the way in which the results of a job evaluation are reflected in the
individual salary.
Preferably the communication process should take place in small

groups of employees, as in bigger groups the individual employee can
only listen and has no opportunity for putting questions or being
heard. If in these meetings overhead sheets are used, it may be a good
idea to provide the participants with copies after the meeting.
The various groups that require training and communication
include:
ᔢ personnel officers;
ᔢ management;
ᔢ (formal) representatives of the workforce and/or trade unions;
ᔢ employees and groups of employees involved;
ᔢ members of the supervising committees of the job evaluation
project.
These groups and individuals need to be addressed at their own level,

taking into account their role and contribution to the organisation and
the process of job evaluation. Obviously the owner of the system will
provide assistance, particularly concerning technical matters, but it
should be realised that members of the personnel function know the
organisation and the employees best. Good communications are only
possible if the owner of the system and the personnel manager collab-
orate as one team.
Some groups may need training in using the method, depending on
the degree to which they will be involved in applying the method of
job evaluation. It is, therefore, recommended that the (official) repre-
sentatives of the workforce and members of the supervising commit-
tees are given first-hand experience in evaluating jobs. In a later stage
they will then be in a better position to perform their role in the job
evaluation process.
This section on communication and training concludes the discus-
sion of the preparation of the project. If the suggestions have been
followed, all groups and individuals concerned should know the
purpose of the project and the way in which its objectives will be
achieved. The next step is to acquire a thorough understanding of the
organisation as a whole and of the interrelationships of its depart-
ments and activities.
2.5 BUSINESS CHARACTERISTICS

In section 1.3 we discussed the role of job evaluation in personnel
management. At that point we linked the rationale of the organisation
to the quality of working life in it through the integrative model. In
this section we will explain the relationship between rationale and the
design of the organisation. The relationship between the quality of
working life and design also has some important implications. A job
that contributes to the quality of the working life of employees is
shaped through the design of the organisation on condition that the
rationale is not put at risk.
Evaluating jobs 35
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.5 The process of job evaluation – business characteristics
If an attractive and pleasant job is inefficient and ineffective, it may

endanger the rationale of the organisation and thus its entire exis-
tence. A job which is inhuman or impossible to perform, and in which
all attention is concentrated on its effectiveness and efficiency, is also
a risk to the survival of the organisation.
The description of the business characteristics (see Figure 2.5),
and the job descriptions based on it, should thus reflect all conditions
on its existence in a balanced way. Whereas the rationale of the organ-
isation (its products, services, markets, targets, etc) is explicitly iden-
tified as part of the business characteristics, its purpose, objectives,
tasks, processes and structures, which are the starting point of person-
nel management, are implicitly included.
Based on the conditions of the organisation, we focus on the quality
of working life. All other applications of job description are less rele-
vant to our purpose and will therefore not be discussed. Our subject is
restricted to the job and the financial rewards for the efforts to achieve
its objectives. The design, though, is a starting point for the justifica-
tion of the job and its remuneration. It is thus very important to iden-
tify and record the design of the organisation. This is done by means
of two closely related descriptions: of the business characteristics and
of the characteristics of the department.
Usually organisations are divided into departments/activities,
which then are split up into functions. The purpose is to form units,
each in their own distinctive way and fashion contributing to the
objectives of the organisation. This implies that they are able to
operate independently from each other and that they are co-ordi-
nated to optimise their activities. Job evaluation is an excellent
instrument with which to analyse and record these relationships, not
so much according to their task, but to their responsibilities/
accountablities.
An organisation usually has a complex structure. If jobs
are described separately from each other, we may lose sight of
their mutual dependence. Thus it is useful to identify systematically
the characteristics of the organisation, which we will refer to as
the business characteristics and which visualise these interrelation-
ships.
A survey of the business characteristics includes information on:
ᔢ the present position of the organisation;

ᔢ the purpose of the organisation;
ᔢ the direction of the organisation.
This overview may also act as the basis of a survey of the characteris-
tics of a specific department.
The survey of business characteristics, which should be made inde-
pendent of the particular methods of job evaluation to be used,
consists of the following elements:
History
A short paragraph on the strategically important developments in the
history of the organisation.
Evaluating jobs 37
Main activities
A description of the distinguishing activities of the organisation. What
is the main purpose of the organisation and what are the long-term
objectives of its activities?
Organisational structure
The structure of the organisation will be represented through an
organisation diagram or chart (Figure 2.2) which includes the func-
tional areas. In addition, the number of employees of each function is
indicated (personnel plan). Particulars of the organisation are
provided separately. To be clear, the chart should not be too detailed
and elaborate. At the end a short description of the rationale of each
functional area is included, indicating its main responsibilities, the
interrelationships between various areas and their contribution to
achieving the objectives of the organisation.
Key products and markets

An outline is included of the key products/services which result from
the main activities and with which the customers are being served. It
also contains some general information on the product lines, the tech-
nology applied, key trends, present and future markets and market
shares, prospective customers, expected or anticipated growth rates,
the industry, competitors and other environmental forces.
Production process
A systematic overview/description is included which provides some
details of the main activities. The activities are divided into sub-activ-
ities and a short description is given of the flows of information and of
products/goods.
Strategic issues
The strategic issues/actions resulting from the purpose of the organi-
sation are shown in the outline. This information may be a translation
or a summary of the strategic plan.
Budget
This summary provides important figures from the budget of the
organisation and its departments. These figures concern the present
situation and the long term.
In Appendix 6 a sample is provided of a survey of the business char-

acteristics of a publishing firm, a subsidiary of a large publishing
group. In section 2.6 the job of Head of Personnel and Organisation
within this firm is described in some detail.
The strategy charts (Figure A.6.4 in Appendix 6), which are also
called Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats Analysis
(SWOT), give a clear picture of the problems with which the organisa-
tion is confronted.
The survey of the business characteristics in this example assumes
that all basic information has to be brought together to obtain one
general overview on the design of the organisation, which is essential
for identifying or investigating the rationale of the organisation. It
provides insight into the interrelationships of the organisation as the
basis from which the individual jobs can be derived.
As the company grows and becomes more complex there will be a
need to elaborate the earlier established objectives of departments into
departmental characteristics. A survey of the business characteristics,
as described above, can be seen as the basic document of the
Personnel and Organisation Department, which then can be used for
the development of a personnel policy and a manpower plan. The
approach for describing and surveying the organisation will also be
useful as a background for job descriptions.
The publishing firm, Fiction, is part of a larger group, which
consists of several subsidiaries located within one country. Such a
company would prefer to co-ordinate a number of activities from its
headquarters. The first reason is simply to comply with the legal
obligations concerning the publication of its financial statements, tax
issues and the like. In this area the Personnel and Organisation depart-
ment will also benefit from a certain degree of co-ordination in the
area of terms of employment and collective labour agreements, as it is
very impractical to have different parts of an organisation negotiate
independently with trade unions on these issues. In addition, such a
lack of co-ordination would obstruct the flow of employees to other,
superior positions. Also their capabilities would be wasted and they
would feel restricted in their personal and professional development.
For a further treatment of these subjects we refer to the substantial
number of books and articles available. The Head of Personnel and
Organisation of the publishing firm Fiction is required to apply the
centrally formulated rules concerning its personnel policy and in
particular its policy for the term of employment. Thus there exists a
functional relationship between the job of Head of Personnel of the
Evaluating jobs 39
group and the job with the similar title within Fiction. This informa-
tion will be used when we discuss the job description, analysis and
evaluation.
In general the description of a department will differ from the busi-
ness characteristics as its use is more restricted. It includes the follow-
ing elements:
Objective
This is a short paragraph on the ‘rationale’ of the department, ie what
the contribution of this department is to the final product or the end
result of the organisation.
Organisation
An organisation chart of the department, linked to the chart of the
organisation included in the survey of the business characteristics. It
includes each function within the department and gives the number of
employees working in each function.
Activities
Referring to the objectives of the department, a survey is presented on
the key activities and performances of the department.
Key figures
In addition to the budget of the department, relevant quantitative data
on the department may be provided.
Specific information
It is important that the survey of the business characteristics and the
description of the department are both signed by their respective
heads. These documents constitute a clear basis for the interviews to
be held and prevent irrelevant discussion and disputes on delegating
authority and responsibilities. A good job evaluation project starts
with a preliminary discussion with management which should
confirm the validity of both the survey of the business characteristics
and the descriptions of the department(s).
The extent to which both documents on characteristics are used
depends mainly on the complexity and size of the organisation. In a
smaller organisation it will be sufficient to draw up a comprehensive
survey of the business characteristics for the entire organisation,
providing a clear picture of the assumptions, principles and objectives
of its various units. In addition to this, a somewhat larger organisation

may wish to have a short profile of the various departments. These
profiles delineate the responsibilities and, if needed, they provide
more details of each functional area in the form of a survey of the
characteristics of departments. In very large, complex organisations
the level of detail of the summaries of the organisation, as a whole and
of its parts, may be such that comparisons between business and
departmental characteristics can be made, which may be useful or
indeed necessary. It is essential that:
The description of the organisation starts from the rationale of

the organisation and then makes clear how the organisation is
designed and structured. It provides a framework in which to
view jobs in this organisation within their mutual relationships.
Information obtained from interviews must never be in conflict or

contradict the description of the organisation as provided by the
survey of business characteristics. The job description, which we will
discuss in the next section, is inseparably linked to the business char-
acteristics. This has the additional advantage that information from
the business or department characteristics need not be included in the
job description itself. In this way it will be shorter and requires less
maintenance.
2.6 THE JOB DESCRIPTION

The job description is the basis and starting point of the job evaluation
process (see Figure 2.6). The importance of a proper job description
cannot be stressed too much. There must not be any misunderstanding
on the contents of the job description between the employee
concerned, his immediate superior and the persons who carried out
the survey and the job evaluation.
As their names imply, systems for job evaluation are directed at
jobs or positions, not at persons. This crucial point must be decisive in
describing a job.
In drawing up a job description, the way in which the holder of a
job performs will not be assessed or discussed. Only elements of a
job, which should be performed following the objectives of the organ-
isation, are relevant to the analysis. The way in which an individual
operates frequently has implications for the quality and quantity of the
Evaluating jobs 41
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.6 The process of job evaluation – the job description
work carried out, but also influences the environment in which the
holder of the job has performed his duties.
The quality and quantity of the work done and the extent of
the tasks (which the holder of the job may have increased or decreased
on his own initiative) will not be taken into consideration in describ-
ing that job. They are only taken into account when assessing the
performance of the individual within the context of the personnel
evaluation or merit rating.
A question frequently asked is ‘Which situation is being described?’
Will the factual situation be the basis, or the desired or normative
situation? If the factual situation is described the result is a job

description which is clear to the holder of the job. If the purpose of
the description process is to arrive at a standard for the job, it must
be made clear that without an assessment of the way in which the
job is performed and without a specific training or education, the
job requirements cannot be met. A factual description of the job will
require more maintenance than a standard job description, because
small changes in the job may necessitate modifying the description.
In the case of a standard description an adaptation is only necessary
if the organisation itself and the place of the job in it are changed.
Thus an organisation needs to be more careful with its standardised
job descriptions. Employees need to be evaluated on the extent to
which they meet the job requirements. The evaluation process may
result in targeted training and education to achieve the desired
performance level. Sometimes one of the results of the evaluation
will be a transfer to another job. Without an evaluation of the perfor-
mance and the training level of the individual, the standard job
description will soon lose its relevance to the organisation and the
employees concerned. It will be clear that a standard approach will
be difficult if the purpose of the job evaluation process is formu-
lated too narrowly.
Monitoring the distinction between job and job-holder should
mainly be a task of the immediate boss of the job-holder. The job-
holder and his boss are jointly responsible for a correct representation
of tasks, competences and responsibilities. For this reason is it recom-
mended that the job evaluation be signed by both the superior and the
job-holder(s).
This does not mean that the holder of the job can refuse to
carry out tasks that have not been included in the job descrip-
tion, or derive rights or privileges from it, unless this is clearly
stated
The job description is in most cases not an exhaustive rendering of all

that is expected of the holder of the job. It includes those elements
that are essential for a proper evaluation of the job level.
Before discussing the job description in more detail, it is useful to
refer back to the business characteristics as this is the basis for the
existence of the job. Also the integrative model of the organisation
should be kept in mind.
Evaluating jobs 43
The layout of the job description differs depending on the holder of

the job. However, two elements are always included:
ᔢ the purpose of the job; and
ᔢ its place within the organisation.
These elements are discussed first, before entering into the other
(varying) elements of a job description.
Purpose of the job
To describe the purpose of a function in a precise and relevant way is
a very difficult task indeed. One easily tends to make the description
too elaborate or divide it into several parts. The word ‘objective’ is to
be taken as: the object which the job is aimed at, which a job-holder
tries to achieve, to realise.’
In order to arrive at a proper description of the objective, one has to
have a clear picture of the purpose and objectives of the organisation
or the part of the organisation to which the job belongs. The job
cannot be an independent, stand-alone unit, its existence ultimately
being derived from the objectives of the organisation. This means that
a job should be indispensable for achieving one or more objectives of
the organisation. Another principle is that the objective of the job as
laid down in the job description should fit in the hierarchy. This
requires that the objective of the job should be linked logically to the
stated objective of the next higher job.
By describing the objective of a job, its rationale, or the reason for
its existence, is recorded. In a few words its purpose is laid down
concisely. This is not the same as a short description or survey of the
job.
An example of the description of the job objective of a director of
an administrative and financial staff department could be:
To provide financial information and reports which allow the

Board and the Managing Director to plan, manage and control
the financial performances and results of the company
An example of a description of the objective of the job of construc-

tion engineer is:
To ensure the sound construction, correct measurements and

proper finishing of buildings under construction
An example of the description of the objective of the job of the mail

room is:
To provide for the efficient distribution, processing, coding,

managing and filing of documents and reception of documents,
in order to manage the internal flow and preservation of
documents
Take care that the description of the objective is always short and
concise.
Place in the organisation

The description of the place of a job in the organisation must make
clear how the job fits in and is related to the organisation as a whole.
This requires at least insight into the immediate environment of the
job. Who is the immediate superior? Which employees report to the
same superior (managerial scope of the superior position or its span of
control)? Are there any jobs reporting to the position described? If so,
which jobs (managerial scope of the job)? Some job evaluation
systems only require a statement on who is the immediate superior
and how many subordinates report to that job. In general, this infor-
mation is insufficient to form a proper picture of the situation. The
best way to delineate the place of a job in the organisation is to draw
an organisation chart (see Figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7: The organisation chart, showing hierarchical and functional

relationships.
Evaluating jobs 45
The hierarchical relationships are represented by a drawn line, func-

tional or professional relationships by a dotted line. Adding more
information hardly ever makes the chart easier to read. It is better to
include additional information in the (survey of the) business charac-
teristics.
This concludes the discussion of the place of a job in the organisa-
tion. We now proceed to the differences in job description of the vari-
ous systems. Note that the format of a description will not be
determined by the consultancy firm which performs the job evalua-
tion project. To a large extent format and content should be estab-
lished by the organisation itself. The following example illustrates job
descriptions that Hay uses as a standard. Hay and other consultancy
firms are very flexible and will take into account any special wishes
and needs of the organisation. Sometimes a distinction is made
between the type of job descriptions for managerial or higher staff
positions on the one hand and for operational, task-oriented jobs on
the other.
The Hay job description

Relevant quantitative information
The data on a job consist of quantified information that expresses
the differences with comparable jobs. They provide insight into the
variables that are controlled by the job. The Hay method does not deal
with delineation risks but is directed at assessing the scope of the
activities of the job-holder, ie the extent of the area directly or indi-
rectly under his control and influence. Depending upon the type of job
this scope may be expressed in monetary terms, but also in numbers.
ᔢ The scope of a sales job will be specified in terms of sales, cost

budget and value added.
ᔢ The extent of a job in the HRM department may be expressed
through the total amount of wages, the training budget and the
number of employees.
ᔢ For a buyer in the purchasing department the scope of his job may
be indicated by the total value of the goods and services bought
and the value of the inventory.
All amounts are annualised. It may be useful not only to include the
figures for the current year but also for the next planning period. This
may indicate whether the job has stabilised or is still growing.
Principal accountabilities
This is, in effect, the most difficult part of making a job description.
The Hay method concentrates on the relative importance of a job for
achieving (sub-) objectives of the company. In this approach the
emphasis is on the end results that are expected of that job. These
end results are called accountabilities. It does not matter much how
these end results are achieved, but rather of what they consist. It is
important that the number of accountabilities remains limited. If
not, duplication may occur and the accountabilities turn out to be a
summary description of tasks and responsibilities. Special attention
should be paid to the distinction between an accountability and a
task. What delineates a job? Not its execution, but the results of the
efforts.
To illustrate this difference, we give an example of the tasks and
accountabilities of the job of an estate agent (see Figure 2.8).
A well-formulated accountability provides more and better infor-
mation than a summary of the separate tasks.
The description of accountabilities consists of three elements:
1. What? What action(s) are required or need to be taken?

2. Where? In which accountability areas should (these) actions be
taken?
3. What for? Which results should be achieved by these actions?
For each accountability a description will be made of its key activi-

ties. This direct link between key activities and accountabilities gives
a concise representation of the job, without any duplication.
Appendix 7 provides by way of an example the job description of a
(departmental) Secretary according to the Hay method. To give an
impression of the difference between a lower and a higher job,
Appendix 8 contains the job description of the Head of the Personnel
Department of a publishing company.
2.7 ANALYSING A JOB

In analysing a job we determine whether the characteristics or
requirements of the proposed method are applicable to the job and
if so, to what extent (see Figure 2.9). For example, which level of
knowledge (as defined by the method under consideration) is
required to perform the job? Note that the individual competences
of the job-holder do not play any role. The best preparation for
Evaluating jobs 47
Tasks
Tasks are:
– Placing of advertisement Tasks to be activities that must be
for property for sale and
welcoming potential buyers
accomplished performed within the job
– Upon request, surveying

property and drafting
survey reports within the
– Negotiating on the price
of the property on behalf context of
of the client
– Taking care of the
administrative settlement
Activities are:
of transactions
Key activities on a actions that, as a consequence
of a job, need to be in order to
Accountabilities particular area produce the expected end results
– Ensuring that through an

appropriate advertising
campaign sufficient interest aimed at achieving
is raised
– Influencing potential buyers of the
property in such a way that the Performance areas:
probability of arriving at a sale describe the main activities that
is maximised The expected make it possible to achieve the
– Negotiating on the price within end results as well as the
the limits set by the client in end results immediate impact on these end
order to achieve a result that is results
acceptable to the client
Figure 2.8 Accountability areas versus tasks
analysing a job is to describe the degree in which a specific charac-

teristic or requirement must be satisfied in order to perform the job
adequately.
The Hay Guide Chart and Profile Method – the Hay method – takes
a somewhat different approach, which we will illustrate through the
example of the analysis of the job of personal secretary.
In this method, the Hay Guide Chart and Profile Method, the
requirement or characteristic ‘know-how’ of a job is defined as
follows:
Know-how is the sum of every kind of knowledge, skill and

experience however acquired, needed for standard acceptable job
performance.
The analysis of the job of personal secretary, according to the Hay

method, results in the following statements.
A personal secretary performs all standard secretarial tasks for one
or more persons who usually operate at the middle management level.
She or he performs standard administrative activities in connection
with these secretarial tasks.
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.9 The process of job evaluation – analysing a job.
The job requires a sound independent judgement and a good

knowledge of the way in which the superior(s) work(s). In addition,
substantial experience as a secretary is necessary. Besides proficiency
in English, some knowledge of a foreign language (German/French)
is required.
The characteristics of jobs and their various factors or aspects
according to the Hay method can be structured in the way which is
illustrated in Table 2.1.
Evaluating jobs 49
Characteristic Factor
Know-how Technical know-how

Breadth of management know-how
Human relations skills
Problem solving Thinking environment – freedom to think

Thinking challenge
Accountability Freedom to act

Magnitude
Impact
Table 2.1 Characteristics and factors/aspects of the Hay Guide Chart and
Profile method.
As is evident from this table the interrelationships between these char-

acteristics are relatively simple. If more characteristics are used in
analysing a job, more attention needs to be paid to the interrelation-
ships of the various characteristics.
The choice of characteristics of jobs follows from the following

reasoning:
ᔢ the results for which the job is held accountable output
ᔢ require an amount of know-how input
and
ᔢ the processing of the know-how required for the job
through the conscious thinking process or
problem solving throughput
or processing
in order to achieve the expected end results.
This process is visualised in Figure 2.10.

Though the Hay method does not use a weighing factor for each
characteristic, the relationship between the aspects is determined by
the quantified comparisons (‘numbering pattern’) on the evaluation
charts (‘Guide Charts’). The quantified comparisons or ratios are
based on the concept of the ‘just noticeable difference’ which is
derived from Weber’s Law. The just noticeable difference is the small-
est difference which a person can observe in the degrees in which a
characteristic is required for jobs. Applied to weighing job require-
INPUT OUTPUT
KH KNOW-HOW INPUT
KH ACC
PS PROBLEM SOLVING THROUGHPUT
PS
ACC ACCOUNTABILITY OUTPUT
THROUGHPUT
Figure 2.10: Relationships between characteristics of the Hay Guide charts.
ments or characteristics, the following ‘scores’ are given to the differ-

ence in a characteristic required for two comparable jobs:
ᔢ a just noticeable difference; the jobs are considered to be one step
apart;
ᔢ a clearly noticeable difference; the jobs are considered to be two
steps apart;
ᔢ a quite evident difference; for this characteristic the jobs are three
steps or more apart.
In the Hay method a distance of one step is considered to be equiva-

lent to a difference of 15 per cent. This 15 per cent difference consti-
tutes the basis of the ‘numbering pattern’ of quantitative comparisons
in the evaluation charts.
In addition to the characteristics of jobs, the Hay method uses the
so-called job profile. This is a practical judgement of the nature of the
job in relation to the objectives and end results to be achieved in the
job. The job profile is used:
ᔢ to check whether the evaluation is correct;

ᔢ to monitor the degree of the involvement of the job in (primary)
processes of the business;
ᔢ as an instrument for judging the relationships and ratios in jobs
and levels of the required characteristics which have been found
in the evaluation process.
The method uses two types of profiles; the short profile and the long
one.
Evaluating jobs 51
The short profile represents the ratio between problem solving (PS)
and the extent of the accountability (ACC) as measured in the steps
concept of Hay. If the score for the extent of the accountability (ACC)
is higher than that for problem solving (PS), the job is said to have an
A-profile. In the opposite case the resulting profile is called a P-
profile. If the scores for both characteristics are equal, the profile is
called an L-profile (Level). As is illustrated in Figure 2.11 the range
of feasible profiles is A1, A2, A3, A4, L, P1, P2, P3 and P4. The
figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 indicate the difference between the scores for
ACC and PS, expressed in steps of 15 per cent.
A-profiles
In the A-profile the emphasis is on the extent of the accountability.
Distinctive A-profiles (A4 and A3) indicate in general that the jobs
are action-oriented and have a strong influence on the end results to
be achieved. Managerial jobs tend to have an A3 or A4 profile.
Operational jobs and jobs supervising the various primary processes
of the firm also have A-profiles.
A2-profiles can be found for managerial jobs in which problem
solving is a major component. Examples are jobs in charge of a staff
department or a supporting function (to line management). A1-
profiles occur mainly in supporting and advisory functions and in
operational jobs, like secretaries and administrative assistants.
P-profiles
The emphasis of P-profiles is on dealing with and solving problems,
while the extent of the accountability is less prominent. Solitary,
non-managerial jobs in Research and Development or in eng-
ineering are usually of a nature that matches a P-profile. P4-profiles
can be found for jobs that are entirely in the field of basic research.
Jobs that are in charge of small research units may also show a
P-profile.
short profile
P E A
4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 steps
Figure 2.11 Short profile
L-profiles
For jobs with an L-profile the numbers of steps for the characteristics
‘extent of the accountability’ and ‘problem solving’ are equal. Jobs
with a P1-profile or an A1-profile differ only a little from the
L-profile. Many supporting jobs, such as strictly staff positions and
managerial jobs which concentrate on problem-solving activities,
show these profiles.
In determining the ‘long profile’ or the percentage profile, the job
is viewed in its entirety in order to examine the interrelationships
between the three characteristics. The value of each characteristic is
expressed as a percentage of the total score possible. For example:
HAY STEP VALUES
KH 400 points ---> 44% 175

200 ---- 0 STEPS
PS 200 points ---> 22% 230 ---- 1 ,,
264 ---- 2 ,,
ACC 304 points ---> 34%
304 ---- 3 ,,
TOTAL 904 points ---> 100% 350
400
460
Short profile A3
Long profile 44-22-34 etc
Note on the short profile

The difference between ACC and PS amounts to three steps, while
ACC has the highest score. Thus the job has an A3-profile.
Note on the long profile

Equate the total score of 904 to 100 per cent. Then the share of know-
how (KH) of 400 points equals: (400/904) x 100 = 44 per cent.
Similarly we find for the PS share 22 per cent and for ACC 34 per cent.
A more specialised job will show a higher percentage KH, while
the percentage AC decreases as the job is located lower down the hier-
archy. The ratios within the short and the long profile are independent
of the score. In Figure 2.12 a comparison is made between the above
example and another job with a lower score, both of which have
different profiles.
Evaluating jobs 53
LONG PROFILE
KH 44%
KH 65%
ACC 19%
PS 22%
PS 16%
SHORT PROFILE ACC 34%
A1 A3
233 904
TOTAL SCORE
Figure 2.12 Comparison of profiles versus total score
For the composition of the profile several conclusions can be drawn.
ᔢ In the case of two subordinate jobs the higher job will also show a
higher ACC score in the long profile. This score reflects that the
higher job is ‘more accountable for end results’ than the lower job.
ᔢ As the job is located lower down the hierarchy, the percentage
ACC decreases, whereas the percentage KH increases.
ᔢ The composition of the long profile indicates whether a job is
a staff or line position. In the case of a line job the emphasis is
on ACC, whereas for a staff job the KH percentage is relatively
high.
ᔢ A manager at a higher level scores a higher percentage for PS and
ACC and a lower percentage for KH than a manager at a lower
level. The former is more like a generalist, whereas the latter is in
general more like a specialist.
ᔢ In supporting and research jobs the emphasis is on KH and PS.
The percentage score ACC will be lower in these jobs.
ᔢ The extent of the influence of supporting jobs on the decision-
making process of line management (co-management) is reflected
in the percentages for ACC of both types of jobs.
ᔢ Normally only specific ratios in the percentages for ACC of jobs
within the hierarchy can be acted upon.
ᔢ In matrix organisations and in project management the percent-
ages ACC will be closer to each other than between hierarchical

levels in classical organisation structures.
After careful consideration some conclusions can be drawn from the
results of job evaluations regarding the relationships and links
between jobs. An experienced user (system-holder) will certainly be
able to provide such insight. None of the methods discussed empha-
sises these applications for profiling and comparing jobs as explicitly
as the Hay method does. The more detailed description of the Hay
method is thus meant to demonstrate that the results of job evaluation
may be useful tools for an organisation to analyse, characterise and
correlate jobs.
The analyst is only able to make a proper analysis if he knows all
characteristics of the method and their mutual relationships.
Therefore after the example of the secretary this section has focused
on the method of Hay. What information these methods have
produced in this section must be in accordance with the motivation
that will be provided by evaluating the knowledge required for this
function. Next, after careful consideration of the definitions of the
table entries, the correct entry for this job in the table ‘know-how’ can
be determined.
2.8 EVALUATING A JOB

2.8.1 Construction and use of evaluation tables
Evaluating jobs consists of assigning scores to various job character-
istics included in the method being used (see Figure 2.13). To deter-
mine the score of a particular characteristic the analyst needs to
determine the applicable entry code to the evaluation table of the
method. Most methods which use points have tables in the form of a
matrix (see Table 2.2).
The table entries in this example have been coded by the letters a,
b, c and d for the vertical columns and the numbers 1, 2 and 3 for the
horizontal rows. If we choose the entry codes b and 2 in this table, we
find a score of 25 points. Some job evaluation methods, such as the
Hay method, do not allow a value to be chosen in between the values
included in the table. Other methods do allow interpolations between
the values provided. For both approaches some valid arguments can
be given. If we take the latter approach, the following notations of
scores can be determined:
b/c 2 or b+2 score = 28
Evaluating jobs 55
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.13 The process of job evaluation – evaluating a job
b/c 2 or b+2 score = 31

b/c 2/3 or b+2+ score = 38
b/c 2/3 or b+3– score = 38
Note that these codings and numbers have been chosen arbitrarily, the
point being to demonstrate the use of these types of tables.
Table X 1 2 3
a 10 15 20
b 20 25 30
c 30 35 40
d 40 45 50
Table 2.2: Simplified matrix table

It is important that clear rules are established on the way in which the
notation of the table entries needs to be interpreted. This is not just a
matter of co-ordination between job analysts. The notation also
contains information for the personnel manager or head of the depart-
ment, which he may need in explaining the evaluation results to the
job-holders.
In the Hay method, assigning values included in the table is not
allowed as this method is based on the so-called concept of steps.
According to this concept the distance between successive values is
defined as ‘a just noticeable difference’. In view of this definition a
value between steps does not make sense. Nevertheless the Hay
method allows for smaller nuances and refinements when choosing
the table entry, as is shown by the following examples. As in Table 2.2
the figures in these examples need not correspond with factual evalu-
ation tables of both methods. We just want to demonstrate their
construction. According to the Hay method we may have derived the
following scores from Table 2.3:
b2 score 25 b+2 score 30
Table X 1 2 3
A 5 10 15
10 15 20
15 20 25
B 15 20 25
20 25 30
25 30 35
C 25 30 35
30 35 40
35 40 45
D 35 40 45
40 45 50
45 50 55
Table 2.3 A more extensive matrix table
Evaluating jobs 57
b+2- score 25 b2+ score 30

c2+ score 25 b–2 score 20
b–2– score 20*
b+2+ score 30*
* These scores make no sense as they produce the same result as, for instance, ‘b – 2፱ and
‘b + 2፱.
In interpreting the tables and definitions of a particular job evaluation

method, reference or benchmark jobs are indispensable. These bench-
mark jobs should therefore be seen as an integral part of that job eval-
uation method. A benchmark job has been described, evaluated and
commented upon in such a way that complete agreement has been
established between system-holder and other parties involved.
2.8.2 Evaluating jobs with the Hay method

As has been discussed above, the Hay method evaluates jobs on the
basis of three characteristics or ‘aspects’; know-how, problem solving
and accountability. We start with the evaluation chart (which is called
the ‘Guide Chart’) for the characteristic ‘know-how’. This chart
differentiates between three aspects or factors:
ᔢ technical know-how;
ᔢ breadth of management know-how;
ᔢ human relations skills.
For the definitions of the table entries of the ‘know-how’ chart we

refer to Table 2.4.
When evaluating the job of Secretary according to the Hay method,
we arrive at entry C for the specialised and technical know-how. This
know-how concerns carrying out practical techniques, processes and
procedures, such as taking shorthand notes of texts, typing activities
by means of word-processing techniques, working on a personal
computer, operating printers, typewriters and facsimile machines,
filing and keeping the office diary. In this job, insight into the techni-
cal operating procedures and methods concerns the knowledge of and
some insight into the (commercial) activities of the department.
From the definition under D, ‘advanced vocational knowledge’, it
will be clear that in this job of Secretary no ‘specialised, generally
non-technical know-how’ is required. Also the job does not entail
‘specialised methods and processes that can be learned in a relatively
PRACTICAL PROCEDURES
* DEPTH AND RANGE OF TECHNICAL KNOW-HOW
PROFESSIONAL DISCIPLINES
SPECIALISED TECHNIQUES
Table 2.4
Know-how chart
Evaluating jobs 59
short period of time’ (entry C). After a preliminary choice of the table
entry it is not only useful, but necessary, to read carefully the defini-
tions just above and below that entry. Only then is it possible to make
a proper selection and to establish the reasons for the choice.
The next characteristic is Managerial Skill. A personal secretary
has a supporting role to the persons she works for. The job contains
elements that concern the entire department. A series of issues for
which personal initiative is expected bears upon the efficiency of the
operations of the department. For these reasons Managerial Skills
scores I instead of 0.
Finally the human resource skills need to be evaluated. These
human resource skills refer to the degree in which others need to be
influenced to obtain the expected results. The working relationship of
a secretary with the department and its environment will generally be
of an informative nature. Thus the choice will be 1.
The complete score for ‘Knowledge’ will thus be:
The mean value of the block has been chosen, because no further
C I 1 score 115 points

The total score is 177 points A1-profile, 65–16–19
nuances have been used when selecting the entries. Comparison of this
score and the score according to another method is not relevant,
because of the difference in depth in which this characteristic is evalu-
ated, in the sense that the Hay method goes further than most methods.
Next the job of Head of the Personnel Function will be evaluated
on the basis of the Hay method.
In order to perform the job of Head of Personnel an individual
needs professional education and training, because it is necessary to
have insight into the theoretical fundamentals and relationships. Also
a substantial degree of abstraction is needed to be able to understand
and appreciate the processes in such an organisation. Designing and
formulating a personnel policy or a social plan requires knowledge
and expertise of an advanced professional level and a substantial
number of years’ experience in practice. The Head of Personnel has
an important advisory and supporting role towards management and
is involved in decision-making processes which are aimed at effec-
tively and efficiently achieved short-term and long-term objectives.
There is a demonstrable relationship between the quality of the func-
tioning of the organisation (its rationale) and the advice of the Head
of Personnel concerning the design of and the quality of working life
Evaluating jobs 61
in the organisation.
Which human resource skills are required, will, amongst other
things, be determined by the expectation that the job-holder will
convince and motivate others, frequently on the basis of non-rational
arguments. In situations of conflict the job-holder must be able to
mediate. These considerations result in the following evaluation:
EII 3 score 350 points

The total score is 657 points A2-profile 53–20–27
2.8.3 Evaluation procedure

An important element of the job evaluation method is the procedure
and format of the evaluation process. When the evaluation is carried
out by the system-holder or by someone under his direct supervision,
it may lead to different results from those obtained when the organisa-
tion itself is responsible for the evaluation of jobs. Both approaches
have advantages and drawbacks.
The former approach, referred to as the ‘external approach’, has been
applied for a long time and is still preferred by many organisations. The
latter approach is more in accordance with the views of the Hay Group
and is referred to as the ‘internal approach’. The organisation itself has
to determine whichever approach it prefers. Choosing the external
approach implies maximum objectivity, because the owner or holder of
the system remains outside the organisation and will give the quality of
the evaluation the highest priority. If the job evaluation is performed by
management (Personnel Department), whether or not assisted by inter-
nal or external experts, maximum commitment concerning the results
may be expected of the managers. This will consequently lead to a high
degree of acceptance of the findings.
The internal approach is usually chosen to stress that the organisation
accepts its responsibility for the evaluation process and its results.
2.8.4 Computerised job evaluation systems

Now we have discussed the technique of evaluating jobs in the previ-
ous four sections, it is appropriate to give a brief review of the latest
developments in the field, in particular the use of the computer in
evaluating jobs. Also, as can be expected in this area, there are differ-
ences in the views of system-holders. In addition, the available
standard software is not limited to job evaluation as such; in a number

of cases information on pay levels in the labour market is linked to the
results of the evaluation process.
A first step when considering the implementation of a comput-
erised system is making an assessment of the possibilities of the auto-
mated system in view of the objectives to be achieved with the aid of
the system. The results of paired comparisons, and the subsequent
classification of functions in job or salary groups, may inhibit the use
of job evaluation, eg organisational analyses. The implementation of a
computerised system may necessitate reconsidering accepted condi-
tions and principles of job evaluation. It would not be wise to ignore
such conditions in order to reap the undeniably considerable benefits
of automated systems. One of the main advantages may be the consis-
tency which is enforced by the application of these methods. By
incorporating so-called validity checks, the input data will be checked
and compared with predetermined standards. In addition, such checks
signal if a particular answer to a question put by the system contra-
dicts previous answers.
Computerised methods are an improvement as they save time
and promote consistency in the application of job evaluation methods.
However, they do not constitute a different approach to job
evaluation.
An example of a computerised system that is linked to external pay
information is the modular HayXpert system of Hay Management
Consultants (see Figure 2.14). It is not the only method currently
available that uses such a modular set-up.
DATABASE
JOB EVALUATION MODULES
CHART
• JOB – INFORMATION
• EMPLOYEE – INFORMATION COMPARISON
• ORGANISATION – INFORMATION
QUESTIONNAIRE
• EVALUATION – INFORMATION
COMPENSATION
• REMUNERATION – INFORMATION
ADMINISTRATOR
• MARKET – INFORMATION
COMPETENCY
• QUESTIONNAIRE ANALYSES
Figure 2.14: Hay Xpert modules

Evaluating jobs 63
The HayXpert system is based on two elements: ‘points’ and ‘refer-

ence’ and is built on four modules for job evaluation; ‘Chart’,
‘Comparison’, and ‘Questionnaire’.
Chart
This module contains a database for recording and consulting job
information, previous evaluations and justification of the scores
assigned, based on the Hay Guide Chart.
Comparison
Comparison is a factor-based approach to evaluating work (on the
basis of three factors) within a given grade structure. As the scales are
custom made to the organisation, no specific knowledge of the Hay
method is required. The module can be used by management and
provides substantial insight to the employees. ‘Comparison’ includes
‘Chart’ and can be developed for other job families as well.
Questionnaire
On the basis of a structured questionnaire the job level is established
through an arithmetic model. ‘Questionnaire’ includes ‘Chart’ and
allows for external comparisons through benchmark jobs in commer-
cial organisations.
2.8.5 The job level matrix

Apart from point factor methods, which are sometimes called expert
systems (in the case of Hay, Framework, EFP) another phenomenon
gains increasing acceptance. A number of consultancy firms have
introduced flexible methods for job evaluation in the market, called
Job Family Systems. These provide a methodology that can be applied
by a non-specialist manager. However, as in the point factor methods,
the basis for establishing mutual relationships between the elements
of a Job Family System is an expert system, as in point factor systems.
In everyday use a Job Family System (JFS) does not require consult-
ing point tables, but rather a matrix or grid. Because JFSs are built
upon an expert system the facility to make external comparisons is
ensured. This expert system is used to evaluate the series of bench-
mark jobs which need to be well established, clearly described and
easily recognisable throughout the organisation. Preferably they are
not linked to a specific individual and are not likely to be changed
substantially in the foreseeable future. These requirements of bench-
mark jobs provide a sound basis for the JFS and allow for external
comparisons.
The JFS methodology has two entries for classifying jobs: the
combinations of different types of jobs, or job families (rows) and the

number of job levels (columns). (See Table 2.5.) As previously stated
the JFS is developed starting from an expert system. This describes
and values the benchmark jobs (c. 25 per cent of the total job base).
Very short descriptions of these jobs – subdivided according to job
family – are included in the JFS as references for classifying the other
jobs. For determining the level of a job, so-called level indicators have
been established. These level indicators, apply formulated,
summarised common characteristics of jobs within the same job
group or ‘grade’. In this way the difference between job levels can be
clearly established. In fact the JFS is an elaboration and extension of
the construction of so-called job series. A job series contains succes-
sive levels of the same job, in which each level represents a job grade.
For instance, the job family consists of:
Departmental secretary Grade 4
Secretary Grade 5
PA/secretary to the Managing Director Grade 6
For each of these jobs standardised job descriptions have been made,
which clearly establish the core of a job. The degree in which the
employee meets the specified job determines into which job family he
is classified.
Tables 2.5 and 2.6 give examples of differently structured job level
matrices. In conjunction with the given level indicator Table 2.5
provides a sample description of the respective levels of the activities.
Other jobs from the same job family can be classified by comparing
them with the sample descriptions, for example:
The family group ‘sales’ gives at level 5 a description of the type

of activities that match the description of the level indicator in
the heading of the table. Other sales jobs can be compared with
these and accordingly classified at the same, higher or a lower
level
While Table 2.5 provides general descriptions as level indicators,

Table 2.6 describes the various job levels within the job family
Personnel. The precise set-up and contents of a job family system
(JFS) depends upon the specific needs of the organisation.
When classifying the job of Head of Personnel the description of
the job matches level 8.
Evaluating jobs 65
Table 2.5: Example of a Job Family System
Level 4 5 6
Level indicator Performs technical or Performs technical or Performs specialist oper-

specialist activities specialist activities ational activities accord-
according to guidelines comprising co-ordinating, ing to guidelines and with
and is directly super- preparatory and opera- a large degree of auton-
vised. Has possibly oper- tional elements. Has omy. Has possible opera-
ational responsibility for possibly operational tional responsibility for
some employees carry- responsibility for some some technical employ-
ing out routine operations operational technical ees.
employees.
Sample description Visits (prospective)

customers, closes trans-
Sales actions for the sales of
books according to
guidelines
Sample description Records, co-ordinates Plans the activities of the

and answers where computer centre.
Automation possible questions from Tests new applications,
internal and external implements new methods.
users. Manages the Keeps the departmental
registration system of the documentation up to date
project, supports the test-
ing of the system
Sample description Performs the accounting Is in charge of the

of some products, accounting of the internal
Finance and Accounting checks the billing, the receivables and payables.
tapes for the collection of Presses for outstanding
debts and payments. payments. Provides
Reconciles the sub- management information.
accounting and the Supervises some
general ledger and employees.
prepares the internal
reports.
As when using expert systems, some conditions must be met before

a job level matrix can be applied. These conditions concern the issue
as to whether or not it is wise to implement a JFS at a particular
moment. Similar to the considerations when introducing automated
systems, the question arises to what extent the job level matrix
contributes to achieving the original objectives of the job evaluation
Table 2.6 Example of a Job Family System
Level 4 5 6 8
Core Head of Personnel Sector Personnel Head of Training Chief Personnel

Job Administration Manager and Development Officer
Level Advises on complex Prepares personnel Prepares policy propos- Advises on policy at
indicator problems. Co-operates policy within designated als in a specialist field company level on the
to some extent with other projects and fields. Has and is professionally basis of a profound
departments and possibly functional and responsible for content professional expertise
disciplines. Has possibly operational and results. Has and has final responsi-
operational responsibilities for more possibly functional bility concerning
responsibilities for (sub-) complex (sub-) projects responsibilities for complex issues and
projects or for managing or is in charge of some complex (sub-) projects relationships within the
some employees. employees. or is in charge of some context of the company
employees. policy or strategy. The
activities are generally of
a rather innovative and
creative nature. Is possi-
bly in charge of a
department
Sample Is in charge of the depart- Contributes to the devel- Formulates the training Supervises advisory
descrip- ment of personnel infor- opment of social policy. and development policy activities in the field of
tion mation and salary Implements social policy of the organisation. organisational change,
administration. Is in within a section Prepares training and conditions and terms of
charge of preparing (personnel planning, development plans, employment, job
management information. recruitment, selection, develops methodologies evaluation, training and
Carries out some collective conditions and and didactics. Is in development, company
research in this field termination). Advises charge of a team of welfare, personnel
and intermediates in internal training management, etc.
case of labour conflicts. specialists. Prepares policy on
Is in charge of a team of social and organisational
employees. issues for the entire
company. Manages and
coaches change
processes with a large
impact on the
organisation
project. Is it exclusively intended for remuneration purposes or will

job evaluation be used for wider purposes?
The role of the Personnel Function in applying JFS differs from the
one in expert systems and is in this case more that of a guardian of the
system and procedures and of a coach than that of a department that
carries out the evaluations or passes on the results. The first condition
is that the Personnel Function is sufficiently trusted in the organisa-
tion to be able to adjust and manage the process. Also, it must be able
Evaluating jobs 67
to intervene if procedures are not or insufficiently followed and if

adjustments or modifications of the JFS are necessary (maintenance).
In addition, the Personnel Function must also take action if the opera-
tional process of classifying jobs on the basis of exchanges of views
and of communicating the classification results to the employees is
hampered or obstructed.
The second condition is that the Personnel Function possesses the
professional skills required to perform its (new) role. The manager in
charge should be of sufficient professional integrity to coach and
support the process independently. This implies that the personnel
officer can only have an advisory role in the evaluation committee.
The Personnel Function should keep its distance to preserve an inde-
pendent position from which it can be facilitator and coach and to
participate in a committee for appeal.
The third condition is the quality of the management of the organi-
sation. As has been pointed out before, JFS is carried out by manage-
ment. Thus it should meet certain requirements. Not only must it be
willing to carry out this task, it must also possess the necessary
competences. These requirements concern mainly communication
skills, because in JFS the management will have to communicate the
results of the classification process in grades to the employees.
Finally, a summary of the implementation process of a JFS is given.
This process consists of the following eight stages:
ᔢ education/communication;
ᔢ choice of core jobs and selection of job families;
ᔢ description and weighing of core jobs;
ᔢ testing the ranking of jobs and possibly weighing these rankings;
ᔢ establishing job families’ structure;
ᔢ job matrix, classification and appeal procedures, and appointing
and setting up a classification committee;
ᔢ classifying jobs;
ᔢ communicating the results.
A major advantage of JFS is that it provides insight into employees

across job families and specialisations, because it gives a picture of
the requirements and requirement levels of various jobs. How do you
compare a job in the accounting department with a job in mainte-
nance? As is the case with the job series discussed earlier, the JFS can
be combined perfectly with flexible remuneration systems. We will
discuss this in more detail in Part II. Finally, a widely accepted and
consistent evaluation methodology provides the essential link between

the JFS and the pay system.
2.9 RANKING OF JOBS

From a technical standpoint the weighing of jobs is the final step in
the job evaluation process, provided all parties involved agree that the
ranking correctly represents the relationships within the organisation.
Only then can it be assumed that a basis has been established for
developing a remuneration policy.
After careful consideration of the ranking list and in particular of
the clusters of jobs in that list, it may appear that the position of some
jobs does not seem logical (see Figure 2.15). In such cases it is recom-
mended that the evaluation of that job is thoroughly checked and
compared with jobs directly surrounding it (‘cluster’). After these
final checks and possible adjustments have been made, the ranking is
ready for use.
After describing some basic concepts of salary structures sections
4.5 and 4.6 will discuss the ranking list as the starting point of the
design of an ‘own’ salary structure. For an example of such a ranking
list of jobs see Table 2.7.
Table 2.7 Rank order of jobs
Job evaluation Jobs

points
45 Cleaner
51 Delivery man
63 Driver
68 Typist
70 Receptionist
85 Departmental secretary
89 Receptionist/exchange operator
105 Computer operator
121 Head of post room
136 Secretary
148 Calculator/cost accountant
159 Programmer
165 Wage accountant/personnel administrator
193 Head of accounting
201 Marketing assistant
203 Sales representative
235 Systems manager
etc. etc.
Evaluating jobs 69
rganisation
O
Jobs
Objectives
Procedures
Communication
Business
characteristics
Job description
Job analyses
Job evaluation
Ranking of jobs
Figure 2.15 The process of job evaluation – ranking of jobs
2.10 CHECKLIST FOR JOB EVALUATION

At the end of this chapter we provide a checklist as a tool for making
choices.
1. What type of job evaluation will be carried out?

ᔢ ascertaining job surveys, which describe the current
situation;
ᔢ normative job surveys, in which jobs on the basis of their
mutual relationships are linked into a logically coherent body;
ᔢ structuring surveys which focus on the issue: What is the ideal

situation for this organisation in terms of objectives, results
and responsibilities on the one hand and job-related develop-
ment opportunities for employees on the other hand?
2. How valid are the job characteristics? Do they differentiate suffi-
ciently in the interpretation of definitions to prevent the same
requirement from being evaluated or weighted twice?
3. Are the results reproducible, ie can the justifications of the results
clearly and repeatedly be derived from the definitions of the
method so that a correct comparison can be made where a re-eval-
uation is necessary?
4. Has the method sufficient and clearly recognisable benchmark
jobs suitable for the organisation?
5. What options has the organisation if an employee does not meet
the requirements as laid down in the job description?
6. Does the organisation intend to create or develop skills of its own
in evaluating jobs, or does it prefer to use external experts? What
are the arguments for its choice?
7. Which objectives are being pursued with the implementation of
job evaluation?
8. Have the procedures been carefully constructed?
9. In which way are aspects of the job evaluation process communi-
cated to employees, labour representatives and management?
10. Does the organisation have previous experience in job evaluation?
With which obstacles and disadvantages has the organisation then
been confronted?
3
Job evaluation systems
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter ended with a checklist which may assist in
making the correct choices/considerations when an organisation plans
to implement job evaluation or to switch to another method. However
having satisfied all the questions in this checklist does not mean that
the selection process has been concluded or that a final choice can be
made. This requires insight in the job evaluation methods currently
offered in the market. Acquiring the necessary information is not an
easy task, mainly because system-holders do not provide access to the
details of the method before a serious assignment seems to be within
reach. If an organisation does succeed in obtaining comprehensive
information, comparisons are hampered by the fact that the character-
istics of one method are more or less detailed than those of other
methods. As a consequence the definitions of various methods are
hardly comparable.
In Europe more than 100 different methods of job evaluation are
presently being used. A number of these have been developed specifi-
cally for a particular company or organisation, others are being
offered in the market by specialised firms. Others again are a mixture
of both. The methods can be divided roughly into two main groups:
— methods based upon an evaluation of jobs based on a points

system;
— methods that determine the weight of jobs by comparing them
with a general description of levels of similar jobs (reasoned
comparison). A more subtle approach is provided in Tables 3.1
and 3.2.
In order to make a detailed judgement of various methods an analyt-

ical survey on the basis of their features has been made which also
includes a description of the evaluation characteristics used in each
Table 3.1 Various methods for job evaluation classified according to

characteristics
2. Method of determining grades
2a 2b 2c
Ranking of jobs Classifying of Scale or matrix
jobs into classes
1. 1a Ranking per Assigning per

Characteristics Various characteristic character (point
or entire job characteristics (factor factor)
to be assessed comparison)
1b Decision band Time span

One method method
characteristic
only
1c Job ranking Job

Job as a classification
whole
method. Next, details are given of the various characteristics of each.

Finally, information is provided on the perspective from which these
evaluation characteristics are built. The survey does not pretend to be
exhaustive, only to provide an overview of the major aspects of vari-
ous evaluation methods. Where appropriate, a block describing incon-
veniences (or working conditions) can be added to the analyses.
Under the heading ‘specific system information’ some additional
information is given, including:
system technique;
procedures/implementation;
tools/computer support.
At the end of each method some representative parts of the grading

or evaluation tables are included. On the one hand these give some
idea as to how the table is constructed and on the other hand they
show typical elements of the evaluation method. In order to be sure
that the information on the various methods is well understood and
correctly interpreted, we have presented these descriptions of the
methods to their owners for their comments. In particular concerning
Job evaluation systems 73
Table 3.2 Classification of the job evaluation methods discussed according
to characteristics and the benefits and disadvantages
Type Characteristic Benefits Disadvantages
Non analytical
Ranking Comparing entire jobs Easy to use and easy No well-defined

in order to arrive at a to understand standard and therefore
ranking difficult to explain and
to defend
Paired Each job is compared Reasonably reliable See ranking

comparison with all other jobs,
scores are assigned
(eg 0 = lighter,
1 = equal,
2 = heavier)
then added together
to find a total score
for the jobs
Grading/ On the basis of a Simple to use Difficult to put into

classifying standard description provided the gradings effect for complex
job level and/or grading (ie an for each level are jobs, because the
interpretation of practicable and well description does not
certain factors such described and that apply and/or the inter-
as independence, sample jobs are pretation of factors
know-how, etc) an appropriate to the used in grading
entire job is organisation become too complex
compared with a and too abstract.
standard job
description or grading
Analytical/ Several factors are Defining factors Rather difficult to

points chosen that are clearly avoids subjec- implement and main-
considered important tivity and facilitates tain; objectivity is
for establishing the establishing (and illusive; a subjective
weight of the job; for defending) differ- assessment is needed
each factor a score is ences between jobs. for scoring each
determined after This is particularly so factor.
which scores of indi- if differences are
vidual factors will be established through
translated into a total techniques from
score of the job. observational
psychology
the information under the heading ‘specific system information’, the

author has for a major part depended upon data provided by the
system holders.
The growing possibilities and use of the computer and the occa-
sional automated job evaluation system already in existence were
discussed in the previous chapter. For the sake of completeness more
detailed information on the individual method has been included
under the heading ‘specific system information’.
A second remarkable aspect is that system-holders increasingly
respond to the demands in the market. Methods of several ‘levels’ are
being offered, varying from very elaborate to simplified versions that
require rather less specialist knowledge in this field. However, such
simplifications may also enforce an intimate link between the
‘applier’ (management) and the (internal or external) ‘specialist’ in
order to ensure consistency and comparability with the external
market.
For a proper understanding of the descriptions of the methods and
the details appended, it should be kept in mind that the job evaluation
process consists of several steps:
1. Job analysis. The process of inquiring into the content of the

job and recording the relevant information for evaluating/grading
the job.
2. Job evaluation method. Evaluating/grading or weighing of job by
means of evaluating, weighing or measuring instrument.
3. Testing the ranking. This ranking is the result of listing jobs accord-
ing to the value of their final score.
4. Establishing grades. This is done on the basis of the ranking list
and the scatter diagram in such a way that within each job family
clusters of jobs are obtained which are similar in terms of their
weight and level.
Before starting to analyse/compare a number of job evaluation meth-

ods we give some explanation of the aspects of these
analysis/comparisons. As noted before, this chapter presents a survey
of methods on the basis of respectively their ‘features’ and ‘charac-
teristics’, ‘factors’ and ‘aspects’, a model which in general can be
applied to all job evaluation methods. The four ‘main characteristics’
are :
Know-how
Problem solving
Area of responsibility
Working conditions
However, there are some methods that are quite difficult to fit into this
model. System-holders have rightly pointed out that what for their
methods is listed under ‘features’ for purposes of comparison is, in
fact, a typical ‘characteristic’. Other methods have grouped a number
of ‘characteristics’ or ‘factors’ under one collective term, without
giving a precise definition of that term. The profile of each method as
to its main characteristics, factors and aspects therefore needs some
explanation.
The starting point of the analyses model is the following model. A
characteristic of the method comprises one or more factors which in
their turn can be separated into aspects. An example:
Characteristic area/phenomenon under observation
eg job knowledge
eg problem sharing
features/perspectives/dimensions of
Factor
the main characteristic
eg complexity of knowledge
eg freedom to think
Aspect table entry or level
eg specialist knowledge
eg broadly defined
Most methods operate with matrix tables for each ‘characteristic’ in

which the horizontal and vertical axis have been named and defined.
These axis are called ‘factors’, which have different levels (or
degrees) and are what we call ‘aspects’. These levels, which constitute
the table entries (see Figure 3.1) are also defined separately.
FACTOR
CHARACTERISTIC
ASPECT
FACTOR
ASPECT
DEFINITION
Figure 3.1: Basic layout of a matrix table
As previously stated, this model cannot be used for all job evaluation
methods; occasionally the main characteristics have not been defined.
In order to obtain some insight into these methods the
indication/name preferred by the system-holder is given between
brackets, after the headings ‘characteristic’, ‘factor’ and ‘aspect’
The comparative profile gives a summary of the ‘features’ of
the job the method analyses, name of the ‘characteristics’ as used by
the system-holder, and the ‘factors/aspects’ for each characteristic.
This profile has been standardised to some extent in order to facili-
tate comparisons. All job evaluation methods discussed in this chap-
ter have been rearranged to fit in the set-up in Table 3.3. These
methods are:
Hay Hay Management Consultants

EFP Watson Wyatt
Framework Towers Perrin
Table 3.3 Analytical model for comparing job evaluation systems
Features Characteristics Factors/aspects
Know-how • Know-how/skills • Theoretical know-how/

experiences in the job
• Skills, experience in using
equipment, etc.
• Managerial aspects • Ability to organise people
and means
• Human relation skills • Different contacts
• Written communication
skills
Problem solving • Thinking framework • Freedom to think in

finding solutions for
problems
• Complexity • Analytical judgement
• Creativity • Thinking challenge
Areas of responsibility • Level of decision making • Freedom to act

• Magnitude • Project realisation
Inconveniences • Use of physical power

• Exertion
• Personnel risks
Note: If the characteristic is listed under more than one headings, this indicates that the
characteristic contains dimensions which fit several descriptions
The profile consists of the following elements:
The features. In order to perform the job the job-holder is required to

possess some knowledge/properties/skills necessary to solve the prob-
lems which occur within the job in order to achieve the intended
objectives which represent the responsibility of the job.
The characteristics. These are the elements which define the main
knowledge/properties/skills, but they also indicate what the method
has defined as main problems of the job and what constitutes the area
of responsibility. They also demonstrate how the method classifies the
various factors/aspects and assesses the interrelationships.
The factors/aspects give an impression of the degree of refinement
and detail of the method. More important they show what and how the
methods wants to ‘measure’ in a job.
3.2 HAY GUIDE CHARTS, HAY MANAGEMENT

CONSULTANTS
Table 3.4: Characteristics, factors/aspects of the Hay Guide Chart and
Profile Method
Know-how • Know-how • Technical know-how,

eg:
– advanced vocational
– basic professional
– seasoned professional
• Breadth of management
know-how, eg:
– activity
– heterogeneous
• Human relations skills
eg:
– important
Problem solving • Problem solving • Thinking environment –

freedom to think, eg:
– standardised
– clearly defined
• Thinking challenge, eg:
– patterned
– adaptive
Areas of responsibility • Accountability • Freedom to act, eg:

– regulated
– directed
• Area and type of impact,
eg:
– magnitude
Inconveniences – Physical effort and/

or strain
– Working environment
– Hazards
In the model of the comparative profile of methods on page 77 under

the heading ‘Characteristics’ the text ‘know-how/skills’ has been
put in a darkened box to indicate that this characteristic will be
elaborated according to ‘Factors’ (middle grey) and table entries or

‘Aspects’ (light grey).
Finally, we would like to point out that the profiles could only be
made in such detail thanks to the wholehearted co-operation of
system-holders by providing all system information.
Specific system information

System technique
No weights. The relative ‘weighing factors’ are implied in the
relative value of aspects.
For each level of ‘steps’ on the evaluation charts a definition and a
short explanation of the concept concerned is given.
Through the job profiles the method has a built-in check on the
results of the evaluation. In addition, the profiles provide useful
information on organisational interrelationships, the characteristic
of the job, etc.
Procedures/implementation
The Hay method considers the determination of the job levels as
being a responsibility of the management. The evaluating of jobs
(in the sense of attributing ‘value’ to jobs) is carried out by an
evaluation committee in which management, the personnel –
function on the basis of its functional responsibility – and repre-
sentatives of Hay participate to support and guide the process and
monitor the correct implementation of the method.
In the implementation process the Hay Group is responsible for the
application of the correct standards of the Hay method in view of
the external comparability. The support by the system-holder
during the maintenance phase also depends upon the skills and
competence of the company itself. The Hay Group recommends
performing an annual check on the standards being used. In any
case, the Hay Group itself will carry out such a check when the
company participates (each year) in the Hay Dynamic Pay Survey.
Tools/computer support
The Hay Group has developed several forms of computer aided
job evaluation under the collective name of HRXpert. Depending
upon the demands of the company these systems can be employed
with respect to:
speed/costs of the implementation/maintenance;

dynamics of change of the organisation/jobs
methods of format in which job characteristics must be achieved;
a standalone justification of remuneration. Alternatively, it may
be used as an integral part of the HRM system;
the degree of centralisation or decentralisation of job evaluation.
Characteristics Factors Aspects
Know-how
Definition
Know-how is the sum of every kind of knowledge, skill and expe-

rience required for standard acceptable job performance. It is the
fund of knowledge (however required) which is necessary for
meeting:
The requirement for know-how in practical procedures,
specialised techniques and professional disciplines
The requirement for know-how in integrating and harmonis-
ing the diverse elements involved in managerial situations.
This know-how may be exercised in an advisory capacity as
well as excessively. It involves combining to some degree the
elements of planning, organising, directing, controlling and
innovating and takes account of size, functional or organisa-
tional diversity, and time scale.
The requirement for know-how in working with and through
people (within or outside the organisation)
Guide Chart for Know-How

Planning, Organising, Controlling
Breadth of management know-how
0 I III
Technical Task Activity Heterogeneous
Know-how 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
A Primary 38 43 50 50 57 66 87 100 115
43 50 57 57 66 76 100 115 132
50 57 66 66 76 87 115 132 152
E Basic 152 175 200
Professional 175 200 230
200 230 264
Human relations skills
1. Basic 2. Important 3. Critical
Samples of definitions of: technical know-how:
A. Primary
Jobs requiring secondary education only; plus some working

indoctrination
Explanation of definition for A:
Jobs falling into this slot are extremely simple in nature, and can be
learned within a matter of several days/weeks. Little formal education
is required.
E. Basic professional
Jobs requiring sufficiency in technical, scientific or specialised

field based on understanding of concepts and principles
normally associated with a professional or academic
qualification or gained through a detailed grasp of involved
practices and procedures
Explanation of definition for E:
This slot is generally represented by basic college education or

advanced vocational skills strengthened by years of on the job experi-
ence. It relies on the job need to have a specialised body of knowledge
at the incumbent’s command, like engineering, personnel, production
management, underwriting, credit extension, etc.
Samples of definitions of breadth of managerial know-how
I Activity
Performance or supervision of work which is specific as to

objective and content with appropriate awareness of related
activities
Explanation of definition for I:
Covered by this category are all non-managerial positions, ie both

individual performers and supervisors.
III Heterogeneous
Operational or conceptual integration of functions which are

diverse in nature and in objective in an important management
area, or central co-ordination of a strategic function
Explanation of definition for III:
This category covers multi-functional managers. By multi-functional

we mean either:
1. managing at least two functional areas of an important nature and
size, or
2. diversity in the nature of the end results of each area is important,
and
3. focusing on competing requirements.
Samples of definitions of human relations skills
2 Important
Understanding, influencing and communication with people are

important but not overriding considerations
Explanation of definition for 2:
The HR skills are not overriding to the success of an assignment.

However, normal courtesy and effectiveness with people is just not
enough to carry the job. 2 HR skills involve interplay with subordi-
nates and superiors of a more critical nature. This slot is awarded to
positions that have to do some co-ordinating outside the incumbent’s
unit or company organisation.
Problem solving
Definition
Problem solving is the ‘self starting’ thinking required by the

job for analysing, evaluating, creating, reasoning, arriving at and
drawing conclusions. To the extent that thinking is circum-
scribed by standards or covered by precedents, or referred to
others, problem solving is diminished.
Problem solving has two dimensions:
The environment in which the thinking takes place
The challenge presented by thinking to be done
Guide chart for problem solving
Thinking challenge
2 3 5
Freedom to think Patterned Variable Uncharted
A Strict routine 14% 19%

16% 22%
F. Broadly defined 38% 66%

43% 76%
Samples of definitions of freedom to think
A. Strict routine
Thinking within detailed rules, instructions and/or rigid supervision
Explanation of definition for A:

Rules are very basic and instructions quite specific (mostly oral
orders). Example: ‘File only red copies’; dispatch mail on hand at 3
and 6 pm; mail according to class and weight rate schedule; sweep
hallway and return for further work.
F. Broadly defined
Thinking within broad policies and objectives, under general

direction
Explanation of definition for F:
The determination of the ‘what to do’ in applying broad policies to

solve the problem is largely left up to the incumbent. However, the
objectives themselves would tend to be stated specifically, ie attains a
10 per cent ROI.
Samples of definitions of thinking challenge
2. Patterned
Similar situations requiring solution by discriminating choice of

things learned
Here we are confronted with a mix and match situation. The majority
of non-exempt jobs are covered by this slot. Example: sorting 20 grey
balls into three shades of grey.
3. Variable
Differing situations requiring the identification and selection of

solutions through the application of acquired knowledge
Interpolative implies being confronted with a number of different

questions, each having several different answers to it. It is in other
words, a pick and choose situation. Decisions can still be made rather
rapidly based on prior knowledge or experience as opposed to fitting
a prescribed pattern, or the necessity to define the problem and solu-
tion more methodically.
Computer support
HRXpert is the software used with the Hay Guide Chart and Profile
Method. It can be required as a full system or in modules, with the
following utilities:
Work comparison/job evaluation (example displays already
shown);
performance management;
competency analyses;
comparison design and administration.
HRXpert is a decision-making support tool which enables organisa-

tions to address today’s HR issues: work comparison, compensation
administration, performance management, and human resources plan-
ning and development. As far as job evaluation is concerned the
following modules of HRXpert are of interest:
Chart
Chart provides you with on-line record keeping and reporting for Hay
Guide Chart evaluation and documentation. This module provides
you with:
a display-based Hay Guide Chart tailored for your organisation;

a data viewing tool providing you with the most relevant compar-
isons to other jobs or positions;
a documentation area to record position description data, evalua-
tion rationales, and other information;
an ability to evaluate jobs, positions, or individuals using multiple
work comparison models.
Some examples of displays are shown in Tables 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7:
Comparison
Comparison is a factor-based approach to evaluating work. The soft-
ware can complement any evaluation methodology which uses a set of
common factors for job or position evaluation. This approach facili-
tates the slotting of jobs, positions, or employees quickly against a
series of benchmarks based on direct comparisons for each factor
employed in the work comparison process. The use of an accepted and
comprehensive benchmark sample minimises subjectivity in assess-
ment. It helps to ensure consistency in evaluation as much as possible
through an easy and intuitive measurement process. Comparison
helps in:
quick evaluation with relevant job information readily available;
evaluation by line management with HR assistance, without a full
understanding of the Hay method.
decentralised evaluation of nonbenchmark positions.
Table 3.5: Evaluating know-how
Questionnaires
Hay designs tailor-made questionnaires to generate relevant job
or role information for various purposes, like defining pay levels,
supporting people development and person/job matching. This chap-
ter provides you with three examples of job size establishing question-
naires and one example of a mixed model. For establishing job
size Hay offers three approaches: ‘comparison’, ‘job family’ and
‘universal’.
Table 3.6: Comparing the job evaluation under consideration with
other (or selection of) job evaluations.
An example of a problem-solving scale:
Problem solving consists of the mental processes involved in thinking about work to be done
as well as the organisational constraints in which the thinking takes place
4. Instructions usually provide latitude to Telephone operator A
consider variations in the sequence of Receptionist/switchboard operator
procedures based on the situation at File clerk A
hand
5.
6. These jobs are confronted with multiple Payroll clerk A
choice situations and through prior General clerk A
exposure/experience have learned which Accounting clerk B
choice is the most appropriate solution
7.
Table 3.7: Comparison model to judge the validity of the score

for know-how
How is a Comparison questionnaire organised?

When a benchmark of jobs is evaluated with the Hay method of job
evaluation and profiling, subsequent jobs can then easily be slotted in
by focusing solely on know-how, problem solving and short profile.
The questionnaire can be used to ask line management to indicate the
requirement levels of know-how and problem solving and indicate the
correct short profile. Line management is supported in this task by
showing which jobs are already slotted in at a certain level, hence the
name ‘comparison’. An evaluation committee reviews outcomes to
ensure internal equity.
How is a Job-family questionnaire organised?

A job-family questionnaire focuses solely on a set of jobs that have
a common job purpose which can be fulfilled at several levels, eg
technicians.
A job family questionnaire may have a strong developmental focus:
aspiring technicians can see what the next step up the ladder looks
like. An example of questionnaire content is:
Job-family questions:
1. Technical knowledge and expertise
2. Technical diversity/breadth
3. Integration of technical disciplines
4. Knowledge transfer
5. Complexity of projects
6. People management
7. Communication
Generic questions:
8. Problem analysis
9. Level of thinking
10. Time frame
Impossible or unlikely combinations of answers can be flagged by
computer warnings.
An example of the knowledge transfer scale:
Select the item that best describes the degree to which the job is expected
to contribute to results through the transfer of knowledge
5. The job is responsible for communicating knowledge which impacts on

business operations and transfer of knowledge by teaching team
members on the job
6.
7. The job is a consulting resource in transferring technology to outside the

unit
8.
9. The job is responsible for organising and securing know-how transfer on

a large scale by developing the appropriate processes and programmes
for communication to ensure sustained/improved business results
How is a Universal questionnaire organised?

A universal questionnaire is also a tailor-made questionnaire, its
universal character being that it targets the entire job set of a
company. Its broad focus necessitates a larger number of questions.
The list below shows a possible table of content and what Hay job
evaluation factor the questions relate to:
Questionnaire item Hay job evaluation factor
1. Primary focus of my position Profile

2. Position objectives Freedom to act
3. Overall knowledge Know-how depth
4. Education and experience (minimum) Know-how depth
5. Communication and interpersonal skills Human relations skills
6. Customer service skills Human relations skills
7. Management and planning skills Know-how breadth
8. Organisation and integration of tasks Know-how breadth
9. Management responsibilities Human relations skills
Magnitude/impact
10. Functional/technical responsibilities Know-how depth
11. Training and development responsibilities Human relations skills
12. Judgement and problem-solving skills Problem-solving environment
13. Problem complexity Problem-solving challenge
14. Decision-making responsibilities Freedom to act
15. Direct influence Magnitude/impact
16. Indirect influence Magnitude/impact
Here again, impossible or unlikely combinations of answers can be

flagged by computer warnings.
An example of a management responsibilities scale:
Please read each statement below carefully and then select the one that best
describes the way that the position contributes to the management and perfor-
mance improvement of others. Please note that these statements are not ranked
in any order or hierarchy
1. I am accountable for the supervision of a group or team of permanent reports.

I assign work, monitor progress and ensure the quality and timeliness of
output
2. My role is project team leader or project manager. I have no permanent direct
reports but I am responsible for ensuring that project members understand the
work assigned and have sufficient resources available to meet their objectives.
Project members may include external consultants and/or contractors
3. Although there are no employees reporting directly to me, I am responsible for
helping, guiding and advising others. I may also provide on-the-job training
How is a Mixed model questionnaire organised?

A mixed model questionnaire integrates information necessary for
establishing job size as well as establising required levels of compe-
tences in order to match persons to jobs and to support personal
development. Added to the job family questions or universal ques-
tions are questions that capture competency levels. These may
include:
11. Influencing others

12. Sensitivity to people
13. Concern for quality
14. Getting results
15. Being flexible
16. Etc.
3.3 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK, TOWERS PERRIN
Table 3.8: Characteristics, factors/aspects of framework

(basic)
Know-how Knowledge and skills Tailor-made, designed for

Human relations r client
Problem solving Problem solving
Areas of Freedom to act See examples from the
responsibilities Accountabilities banking and retail industry

System technique
Framework is a ‘point factor’ job evaluation scheme customised

to client requirements.
Framework uses a tailored questionnaire to collect information on
the above factors.
Framework uses a computer system that stores questionnaire
responses and allows easy manipulation of the data for:
data checking;
calculating factor levels and points;
reporting results.
In the context of Framework the ‘characteristics’ (see Table 3.8

above) comprises a group of wider elements in the sense that there
are no ‘fixed’ or well-defined characteristics that can be split into
the same factors/aspects. Examples of a tailor-made application
are shown in Tables 3.9 and 3.10:
Table 3.9: Example of Framework set-up for a financial organisation
Know-how knowledge and skills A education,

A experience, skills,
A knowledge and
A expertise
resource responsibility F direct reports
F (number and nature
F of responsibility)
F projected/ad-hoc
F teams
contacts C external level and

C nature
C internal level and
C nature
Problem solving problem solving B complexity of

B problems
Areas of freedom of action D freedom of action

responsibility
accountabilities E accountability for
E managing projects
E and processes
resource responsibility F financial
impact G internal
G external and
G business impact
Table 3.10: Example of Framework set-up for a retail organisation
Know-how professional/technical 1A education and

skills and knowledge experience
1B: level of expertise
1C: specific job skills
management 5A: number of employees

responsibilities 5B: level of responsibility
for staff
communications 4A: external
communications
Problem solving work complexity 2A: problem solving

2B: independence and
initiative
Areas of decision making 3A: job’s own decisions

responsibility
3B: advising other’s
decisions
management 5C: level of financial

responsibilities responsibility
5D: nature of financial
responsibility
business impact 6A: potential positive

impact
6B: potential negative
impact
Procedures are established after consultation and in collaboration
with the organisation. Securing a maximum involvement of the
employees concerned and if possible of worker representatives is
considered advisable as it increases the acceptance and support.
Each characteristic in the job evaluation scheme can be broken
down into its factors/aspects and each of these factors/aspects is
broken down into questions for the questionnaire. For each job
being evaluated, the system uses the responses to each of these
specific questions and determines the factor level required.
Information on jobs can be collected through questionnaires or
structured interviews, depending on the situation and agreed
process for the job evaluation exercise.
The basis of the scoring process is provided by one or a combina-

tion of the following items which have been chosen in consulta-
tion with the client:
multiple regression against a reference rank order of bench-
mark jobs which is agreed with the client;
using Towers Perrin’s knowledge of typical distributions of
weighting within schemes;
agreeing an initial set of weights with the client based on the
perceived importance of the various factors;
starting from a basis of equal weighting for each factor and
then trying alternative models to better reflect the relative
importance of the various factors.
Modelling is made easy through the Framework software.
Processing the completed questionnaires is fully automated.
Framework software is a complete package for job evaluation,

competencies and remuneration.
An extensive report generator is available, providing a range of
standard reports and the facility to create tailor-made reports.
With this generator summaries can be made that provide insight
into the interrelationships and consistency of the evaluation of
jobs.
Samples of questionnaires, from different organisations, designed

after consultation with the client (including samples of Response
Tables):
Knowledge and skills

A. Level of formal/academic training
Consider the levels of education and qualifications required for this
job:
1. What is the minimum essential level of qualification?

2. What is the desirable or optimum level of qualification?
Response Table A
A PhD or equivalent
B
C
D
E Three to five GCSEs or equivalent/NVO level 2
F One to two GCSEs or equivalent/NVO level 1
G
H
B. Job-related experience and training
Now consider the period of prior, relevant work experience and neces-
sary on-the-job training:
3. What is the minimum necessary total period of prior experience

and training?
4. What is the desirable or optimum total period of prior experience
and training?
Response Table B
A More than 5 years
B
C 7–12 months
D
E Less than 1 month
Knowledge and skills

C. Level of proficiency
This section focuses on the level of proficiency required to success-
fully hold the position being evaluated.
Determine a position’s level of proficiency by matching the job
family’s career progression to Response Table B. The entry-level posi-
tion in the job family (eg Junior Accountant) would normally be a
level ‘E’, Junior Practitioner, but may be at a level ‘F’,
Apprentice/Trainee.
Supervisory and subordinate positions may have the same level of
proficiency; do not automatically give a higher response to the super-
visor.
This question is intended to capture technical expertise, not man-
agerial authority. This is considered elsewhere in the questionnaire.
While general management is sometimes considered a job family,

this will not be appropriate for determining the level of proficiency
since these positions are normally attained only after considerable
experience in a functional area such as marketing, production or
finance. The level of proficiency for a General Manager should be
determined within the context of a normal career progression leading
to the general management position.
This question is concerned with technical expertise, and not
managerial authority. The recognised expert will be that person who is
regarded as having the greatest technical knowledge in a particular
area – not necessarily the manager of that area.
5. Within the position family, this position requires the following
demonstrated level of proficiency.
Response Table C
A Leading expert – acts as final source of expertise over a major portion of

the organisation, or external to the organisation
B
C
D Practitioner – works independently on assignments of standard difficulty
for the vocation, profession, trade or craft
E
F Apprentice/Trainee – work assignments provide training and
development
D. Physical/operational skills
6. Select a statement from A to E in Response Table D which best

describes the physical/operational skills needed for your job.
Response Table D
A Physical skills may be used, but little training is required

B
C
D
E High levels of dexterity and physical skills are needed to interpret
programme operational requirements in environments that require speed,
accuracy, adaptation and reaction to rapidly changing circumstances
Problem solving
E. Fact-finding and analyses
Fact-finding and analyses may compromise a very small or very large

part of a job. The statements in this section seek to establish the
degree of fact-finding and analyses required as well as its nature.
This section requires the use of response ‘A’ once only. To facilitate
completion of this section, find the statements that match response ‘A’
first. Then use the other responses as appropriate; responses ‘B’, ‘C’
and ‘D’ may be used more than once.
For each of the statements below (7 to 11), select from Response
Table E the level appropriate for this job.
7. Problems are comparatively familiar and well-defined, and

primarily focused on a specific work function. Typically a number
of possible solutions are apparent, based mainly on precedents
and/or established processes
8.
9.
10. Problems are complex and may affect many business units.
Problem-solving complexity may result from: either: the variable
and diverse nature of problems encountered in rapidly changing
situations or: the fundamental, in-depth and long-term nature of a
range of specialist problems.
11. Problems are highly complex and cover a very wide range of
issues across the company. Problem solving typically requires a
thorough understanding of complex and interrelated business
issues across the organisation.
Response Table E
A Most applicable
B Applicable on many occasions
C Applicable on a few occasions
D Rarely or never applicable
F. Innovation and initiative

This section seeks information about the job’s responsibility for inno-
vative thinking. Many jobs do not demand any innovative thinking,
but some do. For example, any job that requires an individual to
design new products or methods, write informational technical pub-
lications, perform research in previously unexamined areas or find
new ways of making money requires innovative thinking. These

examples have a common feature: the absence of guides or proce-
dures to follow.
One of the four statements must be rated ‘A’, with ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’
used as often as appropriate.
One of the following four statements must be rated ‘A’. Read all
four statements, select the one most important to the position and
mark that statement as ‘A’. Responses ‘B’, ‘C’ or ‘D’ may be used
more than once.
12. Some creative thinking needed to vary or adapt standard pro-
cedures to meet different circumstances.
13.
14.
15. Creative thinking is a fundamental requirement for realisation of
broadly specified briefs. May also be required to investigate
and instigate new ways of enhancing and improving existing
techniques.
16. Innovation and original thinking required to originate or develop
new theories, principles, concepts and policies and their appli-
cation.
Response Table F
A Most applicable
Another example of a questionnaire:

Factor 1 – Professional/technical skills and knowledge
Factor 2 – Work complexity
2B: Independence and initiative

This section considers the requirements to act independently and to
display personal initiative in the job. It considers both the degree and
nature of independence. Is the job largely driven by procedures and
precedents, in which case an ‘A’ response at Q18 or 19 would be
required? Or is it one in which creativity and individual initiative
constantly has to be applied, a job with the purpose of coming up with
new ideas and approaches, which would lead to an ‘A’ response at
Q22 or, exceptionally Q23?
Remember that the ‘A’ response must be used only once, and the
‘B’ response no more than twice. Examples of a benchmark job scor-
ing an A at Q23 would be Store Manager I, and the A at Q22 would be
Store Manager II.
Consider the requirement for independent action and the use of
initiative in effectively addressing the activities, issues and problems
which arise in the job.
Allocate response ‘A’ to the level of independence and initiative
described below in questions 18 to 23 which is most applicable to the
job. Use this response only once.
Then allocate response ‘B’ to the level(s) which are important but
not predominant features of the independence and initiative required
by the job-holder. Use this response no more than twice.
Finally, allocate responses ‘C’ and ‘D’ to the other levels as
appropriate.
Q18 Work requires accurate adherence to established practices and

procedures and is subject to close external guidance. There is no or
little requirement for individual initiative or judgement
Q19
Q20 Work follows precedent and procedures in the main and external
guidance is available. Some use of initiative is required, for example
in tailoring work practices and in responding to unexpected circum-
stances
Q21 Guidelines exist but there is a fair degree of operational indepen-
dence. Regular use of initiative is required, for example in the
development of improved work methods, and enhancing existing
operations, affecting the job-holder and possibly colleagues
Q22
Q23 The job, to a large extent, is independent and self-driven within broad
policy guidelines, and only results are reviewed. High levels of initia-
tive and creativity are essential, for example in implementing new
business policies and approaches, and developing new ideas to
achieve broad business goals
Response Table
Independence and initiative
A The predominant requirement for independence and initiative which is

most applicable to the job (use this response only once)
B A secondary significant but not predominant aspect of the initiative and
independence required in the job (use this response no more than twice)
C An occasional level of independence and initiative required
D Not required or a rare insignificant level of independence and initiative in
the job
Example of a financial organisation:

(In this example problem solving is designed in a way that meets the
needs in a financial organisation.)
B: Problem solving
1. Consider the complexity of problems which the job has to deal with.
2. For each of the questions below, select a response from the Response
table which is most appropriate to the job.
3. Use responses A and B once only (do not use B at all if it does not apply
to this job)
4. Use responses A and B once only (do not use B at all if it does not apply
to this job). You may use responses C and D as often as required
5. Please complete all the boxes.
Original thinking and creativity

Q10 The job requires clear instructions to be followed with limited scope for
individual initiative, original thought or action
Q11
Q12 Creative thinking is required to develop new or improved solutions to a
limited range of problems or to parts of existing processes and proce-
dures
Q13 Creative thinking is required to develop new or improved solutions or
working methods across a range of diverse circumstances or to change
existing processes and procedures
Q14
Q15 High levels of innovation and original thinking required. Work involves
developing new concepts and theories in areas with potentially wide appli-
cation in the organisation and/or externally, for example in new policy
development, or addressing unique, complex and intractable operational
issues
Response Table: Problem

solving
A Most applicable to this job
Factor 3 – Decision making
Factor 4 – Communications
Example of a retail organisation
This factor is concerned with the nature of the communications and

contacts which the job-holder has with people inside and outside the
organisation in order to carry out their job effectively. It includes all
business-related communication or interaction, whether connected
face-to-face, by telephone or in writing, which is relevant to the job. It
considers the nature of contacts and the communication skills required
in relation to external audiences and groups on this page, and internal
staff overleaf. When responding to all questions, remember to:
exclude from consideration any purely incidental, non-business

related contacts, for example in lunch breaks;
also exclude general contacts which are desirable but not essential
to effective job performance, such as certain staff being encour-
aged to walk around and ‘be seen’ by customers;
exclude also contacts with the job’s immediate superior and
subordinates, which are considered under other factors.
In the statements a relationship is defined as being a contact over an
extended period of time.
4A: External communications
4B: Internal communications
Factor 5 – Managerial responsibilities
5A: Number of employees
5B Level of responsibilities for staff
5C Level of financial responsibilities
5D Nature of financial responsibilities

Factor 6 – Business impact
6A Potential positive impact
6B Potential negative impact
The result of the evaluation, after completion of the questionnaire

by different judges, like the superior, the evaluation committee, the
incumbent, is given in Table 3.11 below.
Table 3.11: Sample of an evaluation using Framework
Job: PA44 Publicity Officer Structure: Operations

Grade: Op 8
Profile number S I C M D Profile number 1* 2 3
1. Communicating ideas C E E E 2 Accountabilities 170 259 268

2. Services and advice C D E 2 Human relations 56 89 75
3. Financial resources A B C 2 Problem solving 135 166 170
4. Physical resources B D B B 2 Freedom to act 27 38 38
5. Supervision of staff B A A A 1 Impact 27 44 38
Knowledge and skills 91 217 172
10. Problem solving B B D B 2
Total points 560 813 761
Profiler:
12. Amount of freedom C C D C 1 1 = Supervisor
2 = Committee
13. Internal impact D D C D 1 3 = Incumbent
14. External impact E E D E 1
Key:
S = Supervisor M = Mode
C = Committee I = Incumbent
D = Deviation
* = Authorised profile
The so-called ‘up-down comparator’ is another check that can be

made on how to respond to one job to others in the same job family.
Each column of responses on the report represents the responses
from separate jobs. The first column is the job which the position
under review is being supervised by; the second is the job under
review; the remaining columns relate to subordinates of the job-
holder.
The first column shows the question name. Where the questions are
underlined, it means that there is an unusual relationship between the

responses for the job under review and those of the manager and/or
subordinates. Typically, it means that the job-holder has responses at a
lower level than his/her subordinates, or higher than his/her manager.
The final section compares the ‘factor’ points across the jobs being
compared. This enables the user to identify the factors that are valued
differently between the jobs. So, the up-down comparator is a useful
tool for designing new jobs to fit within the existing job hierarchy or
to examine anomalies in job design.
Table 3.12 Second sample evaluation
Selected Senior Publicity Officer reports to Chief Publicity Officer

Job:
Job: Profile
PA28 Chief publicity officer *1 Analyst
PB36 Senior publicity officer *1 Supervisor
PA44 Publicity officer *1 Supervisor
Questions PA PB PA Factor points PA PB PA

28 36 44 28 36 44
1 1 1
1. Communicating ideas E D C Accountabilities 283 220 170

2. Services and advice D D C Human relations 77 60 56
3. Financial resources C A A Problem solving 146 141 135
4. Physical resources C B B Freedom to act 38 38 27
5A Supervision of staff D C B Impact 50 33 27
5B Number of staff D B B Knowledge and skills 154 145 91
6A Supervision –ad hoc teams A A B
6B Number involved A A B Total 748 637 506
7A Contacts – own department C C B
7B Contacts – other areas F C C
7C Contacts – trade unions A A A
8A Contacts – public B B C
10B Problem solving C C B

10C PS – Influenced by precedent A A A
11B CT – Limited problems B B C
11E Innovative D D D
14 External Impact E D E
Key:
* = Authorised profile
The following pages will show a number of displays to give more

insight of the design of the Framework software
Table 3.13: Framework: Available reports.
This display shows the various reports that are available (as illustrated in the
‘sampler’). Organisations can develop their own reports using the ‘Quest’
report writer tool.
Table 3.14: Framework: Factor points and job profile.

This just shows the two main areas in which data is held (‘Jobs and Profiles’).
Job profiles can be challenged to look for inconsistent responses.
Only one profile can be the ‘Master’ profile for the job, even if multiple
profiles are recorded.
Table 3.15: Framework: Adding or amending job profiles.

This is the display where job profiles are added or amended. It tells you
what type of response is required (eg alphabetic, numeric). It allows very
quick analyses of profile changes by using the ‘what if’ function. Out of
range answers are flagged up by the system as data is entered.
Table 3.16: Framework: Actual and proposed salary structures.

This is where actual and proposed salary structures can be entered.
Organisations can then produce graphs showing salary structure against best
fit line of job evaluation points and actual/market salaries. Also costing
reports can be produced showing the cost of bringing job-holders up to the
minumum of the proposed ranges.
Table 3.17: Framework: Summary of total points.

Shows some of the basic information held on jobs. Drop down menus
enable you to identify which division/department the job belongs to, which
salary structure to allocate the job to. Evaluated and actual information is
held to allow for the possibility of ‘red circle’ jobs
3.4 EUROPEAN FACTOR PLAN (EFP), WATSON WYATT

Table 3.18: Characteristics, factors/aspects of EFP

Know-how knowledge/skill Job knowledge
– level of knowledge
– complexity of knowledge
– training and experience
– specific qualifications for the job
– specialist knowledge
– keeping up to date/learning (3–6 levels)
Business expertise
– level of knowledge
– scope of knowledge
– understanding of the company
– knowledge of the market
– language knowledge (3–6 levels)
social skills Interpersonal contacts
– internal
– external
– contact with people within and outside the
company
– verbal communication skills
– written communication skills
– maintaining business relations
– skills in negotiation and persuasion
(3–7 levels)
physical demands Eye-hand co-ordination
degree of eye-hand coordination (from 3 levels)
Problem solving problem-solving Type of problems/situations
capacity Complexity of problems/situations
– type of problem situations
– creativity and innovation
– experience and tradition
– nature of management received (3–6 levels)
Areas of responsibility responsibility for Nature (sort) of responsibilities
business resources Scope of responsibilities
– responsibility for people
– supervisory activities
– type and scope of financial responsibility
– monitoring standards and values (4–8 levels)
influence on the Nature of influence
company Area of influence
– decision-making authority
– decision level
– time perspective
– evaluation and management of business risks
– type of influence on final results
– area of influence on final results
Inconveniences circumstances and – possible risks (from three levels)
physical demands – demands in respect of travelling (from three
levels)
System technique
Central to the EFP method is the allocation of values to ‘factors’

or aspects. As a result, a different ‘weighting’ per factor is
obtained, which can be compared with assessment factors. The
difference in the allocated ‘weighting’ per factor should, in the
opinion of Watson Wyatt, be related to the strategic objectives of
the organisation. By employing this approach, the system
manager wishes to tailor the system to company-specific charac-
teristics and developments, and to generate a job structure which
closely reflects the internal relationships. This final point is
achieved by Watson Wyatt by relating the ‘weighting’ per factor
to the opinion/attitudes of local management.
The method employs simple tables.
Watson Wyatt works with structured questionnaires, which relate

to the factors of the method. These questionnaires are completed
by the job-holders themselves. Answers are processed in the
computer.
The questionnaire is geared specifically to the characteristics of
the organisation, and contains structured questions which can be
answered by each job-holder. The questionnaires can be specifi-
cally prepared for each organisation component or job family.
The answers from the questionnaires are processed in the

computer, and checked for consistency.
REWARD is the automated system employed by the system-holder,
and consists of multiple modules. REWARD covers the entire
procedure from job analysis through to market comparison and
budgeting.
Characteristics Factors Aspects

Job knowledge
Definition:
Knowledge concerning job-related activities
Explanation:
This factor measures the demands imposed by the job in respect of

knowledge concerning job-related tasks and activities. The factor is
measured across a hierarchy of tasks, which ranges from the knowl-
edge of tasks through to the ‘theory and practice of more than one
specialisation’. Within this factor, the subject area relates to ‘technical
skill or expertise’, in so far as these aspects do not relate to ‘business
expertise’.
Table 3.19: Classification table for job knowledge
Level Level definitions
1 The job requires knowledge of a limited number of tasks specific to

the work of the unit/the team
2
3 The job requires pure understanding of the principles and concepts
relating to the job-holder’s own area of knowledge/specialisation,
and the practical knowledge of various related subject areas. This
knowledge can be acquired by training or accruing considerable
experience
4
5 The job requires broad and extensive understanding of all or practi-
cally all job/subject areas relevant to the company
Business expertise
Definition:
Knowledge of the organisation, and the market in which the

organisation operates
Explanation:
This factor measures the demand arising from the job in respect of
knowledge concerning the organisation and the market in which the
organisation operates. This knowledge is measured across a hierarchy
of knowledge which ranges from knowledge of the job-holder’s own
department to knowledge of the overall business sector within which
the organisation operates.
Table 3.20: Classification table for business expertise
1 The job requires little knowledge of or understanding of the way

in which the specifically allocated tasks relate to the work of the
department, or the company as a whole
2
3 The job requires a complete understanding of the way in which
the own unit interacts with all or practically all other units, and
how they support objectives within the company. The job also
requires some understanding of the business sector within
which the company operates
4
5
6 The job requires extensive understanding of the entire company
and the business sectors, and a broad knowledge of other busi-
ness sectors, including a complete understanding of economic,
commercial and political questions which affect the business
sector within which the company is active
Problem-solving capacity
Definition:
Analytical skills necessary for playing a specific role
Explanation:
This factor measures the problem level and the type of ‘problem solu-
tion’ required in the job.
Table 3.21: Classification table for problem-solving capacity
1 The job consists of tasks and obligations, which may encompass

the direct passing on of information. The job-holder employs specific
techniques or methods for the implementation of tasks, and for solv-
ing clearly defined elementary problems. More complex problems
are passed on to others
2
3 The job covers an area of activities, which in the first instance require
factual assessment, based on observation of the situation/analysis
of the information. The problems may be identified by others, but in
general further clarification is necessary before suitable action can
be undertaken. The job-holder is expected to select the best possi-
ble solution for coping with the situation
4
5
6 The job requires the use of conceptual skills and vision, with a view
to identifying crucial questions, ordering them according to priority,
and anticipating problems, so that solutions can be offered. This
calls for the use of increasingly abstract conceptual and intellectual
skills, for developing and determining strategies, in an uncertain
environment
Watson Wyatt, European Factor Plan EFP questionnaires

From the point of view of Watson Wyatt, the questionnaire occupies
an important position in the collation of relevant job information and
evaluation. The questionnaire replaces the traditional job description.
Against this background, as examples, what follows are sections from
the questionnaire as developed by Watson Wyatt for a specific organi-
sation. An important point of departure in the EFP method is that the
job-holder completes the questionnaire. After all, the job-holder is the
best person to know about the actual content of the job. The informa-
tion is processed using the computer programme REWARD, developed
by Watson Wyatt.
The questionnaire starts with general information concerning the
job, the job-holder, and a general introduction containing instructions
for the use of the questionnaire. A detailed table of contents
completes the start of this questionnaire.
The first question focuses on gaining an understanding of the

primary objective of the job.
The general section then continues with use of time, which provides
a picture of the time spent on the most important responsibilities.
Table 3.22: Time spent on most important responsibilities
Most important Estimate of time (to Main activities within

responsibilities nearest 5%) each field
1 % 1
2 % 2
3 % 3
4 % 4
5 % 5
= 100%
Subsequently, an indication is given of the location within the organ-

isation, in the form of an organisation chart, which provides horizon-
tal and vertical line information. The following example gives an
impression.
Table 3.23: Sample organisation chart
Manager of next level
Immediate manager
Other jobs Your job Job relations

reporting within in the
the organisation organisation
Immediate subordinates
Other subordinates
The questionnaire then deals with questions more specifically

targeted at the various factors of the method. In this procedure, the
model whereby explanation is given on the left, of the question which
appears on the right of the form, is followed.
As already mentioned, the questions are harmonised with the auto-
mated processing procedure in the REWARD software program.
A. Knowledge and business expertise

A1. Education and experience
This section asks about the minimum knowledge necessary for the
job. The knowledge can be acquired by various combinations of
education, training and experience.
Official education stands for formal certificates. Experience in
relation to the job stands for the total volume of relevant experience
accrued within or outside the organisation.
Specific vocational qualifications necessary for the job are then
listed.
Question:
Circle one letter-number combination which relates most closely

to your job; remember that the answer should represent the
minimum job requirements, and not your personal profile.
When answering this question, use the following definitions:

Definitions:
Minimum required official knowledge: the normal level of basic education demanded in a recruitment
advertisement.
Examples of the levels of education specified in A1 are:
– Level A: Junior General Secondary Education – Junior Secondary Vocational Education:
Secondary Technical Education/
Junior Secondary Service Education
– Level B: Senior Secondary General Education – Senior Secondary Vocational Education:
Senior Secondary Technical Education/
Senior Secondary Commercial Education
– Level C: Pre-university Education – Higher Vocational Education:
Higher Technical Education/
Higher Commercial Education
– Level D: University graduate
– Level E: University post-graduate
Cumulative experience in relation to the job:
All experience (also accrued in previous jobs within or outside the organisation) necessary for func-
tioning well in your current position.
Minimum required official Minimum cumulative experience in relation

education to the job
0–6 From More
months 1 to 2 than 10
required years years
Basic skills in a number A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6

of practical subjects
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6
Ability in a technical C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
subject at an advanced rate
Understanding of theories, D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
principles and techniques
in one or more technical,
professional or academic
fields
E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6
A2. Specific qualifications for the job
Question a:
Please mark any additional professional diplomas and/or certifi-

cates necessary for the job. Please differentiate between ‘vital’
(V) and ‘desirable’ (D) qualifications
Answer a:
V D
Tick only applicable boxes
1. No vocational diplomas and/or certificates 1

2. 2
3. 3
4. Advanced management courses 4
5. Advanced technical vocational diplomas/certificates 5
6. 6
7. Specialist post-doctorate qualification 7
8. Membership of a professional association, if
professionally desirable. 8
9. 9
A3. Specialist knowledge
This question deals with the specialist knowledge required for

appointment to the job.
Question:
Please tick one box which best describes the minimum knowledge
required within your job
Definitions:
General knowledge
– For jobs at this level, a general awareness of the basic principles of the
subject area is required
Practical knowledge
Broad-based knowledge
– For jobs at this level, a factual understanding of the principles of the
subject area is required, to enable the job-holder to apply this knowledge
in the majority of situations
Extensive knowledge
Definitions:
Specialist fields cover sections of subject areas or technical areas, for

example:
– production preparation
– credit administration
– salary administration
A professional discipline covers a complete group of specialist fields or

technical areas, such as:
– financial management
– human resources
– information technology
Answer:
Please tick
only one box
1. General knowledge of one or more specialist fields 1

and/or broad-based knowledge in the field of administration
or service provision
2. 2
3. Broad-based knowledge of one or more specialist fields 3
4. 4
5. Extensive knowledge of one or more specialist fields 5
6. 6
7. Extensive knowledge of more than one professional discipline 7
A4. Keeping up to date

This question deals with the rate at which and degree to which essen-
tial knowledge necessary for occupying this position is subject to
change, and what resources are available within the job, for in-service
training and updating specialist knowledge.
Question:
Please tick the box which best describes the requirements

for the job
Answer:
To keep up to date in the professional field Please tick

only one box
1. Structural changes are dealt with during in-service 1

courses, at work
2. 2
3. 3
4. It is necessary to read and/or study regularly a wide range of
journals, professional and technical information material,
and to follow training courses 4
5. 5
A5. Understanding of own organisation

According to the question below, the following information is
solicited: what degree of understanding of the various business activi-
ties within the job-holder’s own organisation is required of the job-
holder?
Question a: Practical knowledge
Question b: Detailed understanding
Definitions:
Practical knowledge means that you have a reasonable overview of the

business processes, the procedures to be followed, and principles and
questions which arise.
Detailed understanding means that you have a complete understanding of
the business processes, procedures followed and principles/questions
which arise.
World scale relates to the geographical region within which the organisation
is active. For example, Europe is a world scale.
Below is a series of questions, set in the same manner as A1 to A4.
A6. Knowledge of the market

These questions relate to the level of ‘market knowledge’ required for
fulfilling your job.
Question:
According to the scales below, indicate the required depth and

breadth of knowledge required. Depth indicates the level of
knowledge and expertise intended. Breadth relates to the area or
field of knowledge
Depth scale Breadth scale
1. Not necessary No knowledge required 1. Not applicable
2. General 2.
3. Practical Sound understnding is necessary. 3.

This level of knowledge is used
for solving day-to-day problems,
and for responding to questions
typical of daily practice, and
makes the routine implementation
of the job possible
4. Broad 4. Knowledge of
4 different elements
4 within this category.
4 Knowledge of all
4 elements within the
4 category
5. Extensive Extensive understanding is 5.

required. This level of knowledge
serves as a source of expertise
for others within the organisation
Answer
Depth (one type of Category Breadth (various types

knowledge) of knowledge)
Clients
1 2 3 4 5 Local/national 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 5 International 1 2 3 4
Competitors
1 2 3 4 5 Local/national 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 5 International 1 2 3 4
Then follows a table concerning product knowledge.
A7. Language knowledge
B. Problem situations
The following questions relate to situations which may occur within
your work. Problems should therefore be seen as problem situations
which arise within your work.
Name three important problem situations Are there instructions or

in your job procedures for solving
these problem situations?
1 yes no
2 yes no
3 yes no
If you ticked ‘no’: indicate in the table below what action you will
take:
1. Consult with manager For problem number 1 2 3

2. Consult with colleagues/
fellow employees For problem number 1 2 3
3. Consult manuals For problem number 1 2 3
4. Develop own solution For problem number 1 2 3
(circle the applicable number)
Explanatory note:
In this section, the participant must be aware that, as in every

organisation, the majority of tasks are extremely routine
in nature
Definitions:
‘Problems’ within this context relate to questions, difficulties

and highly demanding technical situations. (These need not
necessarily be seen as negative.)
B1. Situation types

B2. Situation description
B3. Creativity and innovation
This question relates to ideas and improvements affecting products,
techniques, services, procedures or policy areas within the organisa-
tion. The question asks whether it is necessary, in the job, to establish
and/or introduce improvements or ideas.
Question:
According to the relevant figures (1, 2), please indicate the

answer which:
1 = is the most applicable
2 = is less applicable
Answer:
The job requires 1 = most applicable

2 = less applicable
1. 1
2. That I look for better methods for carrying 2
out the work; however, I can normally introduce
the majority of changes without approval from a
senior employee
3. 3
4. The development and/or use of ideas from 4
others for producing new knowledge, quality
products/services, new markets, new techniques
or new procedures/policy areas
5. 5
B4. Experience and tradition

B5. Nature of management received
C. Responsibility for company resources
D. Social skills
E. Physical demands and conditions
F. Influence
REWARD is the automated system, covering the entire procedure from
job evaluation through the market comparison and budgeting.
The major system components are:
Setup parameters Data

(eg System, Market, Job, Organisation Employee Job
levels, Labels, Security, Import/export Salary structure
specifications) Market (optional use)*
Questionnaire (optional use)*
REWARD
Reporting features Job descriptions

Standard reports
Standard graphs
Ad hoc reports (access required)
The Market Data module is a standard system feature. The term

optional indicates that you can use the market-based or questionnaire-
based job evaluation approach.
The following computer screens (see Tables 3.24 – 3.32) show how
REWARD supports the EFP. In addition, note that like the approaches of
other consultancies, REWARD provides an integrated system to link the
results of job evaluation to:
data on employees;
information on remuneration, both at the level of the individual
and at the level of pay policy;
compensation information, including history;
performance evaluation information;
information on market rates;
results of job evaluation.
The system opens with the main menu from which one of the above
modules can be chosen. The following displays are restricted to the
recording of the data from the job evaluation. After the opening
display of EFP for each characteristic a separate display can be
opened which gives entrance to the supporting displays (help
displays) containing the definition of the table entries.
Table 3.24: Main Menu
By choosing the number of the desired level the evaluation (scheme)

is activated. As an example the supporting displays for the factors A
(functional knowledge), D (problem solving) and G (interpersonal
skills) are shown.
Table 3.25: Selecting factors

Table 3.26: Definition of aspects of factor A

(functional knowledge)
Table 3.27: Definition of aspects of factor D (problem solving)

Table 3.28: Evaluating job impact (areas of influence
and time-scale)
Table 3.29: Evaluating contacts

Table 3.30: Logic checks and reporting

Table 3.31: Comparison of answers

Table 3.32: Comparison of job evaluations (report)
In addition, REWARD includes modules for developing/adjusting a

salary structure. Watson Wyatt calls this the Easy Salary Structure
Analyses.
During the analyses these modules make it possible:
to compare different salary structures;

to compare an existing and a proposed salary structure;
to adjust grades and salary ranges.
4
Salary structures
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The concept of ‘pay’ or remuneration consists of two elements: the
pay policy and the technical instruments to design and implement this
policy. The pay policy in its turn consists of the total packet of
primary, secondary and tertiary benefits and other conditions of
employment which constitute the (monetary) reward for the employ-
ee’s performance.
The most important primary employment condition is defined by
the salary structure of the organisation. That condition constitutes the
main subject of this chapter. A salary structure is a coherent entity of
figures (monetary amounts of salaries) which settles the individual
pay according to fixed proportions (the salary scale) and determines
the relationships in pay between jobs and job-holders within an
organisational unit. The whole structure must be competitive to the
environment (the external labour market) with which the organisation
compares itself. These relations between salaries are determined by:
– the type of organisation with respect to both structure and culture;
– the competition in the labour market;
– the relationship between salaries and benefits;
– the extent of the scales (the desired difference/distance in pay
between the highest and lowest jobs).
In determining salaries and salary structures an organisation needs to
comply with the relevant laws and regulations. Examples of such
regulations are the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Equal Pay (Amendment)
Regulations 1983, the Treaty of Rome, Article 119, the EC Directives
on Equal Pay and Equal Treatment, domestic case law and judgments
in the European Court of Justice, as well as the Sex Discrimination
Act 1975. Recently the EU Commission published A code of Practice
on the Implementation of Equal Pay for Work of Equal Value for
Women and Men (COM96 336).
Salary structures 135
Of course, the salary structure must comply with the law and regu-
lations. In addition, it is sensible to take into account any possible
changes in government. Until now the legislator has refrained from
formally allowing, or regulating the influence of, or participation of
workers’ representatives in implementing job evaluation systems, pay
policy and formal guarantees for the pay level of, for example, young
employees. In other member states of the European Union such issues
are usually regulated by law, which has important consequences for
the entire remuneration process and for the roles of the various play-
ers. To illustrate this a summary of how such issues have been settled
on the continent has been included in the Appendices. These may
provide a starting point or a model for future negotiations between
employers and workers’ representatives and possibly government.
These may also serve as examples of how to initiate and direct
processes concerning the implementation of job evaluation methods
and salary structures which are based on methods in an organisation.
In this way a maximum degree of acceptance of the policy by employ-
ees would be ensured.
As is the case in several European countries, a future government
might institute specific regulations on the remuneration of your
employees. As a basis for pay negotiation in industries and individual
organisations it could establish standards for the relationships
between the pay of young employees and fully trained and mature
employees. On the one hand such regulations may protect young
employees against unfair treatment. On the other hand they may –
within the context of government employment programmes – provide
opportunities for young persons to enter employment because their
salary levels are in accordance with their productivity. Such consider-
ations are inspired by what is considered to be socially acceptable as
well as by economic factors.
It will be obvious that the salary structure of a large retail chain
will have a different design from that of a high-tech company. Also,
local conditions may play a considerable role, especially at the level
of operational jobs.
An insight into the existing salary structure can be obtained
through a careful examination/analysis of:
ᔢ the motives, constraints and circumstances that resulted in the
present structure;
ᔢ technical aspects such as: number of grades, slope of the salary
curve, extent of the grades, relationships between minimum and
maximum salaries, etc;
ᔢ characteristics of the structure, such as its rigidity or flexibility;

ᔢ the relationship between salary and benefits, between fixed and
variable pay, between the weight of the function and pay. (See also
discussion on the constraints of a pay policy in section 1.3.2 and
the ‘checklist on remuneration issues’ at the end of the present
chapter.)
The formal set-up of the salary structure, the salary scale, can best
be illustrated by Figure 4.1. The rectangles represent the grades which
constitute the total salary scale. The upward sloping line represents
the primary relationship between the various grades as determined by
the pay policy. The developmental stages within a salary structure are
based on this basic figure.
To understand fully the meaning of the collective concept of a
‘salary structure’ the first part of this chapter will discuss the so-
called traditional model. This model is the most common and is still
included in quite a number of collective labour agreements.
Figure 4.1 The formal set-up of the salary structure

Next, a number of variations will be examined which are primarily

based on the ‘open scales’ model. But first we will discuss how the
typical relationships within a grade are constructed.
The discussion will be supported and illustrated by graphs and
figures which also refer to the same sample jobs in Chapter 2. In
explaining the underlying techniques we need to refer to a number of
mathematical and arithmetical concepts. Where necessary, these
concepts will be explained in some detail. Extensive theoretical treat-
ment of statistical and mathematical concepts are not included.
4.2 THE SET-UP OF A SALARY STRUCTURE

The traditional model is still the most common salary scale. This
model will therefore be treated first as a basis for further discussions.
Also we will examine how the sample jobs in Part I will behave
within the various models.
Figure 4.2 The traditional model of a salary structure

Table 4.1: Salary scale – traditional model
Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
salary level.
Step
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £
0 10,526 11,789 12,907 13,968 14,722 16,637 18,797 19,910 21,187 24,154 27,533 31,661 36,408 41,870
1 10,819 12,115 13,258 14,376 15,178 17,155 19,382 20,573 22,094 25,186 28,709 33,014 37,968 43,661
in the levels of the jobs;
2 11,112 12,442 13,608 14,789 15,638 17,674 19,968 21,235 23,002 26,222 29,890 34,373 39,528 45,456
3 11,405 12,768 13,963 15,197 16,099 18,192 20,558 21,898 23,909 27,254 31,070 35,731 41,088 47,251
4 11,698 13,099 14,314 15,610 16,560 18,715 21,144 22,565 24,816 28,291 32,251 37,085 42,648 49,046
5 14,669 16,018 17,021 19,234 21,730 23,227 25,723 29,328 33,432 38,443 44,208 50,842
6 16,430 17,482 19,752 22,320 23,890 26,630 30,360 34,608 39,802 45,768 52,632
7 17,942 20,270 22,906 24,557 27,538 31,397 35,789 41,155 47,328 54,427
8 18,403 20,794 23,582 25,219 28,445 32,429 36,970 42,514 48,888 56,222
The main features of this model are certainty and rigidity.
9 25,882 29,352 33,466 38,150 43,872 50,448 58,018

Two items characterise the traditional model (see Table 4.1):
10 26,549 30,264 34,502 39,331 45,230 52,013 59,813

an employee progresses from the minimum to the maximum
ᔢ within each grade there are fixed amounts (steps) through which
ᔢ each grade has varying salary levels which depend on differences
A salary scale (see Table 4.1) is a (coherent) entity of amounts of

salary that systematically settles the remuneration for the jobs to
which this scale applies but note that not all functions in an organisa-
tion are governed by this salary structure. Exceptions are the salaries
of executives and members of the board. In some industries high-level
exempted functions are also excluded from the scheme. Other jobs
may remain outside the scope of this regimen as well; examples of
such jobs are jobs in the sales department. The remuneration of these
jobs may consist of a basic salary supplemented by commission; the
latter may even constitute the main part of the income. Jobs which
may be difficult to fill through the labour market (as used to be the
case in the field of automation) may receive salaries that deviate from
the pay levels as stipulated by the salary scale. In the next section we
will discuss the functions that are covered by the salary scale.
First we will explain some concepts by means of quantified exam-
ples from the salary structure in Table 4.1. This structure consists of
14 different grades. Each of these grades has a maximum and a mini-
mum salary level. The difference between these amounts is called the
range of the salary scale (pay range).
For grade 8 the pay range is £26,549 – £19,910 = £6,639, or 25 per
cent of the maximum amount.
This difference is represented as a percentage of the maximum
salary, because in order to use this difference correctly, it is conve-
nient to take as a specific the maximum amount as a starting point. In
this case the basic consideration is that:
After some time every employee to whom the salary scale applies
reaches the maximum salary level if the job is properly done. This
maximum level is called the maximum (standard) salary or some-
times the midpoint salary
Expressing the relationships within a salary scale as a percentage of

the maximum salary level (see Table 4.2) simplifies the adherence to
these relationships. This percentage is part of the salary structure.
That is, the salary structure determines in a technical sense the under-
lying relationships within the salary scale.
Each salary scale specifies the amounts of the consecutive pay
rises. These amounts are called the amounts of the salary scale. The
steps of the scale, however, are the serial numbers of the (fixed)
amount of the increments as indicated in Table 4.1 in the column
‘step’ (0 to 10). This can be specified as follows.
The amount of the salary of grade 8, step 3 (8/3) is £21,898, the

salary amount of 8/4 is £22,565, etc. The difference between consecu-
tive steps is called an increment. In this example the increment
amounts to £22,565 – £21,898 = £667. Over the scale small rounding-
off differences may occur. An increment can also be expressed as a
percentage of the maximum salary. In this case the difference is about
2.5 per cent.
If we take two consecutive grades it appears that the maximum
salary of the one scale is higher than the minimum salary of the next
grade. This difference is called overlap. If the maximum amount of
grade 7 is £23,582 and the minimum amount of scale 8 is £19,910
then the overlap is £23,582 – £19,910 = £3,672. As a consequence, an
employee who has reached grade 7 and is later on promoted to grade
8, has to be assigned to scale step 8/6 with a salary amount of
£23,890, being the next higher amount in grade 8. If the employee had
been given the minimum amount in grade 8, the promotion would
have had an opposite effect of what was intended.
Finally there is the concept of progression. Progression refers to the
difference between the maximum salary amounts within subsequent
grades. The progression of the maximum amounts of scales 7 and 8 is
(£26,549/£23,582) x 100 – 100 = 12.6 per cent. The difference
between or progression of the minimum amounts is 6 per cent. The
difference in progression between the minimum and the maximum
amounts results from the difference in the number of steps within the
scale (8 steps in scale 7 versus 10 in grade 8). The minimum salary as
a percentage of the maximum salary is different in both scales (see
Table 4.2).
Because the maximum and minimum amounts of the various
grades are initially determined by the progression and only thereafter
by the number of steps, small rounding-off differences may occur.
The amounts of the steps in grade 8 vary between £138 and £139.
This rounding off difference creates no practical problems.
In various industries and companies the maximum and minimum
amounts of the salary structure can be fixed quite differently. The
reasons for these limits are the nature of the work and the extent of the
grade (for instance expressed in points taken from the job evaluation).
Also the number of grades within a salary scale may vary. The organ-
isation structure, culture, opinions of negotiating parties in the collec-
tive agreement and the (technical) knowledge of the personnel officer
are factors which may influence these limits and provisions as well.
Supplementary to the technical structure of the traditional salary
scale rules must be established in order to be able to apply the salary

structure properly. These rules also co-determine the shape and struc-
ture of the salary scale.
4.3 APPLICATION OF THE SALARY STRUCTURE

After having explained the various elements of the salary scale, we
will investigate the issues we may meet in applying the scale. By
looking at the way in which salary structures are used in practice, the
76
14
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
91
100
76
13
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
100
91
76
12
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
100
91
Table 4.2: Proportional relationship within the salary scheme
76
11
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
100
91
76
10
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
100
91
76
9
70
73
79
82
85
88
94
97
100
91
8
80
75
77.5
82.5
85
87.5
90
95
97.5
100
92.5
7
80
85
82.5
87.5
90
92.5
95
100
97.5
6
80
85
82.5
87.5
90
92.5
95
100
97.5
5
80
85
82.5
87.5
90
92.5
95
97.5
100
4
85
90
87.5
92.5
95
97.5
100
3
88
90.4
92.8
95.2
97.6
100
2
90
92.5
95
97.5
100
1
90
92.5
95
97.5
100
Grade
Step
10
0
9
Figure 4.3: The traditional model of a salary structure
concept is easily understandable. These variations have usually been

constructed in response to the failing of the traditional model as an
instrument to determine what is an adequate salary. The application
aspects discussed in this section focus on the way in which:
– jobs are included in a salary scale;

– salaries develop within the rules of the salary structure.
The grade into which an employee is classified depends upon the

grade in which the job has been assigned according to the
methodology being used (usually a job evaluation method)
This sounds obvious and perhaps superfluous, but it is useful to

differentiate between:
ᔢ the assignment of a job to a grade;

ᔢ the classification of an employee to a salary band.
This applies of course to all employees, especially in organisations in

which job evaluation has been implemented. In these cases a job is
assigned to a grade on the basis of the ranking of the job by means of
a job evaluation method. The width of the various grades is expressed
in points of the job evaluation point range, eg:
Grade Grade width

1 0–50
2 51–70
3 71–90
4 91–110
etc. etc.
For practical purposes the designation of the salary bands will be the
same as that of the job grades, ie assigning a job to grade 1 will gener-
ally result in classifying the salary to band 1, etc. There might be
reasons, however, to classify an employee in a grade that is different
from the band to which his job has been assigned.
One of these reasons might be that a job or family of jobs receives a
greater reward in the external labour market than would be allowed
within the relevant grade. For years this has been the case for jobs in
the field of automation and computers.
In determining the salary of a new employee the assignment of the
job to a grade is obviously the first criterion to be looked at. However,
if this employee is going to work in a job for which no job grade has
been established, then the salary structure should give an indication as
to a provisional classification of the employee in a band. In the tradi-
tional model this is done on the basis of:
– the experience of the new employee in similar work;

– the jobs immediately surrounding the new employee.
If a salary amount has been established for a specific job it will be

increased to the next higher amount in the relevant salary band (see
example below).
Grade 8
Salary band 8
Initially expected salary £21,600
Next higher amount in the band £21,898
By raising the ‘initially expected salary’ to the next higher ‘salary

scale’, the employee can be certain of his position in the salary band
and can follow the progress of his salary for himself. This method to
determine a salary for a ‘new’ job is one of the most important
reasons to continue to use the traditional model. In addition, the
employee has been classified to a particular salary band.
For a large number of employees this settles the development of
their salary. However, as jobs change as a result of the dynamics of the
organisation or of the rapid technological developments an organisa-
tion experiences, an additional set of rules is required to determine the
salaries of other employees. Also individual employees grow and
acquire new skills and their developments may have to be reflected in
their remuneration. Take the sample job of Head of Personnel from
Chapter 2 and assume that his career progresses within the same
organisation. As a young personnel manager he has been made
responsible for a certain sector of the organisation and had to manage
recruitment and selection of all personnel with the exception of the
higher functions. The responsibility for the recruitment and selection
of this latter group of employees in that period remained with the then
Head of Personnel and Organisation. When entering employment the
job was assigned to grade 9. Because the job-holder has only a few
years’ experience, he is offered a salary in grade 9 with 4 steps,
amounting to £24,816. In time he has received the customary periodic
increments. Not only has his experience gradually increased, but he
has been allocated additional responsibilities. As a consequence, the
job after being evaluated, is now assigned to grade 10. In this situation
only the weight of the existing set of tasks has been increased, that is,
that the job has not turned into a different, heavier one. Therefore this
is called a re-evaluation of the job. It is quite justifiable for the job-
holder to expect his salary to be adjusted accordingly. Various possi-
bilities are open for such an adjustment:
– the salary is settled at the next higher amount in the new grade;
– first a periodic increment is offered according to the current grade,
after which the final salary is fixed at the next higher amount in the
new grade.
However, it should be kept in mind that a re-evaluation of the job has

in fact already resulted in better prospects for the job-holder. In the
new grade the employee can look forward to a higher maximum
salary and this also constitutes a reward. Let us assume the first possi-
bility. Suppose the ‘old’ salary corresponds with scale step 8 in grade
9 (9/8), then the salary amounts to £28,448. The new salary thus
becomes £29,328 (10/5).
So far we have discussed what in general happens if, after a re-eval-
uation, a job is assigned to a higher grade. It can also happen that an
employee is transferred to a totally different and heavier job. This kind
of promotion can be within the same profession or to a new discipline
or trade. Sticking to our example, let us suppose that the personnel
manager, as successor to the Head of Personnel and Organisation,
advances from grade 9/8 to grade 12, because it is clear to everyone
that this job involves heavier responsibilities compared with the previ-
ous job.
In this case the promotion will not only consist of better prospects,
but the job-holder will also be granted an increase in salary. The size
of the difference depends on a number of factors besides the technical
aspects of granting a rise. One such factor, for instance, is the rela-
tionship of the new salary to that of other, comparable jobs of, say, the
controller. What will be decided depends very much upon the specific
circumstances and therefore cannot be discussed here.
From a technical point of view and considering what may happen
when a job is re-evaluated, the following rule or procedure may be
carried out. The current salary is first increased by a periodic incre-
ment and then the job will be brought up to the new grade. In our
example the salary is thus first raised from 9/8 to 9/9 (from £28,445
to £29,352). Then, the salary is fixed at the next higher amount in the
new grade, or from 9/9 to 12/0 (from £29,352 to £31,661). By coinci-
dence this is also the minimum salary of scale 12.
If we compare both possibilities the difference in the ultimate
salary of the personnel manager is shown in Figure 4.4.
It is recommended that a specific date in the year is chosen in
which salaries are adjusted, for instance 1 January or 1 July. The eval-
uation interviews will take place insofar as the results may influence
the level of the salary adjustment. Re-evaluation or promotion may
take place at a date different from the annual adjustment date. In this
way it will not look as though a re-evaluation or a promotion is being
offered exclusively for the sake of giving a rise. This situation may in
particular occur when an employee has already reached the maximum
of his present grade.
CURRENT SITUATION REVIEW/APPEAL PROMOTION
9/8 28445
NEXT HIGHER AMOUNT 10/5 29328 9/9 29352

IN THE SALARY RANGE
EXTRA INCREMENT 12/0 31661
DIFFERENCE 883 3211
Figure 4.4: Difference in salary increase after review/appeal and

promotion
After having pointed out all important aspects of the salary structure,
in the next section we will discuss the technique of constructing a
salary structure.
4.4 PARAMETERS OF A SALARY STRUCTURE

Earlier in this chapter we mentioned the factors which determine the
interrelationships within a salary structure. These relationships can
be expressed both in the form of nominal amounts and in percent-
ages. The use of percentages is preferable, because they ‘preserve’
the relationships once they have been established. Aspects that
determine the relationships within a salary structure are called the
parameters. The construction of a salary structure is governed by
the following parameters:
ᔢ the slope of the pay policy line (or salary line);

ᔢ a constant, or the starting point of the pay policy line on the Y-axis
(at 0 on the X-axis);
ᔢ the point range of the grade (sometimes called the width of the
grade), usually expressed in points of the job evaluation;
ᔢ the pay range of the grade, or the difference between the highest
and the lowest amounts within the grade;
ᔢ the number of grades.
Figure 4.5: The parameters of a salary structure
The slope of the pay policy line is denoted by the letter a, the
constant factor by the letter b. Thus, we can express the above graph
by the formula:
S = axP+b
S = amount of the salary;
a = factor for the slope;
P = points of job evaluation;
b = constant.
Figure 4.6 illustrates what the various parameters signify.
60000
50000
40000
TREND LINE
30000
PAY
20000
SLOPE a
CONSTANT b
10000
0
50 250 450 650 850 1050 1250
POINTS
Figure 4.6: Parameters, slope and intercept
With this formula the salary corresponding with every point on the
pay policy line or on the pay practice line can be calculated. The same
basic formula is used in comparative analysis of salaries. It is there-
fore useful to know how to apply this formula when comparing the
relationships of internal salary structure with the relationships in pay
on the labour market.
The formula is also an important instrument when designing a
salary structure. The number and width of the grades can simply be
adjusted without influencing the position of the pay policy line. This
is possible because every time the width of the grade has been
adjusted for the points of the job evaluation, the middle of the scale
can again be determined. Next the corresponding salary level can be
calculated with the formula. Alternatively it is possible to express the
middle of the scale in terms of job evaluation points for a particular
salary level. Finally this formula is useful when calculating intermedi-
ate salaries if, for two points on a pay policy line, the evaluation
points and their corresponding salaries are given.
The equation of the pay policy line is:
S = £34,909 x P + £4364
If the scales are constructed as is shown on the X-axis of the graph,

for the grade starting at 350 points and ending at 450 points, the
amount of the middle of the scale (400 points) is:
£350 + £450
S = £34,909 x + £4364 = £18,360
2
In the case for any two points on the line, both the job evaluation
score and the corresponding amounts are given, the general formula
can also be used for determining the equation of a specific pay policy
line. However, the procedure is more complicated. For example,
suppose the corresponding salary level of 1,250 points is £48,000 and
at 150 points the level is £9,600. The procedure is as follows.
The most important mathematical rule we have to observe here is
that a positive number becomes negative and the other way round, if a
number (here for instance £9,091) is transferred to the other term of
the equation. If the two terms of an equation are both a negative
number, then they can be changed into a positive number.
S = a xP +b
£48,000 = a x £1,250 + b
£ 9,600 = a x £ 150 + b
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –
£38,400 = a x £1,100
£38,400 = £34,909 x £1,100
To determine b, the value of a we have just found (£34,909), is sub-
stituted in the formula:
£48,000 = £34,909 x £1,250 +b
£48,000 = £43,636 +b
£48,000 – £43,636 = b
£ 4,364 = b
Finally, it is possible that the pay policy line in Figure 4.6 is not
straight but a curve. In that case the specialist can use logarithms and
other mathematical operations to turn such curves into a straight line.
However, most personnel officers will have to take a somewhat
more elaborate route that is equally effective. Every curve can be seen
as being composed of small sections that are straight. For each of
these sections the above mathematical operation can be applied to
reduce the issue into more manageable proportions.
Skills for using logarithms and comparable mathematical tech-

niques are an advantage. However if these are applied to ‘straighten’
curves, the usefulness is considerably reduced.
The next two parameters of the salary structure are the pay range
and the width of the grade and its corresponding midpoint. These are
illustrated in Figure 4.7.
In determining the position of the grade (width) in relation to the
pay policy line, the middle of the grade expressed in evaluation points
is usually the best starting point from a technical point of view. Also
the position of the width of the range of a grade, or pay range, is
important. It is therefore necessary to define the so-called midpoint of
the grade as follows:
The midpoint of a grade is determined by:

ᔢ the salary level that can be reached by any employee who
performs his job ‘normally’; and
ᔢ the middle of the grade calculated on the basis of the upper
and lower limits of its evaluation points
‘Normal performance’ is taken to be: carrying out the job in such a

way that the results comply with predetermined qualitative and quan-
titative requirements, taking into account the demands concerning
accountabilities, competencies and suchlike, which have been laid
down in the job description.
In the following section the midpoint is in each case the starting
point for the internal relationships of a salary structure. For example,
the minimum and the maximum salary of a grade will be represented
as a percentage of the midpoint (= 100 per cent) of the grade.
Other aspects of the pay policy that can be linked directly to the
salary amount are in practice also conveniently expressed in relation
to the midpoint. Particularly in so-called open scale systems these
ratios to the midpoint are a major feature.
4.5 MORE THAN ONE JOB EVALUATION METHOD

An additional complication may occur when an organisation employs
more than one job evaluation method to differentiate between blue
and white collar jobs. The job of Head of Personnel may thus be eval-
uated through the Hay method, while the job of secretary is weighted
by means of Framework. In such a case, however, it is virtually impos-
60000
50000
MIDPOINT
40000 = =
30000
PAY RANGE
PAY
20000
10000
POINTS RANGE
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
POINTS
Figure 4.7: The parameters: grade width and pay range
sible to compare the resulting scores of the evaluation of jobs accord-

ing to these different methods.
As a general rule, comparing results of different job evaluation
methods should be restricted to a particular organisation or at least to
the same line of business. The use of more than one job evaluation
method sometimes creates problems in the border area between both
methods. These problems can frequently be solved by evaluating jobs
in these border areas with both methods to establish a final score for
each method. The border area needs to be taken widely enough to
allow statistical calculations which provide a sound and acceptable
basis for comparisons within a specific organisation. In addition, it is
important to check whether the score structure of the various charac-
teristics of the method and in particular the chosen entries to the
tables, do not provide incompatible or conflicting outcomes.
Suppose the sample job of Secretary is classified in method ‘A’ for
the characteristic ‘know-how’ at the level of ‘general knowledge’.
Such a result is incompatible with a score for the same characteristic
at the level of ‘professional know-how’ if this job has been evaluated
to according to method B. Differences like this are not entirely
fictitious. They occur in practice, because in translating the
‘characteristics’ of the various methods in their respective

‘factors/aspects’, jobs might have been interpreted or perceived
differently.
Comparing results from various job evaluation methods thus
involves more than matching total scores. If an organisation does not
possess sufficient expertise in this field, it should discuss the issue
with both system-holders in order to work out a satisfactory conver-
sion formula.
Another problem which will be encountered when using two meth-
ods is the difference in the width of salary ranges. If one method uses
geometrical scales and the other arithmetical scales, then the same
score on both salary ranges produces different salaries. This makes
the scales incompatible, because 20 points on a geometrical series
have an entirely different meaning from 20 points on an arithmetical
series. This is why in the Hay method differences of 20 job evaluation
points between lower jobs signifies another relationship than 20 job
evaluation points between two jobs higher in the hierarchy. In the Hay
method, differences are expressed as percentages using the following
definitions:
15 per cent = 1 step (just noticeable difference)

30 per cent = 2 steps (a clearly noticeable difference)
45 per cent = 3 steps (a quite evident difference)
4.6 IMPLEMENTING A PAY POLICY

In order to determine the number of grades a careful consideration is
required of the way in which the pay policy of an organisation is being
implemented. Two instruments are available:
1. the jobs ranking list (see Table 4.3);

2. the scatter diagram (see Figure 4.9).
The jobs ranking list shows all jobs in the ascending order of their
weight, expressed in job evaluation points. The list provides an initial
picture of their relative differences or the relative similarity or equiva-
lence. However, the jobs ranking list lacks a second dimension: the
salary actually paid. The relationship between job evaluation score
and salary is usually expressed in a so-called scatter diagram.
Figure 4.8: Shape of the pay practice line
Table 4.3 Jobs ranking list
Job evaluation points Jobs
45 Cleaner
51 Post man
63 Driver
68 Typist
70 Receptionist
85 Department secretary
89 Switchboard operator/receptionist
105 Computer operator
121 Head of post room
136 Secretary
148 Calculator/cost accountant
159 Programmer
165 Payroll/personnel administrator
193 Head of accounting
201 Marketing assistant
203 Sales representative
235 Systems manager
etc. etc.
70000
60000
50000
40000
PAY
30000
20000
10000
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
POINTS
CLUSTER OUTLIER
Figure 4.9: The scatter diagram: clusters of job scores and deviations
From the jobs ranking list and the scatter diagram ‘problem cases’ or
deviations (‘outliers’) from the ‘ordinary’ pattern become apparent.
Also, concentration of jobs in a particular area (clusters) are immedi-
ately noticed. If a regression line is calculated and a maximum and
minimum line are drawn without taking into account salaries which
deviate from the pay policy line, we obtain a graph as illustrated in
Figure 4.10.
For several reasons the specific salary amount or level will not be
calculated for every job with an ‘own’ score including:
ᔢ the results of the job evaluation are not conclusive on the level of
the function. It should be kept in mind that the job evaluation
results are but a (systematised) assessment of the level of jobs
within acceptable limits;
ᔢ small differences in job level are not felt by the job-holders to
such a degree that a difference in pay is warranted;
ᔢ the level of the job is not the only determining factor of the salary;
ᔢ from an administrative point of view it is very cumbersome and
time consuming, especially in larger organisations, to monitor the
development of the individual pay separately for each job.
Clusters of jobs which appear in practice demonstrate that the score

of the job evaluation has only a limited effect on smaller salary differ-
ences.
If we try to differentiate the pay of jobs, we have to realise that in
lower jobs a small difference in the weight of a job is felt sooner than
in higher ones. Consequently, for the positions lower in the hierarchy,
relatively small grades (in terms of job evaluation points) will be
designed while those for higher positions will be relatively wider. But
the points are not the only factors which determine the level of the
salary in the design of a new structure.
Another important factor is the pay level in the labour market to
which the organisation wants to attune its pay policy. In general it may
approach a number of consultancy firms (see Chapter 5).
Alternatively it may carry out its own investigation. The advantage of
the latter approach is that the organisation can select its own partners
for participation in such a study. In exchange for their co-operation
these partners usually demand access to the results of the investiga-
tion. And that usually creates problems. Not every Personnel
Department is able to perform a technically sound analysis of the pay
80000
+ 20%
60000
– 20%
PAY
40000
20000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
POINTS
OUTLIERS
Figure 4.10: The scatter diagram: individual job scores within a band
of +/- 20 per cent
in the labour market. Chapter 5 will provide some assistance in choos-

ing the most appropriate approach. It is also recommended that the
parameters and constraints for such a salary study are carefully
considered in advance. Only then will the comparative study be really
useful and deliver results which can serve as a basis for comparison in
any subsequent studies.
When collecting external information, the organisation should not
restrict itself to the general picture of the labour market. The informa-
tion obtained must be of such detail and structured in such a way that
it provides insight into the relationships in pay of different job fami-
lies and individual jobs. The scarcity of computer personnel a few
years ago caused a substantial increase in salary for these jobs. If in
assessing the labour market we do not take into account the effects of
these or similar conditions, we may in the end draw the wrong conclu-
sions. When formulating pay policy we may set the salaries at too
high a level and thus increase costs unnecessarily.
Differences in pay levels on the labour market and those within the
salary structure of an organisation are not only the result of differences
between and within job families, but are also caused by regional influ-
ences, differences between higher and lower jobs, differences in lines of
business, differences in sales, etc. Consequently, an organisation should
be careful in testing its policy against external information.
An additional problem is caused by ‘mistakes’ of the organisation
in the past. Choosing a salary structure implies choices concerning
individual deviations and exceptions. If these individual issues and
considerations are not or cannot be incorporated in the salary struc-
ture, a solution must be found in the rules for applying the structure.
In many cases, during the implementation of a new salary structure
some guarantees and other provisions have been developed. These
contain procedures for settling individual salaries.
Which factors determine the competitive position of an organisa-
tion on the labour market? A first indication is its own pay policy,
because this reflects factors such as:
— age structure;
— years in employment;
— expectations and prospects, whether or not linked to career
expectations;
— attractiveness of the organisation to new employees;
— relationships between pay, benefits and other terms of
employment.
Another indication is whether the organisation has labour-intensive or

capital-intensive business processes. If these questions have been duly
answered, establishing the level of the pay policy line (the line
connecting the midpoints, see Figure 4.7) can be started. In addition
the pay policy line is an instrument for making comparisons with the
labour market in the future, independent of the precise design of the
salary structure.
The next parameters determine the basic design of the salary struc-
ture (they were discussed earlier; see Figures 4.6 and 4.7):
– salary band (pay range);

– width of job grade (points range);
– the midpoint;
– the number of job grades or salary scales;
– the slope of the pay policy line;
– the distribution of the observed salaries in the scatter diagram
(see Figure 4.9).
Next these parameters are influenced by the following internal

elements:
– The difference between the highest and the lowest score of evalua-
tion points – points A and B in Figure 4.11 – and the number of
grades. This influences the width of the range.
– The difference in salary at:
ᔢ the highest and lowest score A – B;
ᔢ highest and lowest observed clusters D – E; this influences the
slope of the pay policy line;
– Finally we assess the difference between the salary actually paid at
the highest and the lowest score/cluster as the basis for determining
the salary range.
Establishing the width of the salary range is the first step in devel-
oping a salary structure. The salary ranges have been invented,
because it is not very practical to determine a salary for each job eval-
uation point, though some companies do. They use a formula in
which the number of job evaluation points are a variable (see the
formula for calculating the pay policy line). The result is a salary and
a salary range for that score.
In order to determine the width of a salary range an analysis of
Figure 4.11 should be made. It is necessary to define clusters of jobs
which are more or less equivalent judging by their total score.
70000
A
60000
E
50000
40000
PAY
30000
20000
10000 D
B
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
POINTS
Figure 4.11: Connecting the highest and the lowest salary levels
70000
60000
50000
40000
PAY
30000
20000
10000
150 120 180 300 200 270

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
POINTS
Figure 4.12: Pay practice, cluster of job scores

At first this causes a less regular definition of the width of the

grades (see Figure 4.12). We call the series of grades regular, if the
distances between different grades, measured nominally, proportion-
ally or otherwise, follow a smooth course (Figure 4.13).
It will be clear that the spread as given in Figure 4.12 is not
satisfactory and that a different distribution is needed. And because
the scores on the X-axis have been determined according to the
Hay method, it is obvious to look for a distribution using per-
centages.
The points range is set at 20 per cent difference.
An important consideration in determining the range of the grades
is the number of steps an employee goes through. In addition, it
should be established whether all grades need to have the same
number of steps. The number of steps in a scale reflects, amongst
other things, the number of years of employment insofar as they influ-
ence the execution of the job (increasing experience). Another consid-
eration is the average ages at which employees start in a job and leave
it. For the lower grades the starting age may be fixed at 23 years and
for higher grades at a somewhat higher age. The setting of the maxi-
mum age is determined by:
70000
60000
50000
40000
PAY
30000
20000
10000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
POINTS
Figure 4.13: Salary pay practice, proportional structure of grades

– external information, which may have been obtained from:

ᔢ comparative studies of salaries;
ᔢ common practice in labour agreements;
– the wishes of the organisation.
Arguments must be carefully weighed, they must also take into

account collective labour agreements, general opinions and attitudes
in society, the relationships between gross and net salaries, and
between lower and higher incomes, and the pay policy and practice in
the organisation. The latter point is important, because the levels of
individual salaries are not set in a vacuum or left to chance. It is there-
fore recommended that existing practices are carefully analysed and
weighed against the other consideration. Again, external information
plays an important role.
What are the core jobs in an organisation? Let us take again the
imaginary company Fiction Publishing Limited from Chapter 2 as
an example. From the business characteristics it appears that the job
of Head of the Publishing Group must be a core job which comes
close to the very rationale of the organisation. Thus it is important to
study the market in order to obtain a picture of the pay level for this
type of job. Though this is a core job to this organisation, it does not
imply that the job will have to be rewarded at a higher or lower rate
than that currently in the market. The benchmark should be what is
being paid for similar jobs in the market or for comparable jobs in
other industries.
Another important aspect is the difference between basic salary
and the so-called total cash. In other words, which variable salary
component should be added to the basic pay to arrive at a total
amount of income. This issue will be discussed in some detail in
Chapter 5.
If a clear picture of all these relationships has been obtained, we
can proceed to designing the outlines of the salary structure, more
in particular the range and the width of the various grades as well
as the number of grades and the slope of the pay policy line. We
are thus back at the main issues of the traditional salary scale which
we discussed at the beginning of this chapter. All aspects and
elements of the construction of the traditional salary scale have now
been discussed, with the exception of the steps of the scale (see
Figure 4.14).
The size of the steps of a grade may follow a linear course or a
non-linear one. This means that in the former case the (periodic)
PROGRESSION
POLICY LINE
OVERLAP
MAXIMUM SALARY
PAY RANGE
MIDPOINT
MINIMUM SALARY
POINTS RANGE
Figure 4.14: Parameters for a salary structure
increments within the grade are all equal, while in the latter the in-
crement will decrease in practice.
If we take grades 11, 12, 13 and 14 from the traditional salary scale
in Table 4.1 as examples, we can compose a Table (4.4) which quanti-
fies the parameters from Figure 4.14.
As we have seen before, the construction of a grade is closely
linked to the pay practice of the organisation (individual scores
and the corresponding salaries). Certainly if we have to deal with
bigger populations it may require a lot of effort and sorting out to
construct optimum grades on the basis of these individual scores
and salaries.
Table 4.4: The parameters of a salary scale
Salary Point range Minimum %* Maximum Progression Overlap

scale salary salary
3 75–90 12907 88 14669 701

4 91–108 13968 85 16430 12 1708
5 109–130 14722 80 18403 12 1766
6 131–156 16637 80 20794 13
11 500–600 27533 70 39331 7670

12 601–720 31661 70 45230 15 8822
13 721–864 36408 70 52013 15 10143
14 865–1037 41870 70 59813 15
4.7 PERFORMANCE-RELATED PAY

Some pay elements are variable, such as profit-sharing, gain-sharing,
bonuses, incentives, premiums and, of course, performance-related
pay. Of these, performance-related pay in particular is of an individual
nature and is usually expressed as a proportion of the total amount of
the salary. It is sometimes so obviously linked to the salary scale that
the possibilities can be read directly from the scale. In other cases the
performance-related pay is expressed as a percentage of the salary
according to the scale. Both versions will be discussed.
If an organisation wants to implement performance-related pay the
functioning of employees needs to be assessed. In Part I we have
stressed the importance of a proper job description; elsewhere the
subject of assessing, and assessment and appraisal systems have been
extensively discussed. Within the scope of this book it will be suffi-
cient to point out a number of preconditions which any job evaluation
system at least must satisfy. ‘In any system of performance-related pay
it should be established to what extent the employee has succeeded in
accomplishing his tasks in the previous period.’ For this purpose other
evaluation methods and approaches may be used, such as performance
measurement and assessing the potential of employees.
The results of the assessment of the performance of individual
employees has to be translated into a monetary reward. In most
assessment systems an individual is assigned to one level of perfor-
mance from a series which corresponds with a certain percentage.
Figure 4.15: Set-up of performance-related pay
Example:
0 per cent – a normal performance; the employee meets all
requirements of the job
2 per cent – the employee performs recognisably better than might
have been expected under normal conditions
4 per cent – the performance is clearly of a recognisably higher
level than might have been expected from the employee under
normal conditions
7 per cent per cent – the employee performs exceedingly well
10 per cent – the employee performs outstandingly well in all
respects
The terms which are used as criteria should be defined as precisely

as possible and must also be perceived in the organisation as clearly
distinct. ‘Insufficient performance’ or similar terms should not be
used in an assessment system, because performance-related pay is
meant to reward achievements and not to establish whether a person
has performed insufficiently. In that case a job evaluation would be
more appropriate.
Apart from a so-called 5-point scale as in the example, in a number
of cases it may be sufficient to use a 3-point scale. Refinements
resulting in a 7-point scale or more bear the risk that the assessment
uses more subtle distinctions than the employees in practice perceive
as real reflections of differences in performance. In that case the
system will overshoot its mark, as the system itself is clearly regarded
as more important than its objective: rewarding superior performance.
Therefore, a 3-point scale is preferable.
The different percentages – in the example 0, 2, 4, 7 and 10 per
cent – should also be chosen so that they are in accordance with
the other relationships within the pay policy. The most obvious solu-
tion is to link the percentages to the successive maximum amounts,
ie the progression in the salary structure. In some cases
the highest percentage of the performance bonus will be higher
than the percentage of the progression. Other relationships are in
use as well. The 10 per cent performance bonus in the example is
lower than the progression percentage of the pay policy line in Table
4.6. A clear distinction in the definitions of ‘steps’ is important,
because that determines to a large extent whether the differences in
pay will be accepted and appreciated. In other words, the overlap
between consecutive salary bands should be carefully taken into
account.
The percentages in the example can be incorporated in a separate
salary scale. Each grade from the salary structure is divided into
five columns (see Table 4.5). To compare the percentages of the
performance bonus with the salary level, an additional column
provides grade 12 at a 0 per cent performance bonus.
Table 4.5: Amounts of salaries in grade 11 at separate performance levels
Scale step 11 12
0% 2% 4% 7% 10% 0%
0 27,533 28,085 28,637 29,462 30,288 31,661
1 28,709 29,285 29,861 30,720 31,579 33,014
2 29,890 30,490 31,090 31,982 32,880 34,373
3 31,070 31,694 32,314 33,245 34,176 35,731
4 32,251 32,899 33,542 34,507 35,477 37,085
5 33,432 34,104 34,771 35,774 36,778 38,443
6 34,608 35,304 35,995 37,032 38,069 39,802
7 35,789 36,509 37,224 38,294 39,370 41,155
8 36,970 37,709 38,448 39,557 40,666 42,514
9 38,150 38,914 39,677 40,819 41,966 43,872
10 39,331 40,118 40,906 42,086 43,262 45,230
In such performance-related pay systems careful consideration should

be paid to the rules which will be applied if the performance level of
an employee falls back. Answering the following questions may help:
– Should the salary of the employee be an amount that can be found

in the salary scale?
– If the salary must be an amount that is included in the scale, how
will the new salary be calculated?
– How will the next increments be determined if the amount of the
salary does not need to be included in the scale?
– What are the consequences for the pension entitlements of the
employee?
In the next section we will discuss a version that deals with these
issues.
4.8 PRECONDITIONS FOR A NEW SALARY STRUCTURE

The traditional pay system is quite rigid in its structure and conse-
quently in its use in practice. Companies with a strongly regulated
production process in which a large number of different bonuses and
allowances are used, eg for unpleasant work, will think that approach
quite appropriate, because it offers some certainty. An employee can

usually determine for himself what his salary, after the next rise or pay
round, will be.
If an organisation wants a more flexible form of performance-
related pay which puts a greater responsibility with the managers (of a
department), it must adopt or develop another approach. In the
following example the flexible system described need not be the only
conceivable solution: other solutions are also feasible. We just want to
provide an example of how an existing, rigid system can be changed
into a flexible one at relatively low costs.
Preconditions of a new system

Before starting the development of a new system it is recommended
that some preconditions are formulated which the new system will
have to meet. For instance, the pay system to be developed in section
4.9 will have to meet the following requirements:
a. The new pay system should not create too many obstacles for
adapting individual salaries
b. The costs of classifying a salary should be kept to a minimum,
ie a change in salary must not cause higher costs than strictly
intended
c. If the reasons for granting a performance-related allowance
cease to exist, that allowance must be terminated
d. In creating a pay system or granting a performance-related
bonus, the consequences for other benefit entitlements should
be taken into consideration
e. Performance-related bonuses must be linked to the time period
over which the performance is ‘measured’ and the nature of the
performance
f. Granting a performance-related bonus must be founded upon
an assessment of the way in which the employee functions
Note: The above preconditions may differ in each organisation. They

are intended as a starting point for developing a flexible salary struc-
ture in the next section.
4.9 TOWARDS A FLEXIBLE SALARY STRUCTURE

One way to break through the rigidity of the strict steps mechanism of
the traditional pay system, is the so-called open scales system. In princi-
ple an open scales system comprises three elements for each grade:
1. a minimum salary;
2. a maximum salary;
3. an average increment.
Figure 4.16: Shape of a flexible salary structure

To illustrate this, these elements for grade 10 of the open scales

system are as follows:
Minimum salary £24,154

Maximum salary £34,502
Average increment £1,035
One of the advantages of the open scales system is that it is irrelevant

whether or not the difference between minimum and maximum salary
is an exact multiple of the average increment. For instance in the case
of scale 10 (£34,502–£24,154)/£1,035 = £9,998 and thus not exactly
equal to 10 scale steps. The minimum and maximum salary in the
open scales system have the same function as in the traditional
system. In the traditional pay system the size of a (periodic) increment
may vary not only between the grades, but also within an individual
scale. In the open scales system for each scale a specific increment is
set, which we will call the average increment.
A characteristic of the open scales system is that any amount

between the minimum and maximum salary of a scale is
acceptable to the system
Thus, in the example, any amount between £24,154 and £34,502 may
be taken as a step of the scale.
In accordance with the precondition mentioned in section 4.8 the
open scales system accepts:
– any salary amount for a newly appointed employee;

– any reassignment of a job to another grade without entailing an
unintended adjustment (increase) of the amount of the salary;
– any adjustment of the pay (policy) line, ie the pay level of the
organisation in relation to that in the labour market (usually the
maximum pay line of the organisation), without any consequences
for the individual salaries;
– any (periodical) increment expressed as a percentage of the average
increment.
There needs to be a provision for adapting a salary in case a job is re-

evaluated or a promotion is awarded. This can be done, for instance,
by setting a percentage of the difference between the maximum
salaries of the relevant (or successive) grades. It is also possible to
express the salary adjustment as a percentage of the average incre-

ment of the new grade.
In implementing an open scales system it is recommended that
consideration be given as to whether or not limits should be set to
salary increments. This seems to be a return to the rigidity of the
traditional system, but this provision is intended to prevent relatively
large differences in increments from being set. In addition, it is
recommended that each periodical increment that deviates negatively
or positively from the average increment should be explained to the
employee in writing.
Other factors as well may make it necessary or desirable for an
employee to progress fast through the salary scale. One of the most
important reasons is the situation on the labour market. It may occur
that an employee has been taken on at a higher salary than his new
colleague. The incumbent employee may feel that to be an injustice,
which could be an inducement for this employee speedily to catch up
his arrears in salary. In this way the ‘equal pay’ situation within the
organisation or unit is restored.
Looking back on what has been said on the open scales system so
far, it appears that it fulfils two of the preconditions because:
– a transfer of a job to a different grade is possible without the system

enforcing an adaptation of the salary (precondition a);
– any (new) salary that fits in between the minimum and maximum
salary of the grade is acceptable to the system (precondition b).
Adapting the pay policy to changing conditions is simpler now,

though the organisation has to take care that individual salaries are
equal to or higher than the minimum salary of the salary scale
concerned (see Figure 4.17).
4.10 RELATIVE SALARY POSITION: THE COMPA RATIO

It creates a disadvantage if a salary structure has no fixed salary steps
within each salary scale. Because the employee cannot trace his indi-
vidual salary in the scale, he is unable to check whether the salary
adjustment granted to him is in accordance with the principles of the
pay system. In practice it appears that individuals in higher positions
also have difficulties in forming a proper opinion on a salary adjust-
ment which they have received, particularly if this adjustment consists
of several components, as in the case of a complete review of the
25000
A. individual salaries as
accepted within the
adapted policy
B. individual salaries yet

to be justified
20000
A
PAY
15000 A
A B
B Current policy
A
Adapted policy
10000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
GRADE
Figure 4.17: Adapting the salary policy line in an ‘open structure’: effect
on individual pay.
salary which comprises a general and an initial increment. Some

explanation is then certainly due.
Management and the Head of the Personnel Department need more
insight and must have a proper understanding of the relationships
between pay policy and pay practice. An extremely useful instrument
for this understanding is the concept of the relative salary position,
which we call the CompaRatio. This CompaRatio is calculated by
expressing the individual salary as a percentage of the maximum
(standard) salary (midpoint) of the grade concerned:
Actual salary
CompaRatio = *100
Midpoint salary
The relative position of a job in relation to other jobs and salaries is

visualised independently of grades. In addition, an individual
CompaRatio can be compared with the CompaRatio of the depart-
ment of the entire organisation. For instance, substitution of the
‘salary’ in the formula by the sum of the individual (full-time) salaries
and the ‘maximum (standard) salary’ by the sum of the maximum

(standard) salary of each employee of the department or organisation
gives the CompaRatio of the chosen entity to which the individual
employees belong. Table 4.6 calculates the CompaRatio for part of the
salary scale discussed at the beginning of the chapter (Table 4.1).
Table 4.6: Example of an open scale structure
Grade 4 5 6 7 8 9
Minimum salary 13,968 14,722 16,637 18,797 19,910 21,187
Midpoint salary 16,430 18,403 20,794 23,582 26,549 30,264
Average increment 410 460 520 598 664 908
Table 4.7: Relative salary position: the CompaRatio of the minimum salary
Grade 4 5 6 7 8 9
Minimum salary
* 100 85 80 80 80 75 70
Midpoint salary
Note: Refer to percentages in Table 4.2
Table 4.8: The CompaRatio per employee and for the department
as a whole
Employee Grade Actual Midpoint Compa-

salary Ratio
A 4 14722 16430 90
B 4 16310 16430 99
C 7 21014 23582 89
D 8 25003 26549 94
E 8 22987 26549 87
F 9 29290 30264 97
Total 129326 139804 93
As Tables 4.7 and 4.8 show, the CompaRatio is also a useful tool
for analysing the pay policy as it is carried out.
The CompaRatio offers a comparative measure for the relative

position of a job or a salary, independent of the grade to which
the individual employee has been classified
4.11 PERFORMANCE-RELATED PAY INTEGRATED INTO

THE SALARY STRUCTURE
If an organisation decided to implement a form of performance-
related pay, it must at least meet precondition c if it wants to uphold
the essence of such a system. (Precondition c: the performance-
Figure 4.18: Set-up of integrated performance-related pay

related pay must be stopped whenever the reasons for granting such
allowances cease to exist.) Also preconditions d and e must be taken
into account (precondition d: effects of the performance-related pay
must be considered; precondition e: the performance-related pay must
be linked to the duration and the nature of the performance).
Figure 4.20 demonstrates in which way performance-related pay
may be granted.
The distinction between qualitative and quantitative performances
and the distinction in reward for each form must be recognisable. For
quantitative efforts which are usually of a shorter duration, a direct
type of reward is appropriate, for instance in the form of a bonus or
more than one increment. The latter is possible when an open scales
system is used, but it should be realised that this may cause the system
to get ‘silted up’. Qualitative performances are usually maintained
during a longer period and involve matters such as attitude, inventive-
ness, initiative etc. For instance, a positive attitude towards the job and
the organisation is likely to be of a continuous nature and not inciden-
tal. Particularly the continuity of the performance and its determining
factors warrants a type of reward that emphasises the prospects rather
than the direct income.
To facilitate this the organisation could create not one but, for
example, three maximum salaries for each grade. This creates a situa-
tion that is similar to the traditional model with several columns for
NATURE DEGREE CHARACTER REWARD
HIGHER HIGHER INCREMENT
QUALITATIVE CONTINUOUS PROSPECTS
PERFORMANCE STANDARD AVERAGE INCREMENT
QUANTITATIVE INCIDENTAL ONE-OFF REWARD
MORE ADDITIONAL INCREMENT
Figure 4.19: Annual assessment of performance

each grade (see Table 4.5). These maximum salaries of each grade
should have a fixed relation to each other, for instance by having three
separate pay policy lines (I, II and III). Each pay policy line has its
own maximum salary; the ratios of these maxima to the standard
salary may be as follows:
Example I I = 100 (standard) II = 106 III = 115

Example II I = 100 (standard) II = 107.5 III = 115
Example III I = 100 (standard) II = 110 III = 120
Which ratios will be chosen is left to the individual organisation.

Depending upon their assessment the salaries of the employees follow
pay line I (normal), pay line II (recognisably higher than normal) or
III (substantially better than normal) (see Figure 4.21).
When the employee is told to which pay line he has been assigned
on the basis of his performance, he must also be informed of the
maximum salary that he can reach. This is essential because when it is
expected of him that his performances remain at a higher level (future
oriented), something should be said on his prospects (also future
SALARY LINE III
SALARY LINE II
SALARY
or
SALARY LINE I
(STANDARD)
or
'TIME'
Figure 4.20: Example of individual salary development

oriented). If these expectations are no longer met, the consequence is

likely to be that the prospects of the employee are reduced in the sense
that the expected maximum salary attached to the new pay line to
which he has then been assigned is lower. In addition to the differenti-
ation in maximum salary, the size of the average increment can also
be adapted. In the case of grade 10 of the example this may have been
worked out as follows:
Minimum salary £24,154 70%

Maximum salary I (standard) £34,502 100% midpoint
Maximum salary II (standard) £37,952 110%
Maximum salary III (standard) £41,402 120%
Average increment I £1,035 3%

Average increment II £1,208 3.5%
Average increment III £1,380 4%
Note: The percentages are based on maximum salary I (standard or

midpoint).
If an employee is reassigned to a lower pay line, his actual salary will
nominally not be adjusted. If the actual salary should exceed the maxi-
mum salary of the lower pay line, the surplus could be granted as an
individual allowance or bonus (see also Figure 4.21). The dotted lines
show possible courses that the salary of an individual may follow.
As we discussed earlier, there must be an assessment system in
place which requires that the reason for the assignment of an individ-
ual to one of the pay lines of the grade is well founded and explained
to him (precondition f). In addition, the ratios concerning the number
of employees – of one or more units of the organisation, not for each
grade – that can be assigned to a specific pay line should be estab-
lished in advance. A major factor for these ratios is the number of pay
lines per grade. A limited number of pay lines is preferred because
when the number of lines increases, not only will assessing and
explaining become more difficult, but it will also be harder to main-
tain and justify a reasonable distribution of employees over the vari-
ous pay lines. In practice, three pay lines appear to be sufficient.
When the organisation has opted for three pay lines, it may adopt
the following distribution (Figure 4.21):
– at least 75 per cent of the employees should be assigned to pay line I;
– at most 10 per cent of the employees could be assigned to pay line
III.
– Different ratios are also feasible, for instance 80 per cent (I) and 5
per cent (III).
The first ratio may have been applied in such a way that, for instance,
75 per cent of the employees are assigned to pay line I, while 25 per
cent are assigned to pay line II. In this case nobody is assigned to pay
line III. (Note: the CompaRatio is always expressed in relation to the
maximum of pay line I of the midpoint. A CompaRatio of say 92 is
quite possible for all three pay lines (see also Table 4.11).
This type of measure must be developed and implemented in order
to manage and control the assessment and evaluation system. If devia-
tions are found, they may induce management to review the way in
which people are assessed.
As for any proposal it is recommended that the positive and nega-
tive aspects of the system we just have described are summarised and
checked against the stated preconditions. Such an evaluation of the
model could result in an adjustment to it.
Positive aspects of the model described:
– Salary adjustment without obstacles caused by the system (precon-

dition a): Any amount between the minimum and maximum salary
of the grade is acceptable.
– Costs of reassignments (precondition b): Because the system tech-
nically allows any amount to be allotted, there are hardly any
implementation costs.
– Performance versus time (precondition e): There is a direct link
between performance resulting from ambition/attitude and
prospects; individual efforts can be reflected in the salary. If an
accelerated progress through the grade results in ‘pressure’ on the
maximum for high flyers, opportunities for promotion need to be
reviewed (career management).
– Reversing performance-related pay (precondition c): Future-
oriented performance pay is linked to prospects; a negative assess-
ment results in reducing or terminating prospects for obtaining
higher maximum salaries and in a lower average increment or a
slower progress to the maximum salary. A negative assessment
does not result in a lower salary as such.
– Benefits (precondition d): One of the principles of the model is
that no salary reduction is required when performances fall back.
In this way possible consequences for other benefit entitlements are
being avoided.
Negative aspects of the model:
– The method does not provide a conclusive solution for the whole
issue of performance-related pay. The method only illustrates how
any form of performance-related pay could be incorporated into a
remuneration system. The open scales method has the advantage
that is no longer necessary to make it possible for employees to
trace back any specific salary amount in the grade.
– In any case requirements must be established which the perfor-
mance-related pay system will have to meet.
– Flexible remuneration systems are bound to fail if the organisation
does not have an appropriate personnel information system. This
system must be able to establish and demonstrate how the remuner-
ation system is implemented and operated by the organisation.
– Flexible remuneration systems demand a disciplined application.
Some organisations think erroneously that all possibilities of the
system must be implemented and used as soon as possible. In many
cases the result is that the ratios for the distribution of employees
over the pay lines are soon be used to their full extent. This implies
new employees cannot be reassessed to a higher pay line, and the
structure loses its flexibility.
– The amount of salary of an individual cannot be found in the grade.
The CompaRatio is difficult to explain to many employees.
Performance-related pay, as it has been discussed in this section,
demands above all the courage to communicate bad news to the
employee in question. In spite of the fact that if the performance falls
back, this will not cause the salary to be reduced, this model does not
provide a solution to the status problem. Being assigned to a higher
pay line involves some advancement in status. This is a problem
which organisations should be especially aware of before implement-
ing the above model. If management and the personnel officer in
charge ignore this issue, then only half a step is being taken. The
organisation should judge whether all effort is warranted and whether
such a pay policy really serves its interests.
As in the case of a remuneration system, before starting the devel-
opment of a performance-related pay system, certain preconditions
should be established. The following examples of preconditions of a
performance-related pay system may be helpful:
– The superior of the person being assessed has to draw up a written
explanation of the assessment.
– The written assessment must be signed by the next higher superior

of the person being assessed.
– The assessment must always be given to the person who has been
assessed. He must be able to express his comments and any criti-
cism.
– The next higher superior and the personnel officer in charge must
always be involved in answering the comments of the employee.
– If the employee being assessed, after having discussed his assess-
ment with his immediate superior, still thinks that he has been
judged unfairly, he must be able to invoke the appeal procedure
included in the assessment method.
4.12 CAREER REMUNERATION MODEL

In section 4.8 we saw how the traditional salary structure can be
changed into more flexible forms of remuneration. This is by no
means all that can be said on the possibilities of flexible remunera-
tion. Section 4.8 discussed only the possibilities of the flexible remu-
neration structure insofar as they concerned pay. Nothing has been
said on how a job is assigned to a grade. As indicated in Chapter 1, a
development is taking place in this field that has resulted in the job
level matrix. This is a matrix with job families on the vertical axis and
grades on the horizontal axis (see Table 2.6). If we combine the possi-
bilities of the job level matrix with those of a flexible remuneration
structure, we have an instrument with which the salaries of employees
throughout their career can be managed relatively simply.
This career remuneration model makes it relatively easy to assign
employees to grades and determine an appropriate salary. It also
offers the possibility of rewarding both qualitative and quantitative
achievements. The main precondition is discipline. As with the broad-
ening of other rules and opportunities, the career remuneration model
requires discipline in its application. We will illustrate this by means
of the sample job of Secretary.
The job of Secretary can be assigned to grade 5 of the job family
secretariat (see Table 4.10) which is part of the total job family matrix
(JFM). As can be seen from this table, similar jobs exist at different
levels, in this example in grades 4, 5, 6 and 7. Therefore it is not
necessary to make a separate job description for each level. In consul-
tation with the employee and his immediate superior it can be estab-
lished what the requirements of the job are and to which grade the job
should be assigned. No separate job description is required, no grad-
Figure 4.21: Set-up of the career remuneration model
ing, no meeting of the evaluation committee and no (external) expert.

In this case the Personnel Department or a specialist from the head
office is able to monitor the whole process, to keep the JFM up to date
as the system-holder and to act as adviser.
If in time a job has become heavier or when a permanent position
has become vacant, it must be determined to what extent an employee
from a lower grade meets the job requirements which have been laid
down in the JFM. Next, the job-holder can be assigned to a grade. It is
obvious that the employee is classified to a higher job grade exclu-
sively on the basis of his personal qualifications, although in practice
this problem occurs quite frequently. Of course, an organisation wants
to offer each employee a job that suits his qualifications and compe-
tences best, but it must also avoid incurring wage costs that are not
strictly necessary. In addition, other employees will perceive this as
preferential treatment and start to doubt the objectivity of the assign-

ment procedure. In the JFM a career can progress horizontally as well
as vertically.
The next step concerns determining the remuneration in accor-
dance with the grade to which the job has been assigned. (See also
section 4.8.) Figure 4.24 illustrates how an employee, on the basis of
his individual performances, progresses from the minimum salary to
the maximum in the grade. The example is randomly chosen. Placing
a job on a higher or lower pay line does not need to follow the obvious
order of I > II > III or the other way round. It is also possible to assign
a job from pay line I to III. If an employee who, within his grade, was
assigned to pay line II or III is reassigned to a higher or lower grade,
he should be placed at pay line I of that new grade.
If an employee is assigned to a new grade, a new assessment of his
performance should be made on the basis of the new (and usually
higher) job requirements. Therefore placing the employee on pay line
I is a logical step. Both employee and organisation are not able to give
guarantees concerning the new performance level of the employee.
Performing and assessing the performance against the job require-
ments is a continuous process. The reward of the performance fluctu-
ates in accordance with the results of this assessment.
In designing the salary structure this facility should be kept in
mind. It may create problems if the progression in the salary structure
is lower than the difference between the maximum salaries of succes-
sive pay lines. This is illustrated in Table 4.9.
Grade Maximum salaries

Grade Line I Grade Line II Grade Line III
100% 110% 120%
4 16430 (100%) 18073 19760

5 18403 (+12%) 20243 22084
6 20794 (+13%) 22873 24953
7 23582 (+13%) 25940 28298
Table 4.9: Differences between maximum salaries of pay lines and the
progression within the grade
The percentage (12 and 13 per cent) after the amounts of £18,403 and
£20,794 represents the difference (progression) in relation to the
amount of £16,430.
It will be clear that an employee who has been classified to pay line
III of grade 5 and has reached the maximum salary of £22,084 will
not be satisfied with a reassignment to grade 6, line I, because the
maximum salary there is lower than he has already reached in grade 5.
As Table 4.10 shows, the job family secretariat has four consecu-
tive job levels. All these jobs have been assigned to either grade 4, 5,
6 and 7 which allows a salary to grow from £13,968 (minimum salary
of grade 4) to £28,298 (maximum salary of grade 7, pay line III). If in
this example the amount of £13,968 is set at 100 per cent, then the
prospect in this series of an amount of £28,298 equals 195 per cent;
Table 4.10: Level indicators and sample summaries on which Figures 4.22
and 4.23 are based
Job family secretariat
Grade 4 5 6 7
Level Technical operational Technical work with co- Specialist operational Specialist activities with
activities according to ordinating, preparatory activities according to co-ordinating, pre-
guidelines with indica- and operational guidelines with a large paratory and mainly
tor direct supervision. elements. Possibly degree of autonomy. operational elements.
Possibly operationally operationally in charge Possibly operationally Usually operationally in
in charge of some of some technical in charge of some tech- charge of some techni-
employees carrying out employees who carry nical employees cal employees
routine activities out operational activities
Sample Performing typing work Performing various Performing full secre- Performing full secre-
(from drafts) and secretarial tasks of a tarial standard tasks tarial tasks of relatively
routine secretarial routine nature, such as such as: carrying out high responsibility and
summary tasks of a typing from draft (some various repetitive activi- of a confidential nature,
simple nature. in a foreign language), ties without assistance such as: carrying out
Performing some drafting routine letters, and within clear terms various repetitive activi-
limited administrat ive taking down shorthand of reference, initiating ties without assistance
tasks related to this notes. Taking minutes the follow-up of actions and within general
typing work, such as: of meetings. Carrying by superior, taking terms of reference.
making out routine administra- down shorthand notes, Interpreting issues and
appointments, filing, tive tasks, such as: drafting routine letters, taking action, setting up
copying of documents. typing, making appoint- handling the mail with- subsystems for specific
ments and itineraries, out consulting others. tasks, taking down
handling mail, starting Carrying out standard shorthand notes, taking
and maintaining files administrative tasks, minutes, drafting letters
such as typing, collect- (possibly in a foreign
ing and summarising language). Organising
data according to meetings and business
instructions, design- trips Possibly managing
ing/managing the files, typists and other secre-
possibly directing taries
typists and other
secretaries
almost double the original amount.

If we combine the possibilities of the JFM with those of the flexible
remuneration structure, we arrive at a model that can best be called
the career remuneration model (CRM). When hiring an employee or
assigning or re-evaluating a job it will be checked whether this person
or job meets the criteria which have been laid down for each grade in
the JFM. Next, this assessment is translated into the assignment of the
employee or job to one of the four grades. Depending upon the level
of the employee and the job requirements at the start of the employ-
ment, the job can be entered at any level between the minimum salary
of grade 4 and the maximum salary of grade 7. The only (systems)
requirement of the starting salary agreed is that the amount must lie
within the salary range of the chosen grade. After that there will be no
need to complete a new job description and evaluation at each change
during the rest of his career. A check as to whether the requirements
of the method are met is sufficient when agreeing the next step in his
career with the employer.
With this method not only vertical career steps can be managed. It
can also be used to explain where and why a further (vertical)
progress is no longer possible. Next, depending upon the availability
of suitable permanent positions, the possibilities of a horizontal career
development can be investigated.
To summarise, it can be said that depending upon the availability of
positions the progress of the individual employee through this career
– the job level (level indicators and sample summaries)

– assessment of the functioning of the employee (pay line)
– assessment of the quantitative performance (granting one or
more increments)
remuneration model is governed by:

Of course the CRM has the same positive and negative aspects as the
flexible salary structure as described in section 4.11.
The CRM offers great flexibility for the development of employ-
ees, while on the other hand a number of assessments have been
built in that puts a break on the progress in the case of a negative
assessment.
Next, we describe the procedure for adjusting the salary within
the open scales structure with several pay lines, within the context
of the CRM as elaborated in Table 4.11 and illustrated in Figures
Table 4.11: Progress of an employee through various grades
Action Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Compa-

Ratio
Hiring: Assignment 13,968 85
to pay line 1
Increment 14,378 88
Assignment of 14,793 90
functioning:
assign to pay line II
Increment 15,243 93
Testing against job 15,703 85
requirements:
assign to grade 5
Assessment of 16,213 88
functioning:
requirements:
assign to grade 6
Increment 17,253 83
functioning:
Increment 18,413 89
performance
grant 2 increments
Increment 20,153 97
requirements:
assign to grade 7
performance:
grant 2 increments
Increment 22,545 96
functioning:
assign to pay line III
Increment 24,165 102
Increment 24,975 106
4.27 and 4.28.

Figure 4.23 shows how an employee can progress through the various
grades. Here are some considerations on the course of this ‘growth
line’ in Figures 4.23 and 4.24:
– The difference between two consecutive grades is relatively small,

as is evident from the level indicators and the sample summaries in
Table 4.10. This implies that the step to a higher grade is relatively
easily made.
– If an employee is classified in a higher grade, he is usually placed
at pay line I.
– If the difference between two consecutive grades is relatively small,
the step to the next higher grade can be seen as a re-evaluation. If
the career steps are larger, for instance when an employee is reas-
signed from grade 5 to grade 7, there is a rather marked difference
in the weight of the requirements of the job. In that case such steps
could be called a promotion.
– It is more obvious to offer an employee on pay line III a promotion
instead of a re-evaluation. In practice a re-evaluation is more likely
when the employee is on pay line I or II. (See also section 4.11 for
Flexible growth through testing

10000 against job requirements and
assessment of performance, which
may result in placement on a higher MAX. SALARY
pay line PAY LINE III
Progress through the grade on the MAX. SALARY
9000 basis of assessment of PAY LINE II
performance grade 7
MAX. SALARY
grade 6 PAY LINE I
8000 (standard)
SALARY
grade 5
7000 MIN. SALARY
grade 4
.... Note: The horizontal segments of

6000 the dotted line do not represent
growth in salary, but a 'jump' in
the prospects as a consequence
of proceeding through the grades
5000
'TIME'
Figure 4.22: The career remuneration model: steps through the

various grades
the requirement for placement on one of the pay lines.)

In Figure 4.24 a promotion is visualised from grade percentage, pay
line III to grade 7, pay line I. It shows that the employee is ready for a
new challenge, because the difference in level between grades 5 and 7
is substantial. An employee assigned to pay line III can be expected to
be able to perform well on that higher level of grade 7. Figure 4.23
illustrates just what happens in the case of a re-evaluation of the job or
a reassessment of the job-holder.
Using the CRM offers more opportunities to differentiate the remu-
neration than the traditional salary structure. The need for such differ-
entiation depends on the developments in the labour market for
specific job families (see Table 5.4). A (temporary) higher valuation
on the market as, for example, jobs in the field of automation, may
cause an increase in the total remuneration level of this ‘column’ in
the JFM relative to the other job families. If this increase is no longer
expedient, because in the market the salaries for this job family have
decreased to a level that is comparable with that of other job families,
the old situation can be restored. This may be achieved by temporarily
suspending structural increases of the salaries in the grade concerned.
In fact this adds a new dimension to the salary structure, which
Flexible growth through testing

10000 against job requirements and
assessment of performance, which
may result in placement on a higher MAX. SALARY
pay line PAY LINE III
Progress through the grade on the MAX. SALARY
9000 basis of assessment of PAY LINE II
grade 7
performance
MAX. SALARY
grade 6 PAY LINE I
8000 (standard)
SALARY
grade 5
7000 MIN. SALARY
grade 4
.... Note: The horizontal segments of

6000 the dotted line do not represent
growth in salary, but a 'jump' in
the prospects as a consequence
of proceeding through the grades
5000
'TIME'
Figure 4.23: The career remuneration model: re-evaluation and

promotion within the same job family
now in total consists of the following elements:

– salary grades of bands;
– job levels which are based on standards laid down in the JFM
(referring to the ideal situation);
– additional increments on the basis of the performance;
– differences in pay levels of various job families depending upon the
situation in the labour market.
Advantages of the Career Remuneration Model

– the model can easily absorb changing conditions in the labour
market (see section 4.8 on preconditions);
– the model makes it clear to the employees what prospects and
possibilities for development exist in the organisation and how
growth and development will be remunerated in the technical
sense;
– the model provides clear, crucial decision points (see Figures 4.23
and 4.24) which make it possible to manage the development and
the career of individual employees more precisely.
– the model offers insight into opportunities for both vertical and
horizontal development as well as into the prospects which the vari-
ous job families offer.
– the model does not enforce predetermined reassignments to grades.
As every job is part of a job family, a job-holder may start in a
lower grade than the ultimately intended grade. If, after a predeter-
mined assessment period the employee performs satisfactorily, he
can be classified in the intended grade.
The model offers the opportunity to differentiate the pay policy in
accordance with developments in the labour market.
Disadvantages of the CRM

As with any flexible method of remunerating or classifying jobs, the
CRM requires discipline on the side of the assessor. Not only are
individual capabilities of employees important, but also the number
of permanent positions and their design (we also refer to what has
been said in the Introduction under the heading ‘Rationale’).
4.13 CHECKLIST REMUNERATION

A checklist for the remuneration issue should be quite extensive in
order to treat all possible considerations as a basis for the develop-
ment of a balanced pay policy. In addition to primary terms of

employment (remuneration), the checklist also deals with secondary
(benefits) and tertiary terms, because these constitute an integral part
of the remuneration issue.
Basic principles of a remuneration policy

-– What are the mutual relationships between the primary, secondary
and other components of the remuneration policy? Which element
is considered to be the most important?
– What constitutes the basis of the salary structure?
– Does the organisation want to have an autonomous remuneration
policy or a policy which is derived from collective labour agree-
ments?
– Does the organisation want to pursue a rigid or a more flexible
remuneration policy? How disciplined is management in applying
the systems?
– Is the organisation considering implementing one or possibly more
new job evaluations? How familiar and comfortable is the organisa-
tion with the phenomenon of job evaluation? What are the reasons
for selecting one or several specific methods?
– Is the organisation considering implementing a performance
assessment system? In what way, if at all, do the results of this
assessment influence the remuneration level of individual employ-
ees or groups of employees?
– What should be the relationship between the remuneration level of
higher and lower jobs? What are the effects on the gross/net pay
ratio?
– Are exceptions allowed in the remuneration of specific jobs or job
families in comparison with others in order to follow developments
in the labour market?
On what criteria does the organisation want to base the differ-

ences in pay?
– Differences in the weight of jobs?
– Does it want to promote growth in the jobs or rather promotions?
– Differences in experience and seniority?
– Does it want, or will it allow, differences in pay for one and the
same job? Does it want such differences on all levels of jobs?
How should the remuneration system be communicated?

– Has every employee access to information on the salary
structure/regulations?
– Is it useful/desirable to formulate strict rules to ensure the correct
application of the system? Should every employee be able to verify
the correct application?
Construction of the system

– Does the salary system function well?
– What are the financial consequences of a reassignment to another
(higher/lower) grade. What is regarded as a re-evaluation of a job;
what is a promotion? Should each of these result in differences in
remuneration?
– Does the organisation intend to implement a form of performance-
related pay and how will these rewards be linked to the salary
scale? How large should the difference be between marginal perfor-
mances and ‘excellent’ performances? How many ‘levels’ of
performance are there and have these levels been clearly defined?
Is there a standard against which performance is measured?
– What are the rules for applying variable remuneration?
– What solution will be chosen for employees whose salaries do not
fit into the grade to which they should be classified?
– Have these rules for the application of the pay policy been laid
down in a document on the rules and regulations on remuneration?
– Which forms of appeal against the results of a job evaluation and
personnel assessment are open to the employee?
Parameters of the salary system

– Should a difference in the weight of jobs, however small, always
result in a difference in salary, or should the salaries of those jobs
remain the same for a certain period of time (overlap in grades)?
How large is that overlap allowed to be?
– How large is the difference in remuneration between the highest
and lowest job? Is this spread perceived to be fair? How many
grades should there be between these highest and lowest salaries?
Is the line between these highest and lowest salaries uninterrupted
or should there be ‘breaks’?
– How large is the difference between the minimum and maximum

salary of a grade and is this difference the same in all grades ?
– What progression should there be between grades, ie should the
difference be as a percentage between consecutive (maximum
salaries of) grades? Where more than one job evaluation method is
used, how far does that correspond with differences in weight of
jobs according to the standards in these job evaluation methods?
– Is there a link between the minimum and maximum salaries in the
various grades and the ages of employees? For instance, is the
minimum salary for all grades set for the same age?
– In what way does the salary progress within a grade, eg through
steps or through a system of flexible increments?
– If a system of performance-related pay is used, how large is the
variable part of the salary allowed to be at the most in relation to
the total (fixed) salary?
– To what extent does the variable part of the remuneration count
with respect to other terms of employment, for instance the pension
basis? Is it possible to prevent this?
5
Salary surveys
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Income or salary surveys (remuneration comparisons) are carried out
by several (commercial) agencies, groups of companies and associa-
tions. They cover most elements of the terms of employment of the
participants, including salaries and other conditions and benefits. The
reason for this is that only all these terms in their mutual relationships
can constitute a sound basis for testing and comparing the remunera-
tion policy of an individual company. Some agencies calculate the
value of the benefits and other benefits in order to arrive at a total
income or total remuneration of the job surveyed. Most agencies and
firms indicate only to what extent certain benefits are used. In this
way they offer a starting point to companies that want to establish
whether their policy differs from other participants of the survey.
Participating in a salary survey also provides insight into the relation-
ship between salary (direct pay) on the one hand and benefits on the
other hand. In this chapter we will concentrate on comparing the
salary conditions, ie the remuneration, and discuss the content of a
salary survey, possible set-ups and how far the results of the surveys
of different agencies are comparable.
An organisation may decide to participate in a salary survey for
various reasons. The most obvious is to be able to compare its own
salary level with that of other organisations. Also the relationships
between salaries within the organisation compared with those of
others may be useful, because in this way differences in the remunera-
tion for specific jobs and job families will become apparent.
Salary surveys can be divided into two large groups:
– surveys based on job evaluation points;

– surveys based on job titles and a short summary of the job content.
Salary surveys 191
The first type of salary survey compares jobs on the basis of their
(relative) weight. These comparisons usually involve only the job eval-
uation points and salaries. In the second type of survey a series of job
titles is accompanied by a short summary of activities and responsibil-
ities and of the context and the place of the job within the organisation.
Through a matching process the relative ‘weight’ of jobs is established.
In contrast to surveys on the basis of job evaluation points, the compar-
isons are made against various criteria, such as age, seniority, sales,
number of employees which report to the job, etc.
Salary surveys use statistical calculation models which may be
quite complicated, partly depending upon the type of survey. In most
cases the Personnel Officer is at the mercy of the organiser of the
survey where it concerns the interpretation and reliability of the
results of the survey. This is an aspect which certainly deserves more
attention by the agencies and which is the reason why associations
and groups of companies have started their own ‘club surveys’. These
club surveys have the advantage that they can focus on aspects and
issues that are of particular interest to the members/participants. The
demand for surveys of specific jobs and job families may also have
played a role. It is thus not surprising that the larger agencies and
consultancy firms also try to meet these needs.
In this chapter we will discuss the salary surveys of the following
firms:
– Hay Management Consultants;

– Towers Perrin;
– Watson Wyatt.
In order to provide a maximum insight into the meaning of the

outcome of these surveys, they are simulated. Therefore we have
asked each firm to clearly indicate in what way they process the data
and how the calculations are made. For the comparison between these
surveys we have a database of approximately 2,250 job-holders in
some 15 companies. The necessary calculations were made using the
statistical software package SPSS PC+. Thanks to the help of the
support department of this software company, we have been able to
obtain a sound insight into the differences between the three salary
surveys.
Table 5.1 lists the elements that are taken into consideration in our
investigation.
Table 5.1: Set-up of the model for comparing salary surveys
Elements
Job JEP
Survey based on job evaluation points
– Results of job evaluation as a total number
– of points
JTS
Survey based on job summary
– Job title with short summary of content
– Reporting level
– Number of employees job-holder
– is in charge of
– Required level of education
Job-holder - Age
– Number of years in employment
– Number of years in job
Environment (factors within – Sales of company

the company) – Total number of employees of organisation
– Type of organisation; domestic or foreign
– parent company
In surveys on the basis of job title plus summary (JTS), the organising
agency usually provides a diagram showing the relationship between
the various types of jobs, as well as their organisational context. This
does not prevent serious errors from being made sometimes, in partic-
ular in the case of corporations with a division structure, organisation
split-ups in groups of operating companies and business units.
With regard to surveys on the basis of job evaluation points (JEP),
it must be kept in mind that various job families and lines of business
are sometimes grouped together too easily, arguing that similar point
scores would make these comparable. Definitions of concepts used
are essential to ensure a correct input and interpretation of the
outcomes. Unfortunately, the contents of these definitions may vary
considerably between system-holders. Some organisations make a
distinction between a fixed and a variable component of share profits.
An example of this is that, whenever a company makes a profit, a
fixed percentage of the salary will be paid. The size of the variable
components depends then in part upon the actual size of the profit.
If such a system is used, the fixed and the variable parts of the
Salary surveys 193
profit-sharing need to be proportionally allocated to the basic salary

and the total cash.
Without exception all firms use the following statistical level indi-
cators for the labour market.
D9: Ninth or upper decile

The ninth decile represents the level at which 10 per cent of the obser-
vations have a score or value higher than that level and the remaining
90 per cent a lower one.
Q3: Third or upper quartile

The third quartile represents the level at which 25 per cent of the
observations have a score or a value higher than that level and the
remaining 75 per cent a lower one.
M: Median
The median represents the middle observation.
A: Average or mean
The average is the arithmetical middle of the value or scores of the
observations.
Q1: First or lower quartile

The first quartile represents the level at which 75 per cent of the
observations have a score or value higher than that level and the
remaining 25 per cent have a lower one.
D1: First or lower decile

The first decile represents the level at which 90 per cent of the obser-
vations have a score or value higher than that level and the remaining
10 per cent have a lower one.
There may be some differences in the names that are used for these
concepts in the sense that the first decile/quartile is called the lowest
and the lowest decile/quartile the first.
MAXIMUM MAX
10%
UPPER DECILE D9
UPPER
Q3
QUARTILE
MEDIAN M
100%
75%
LOWER
Q1
QUARTILE 50%
25%
LOWER DECILE D1
10%
MINIMUM MIN
Figure 5.1: Meaning of the concepts decile and quartile
5.2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

Each agency that carries out a salary survey sets its conditions for
participation. However, none stipulates the requirements which the
investigation should meet. Nevertheless these requirements are deci-
sive for the quality of the survey and the credibility of its results. We
therefore give some examples of requirements of both the participat-
ing organisations and the jobs included in the survey.
Preconditions that should be met as far as possible by the partici-

pating organisations
1. Participating organisations are preferably from the same indus-
try or line of business. The size of the business and of the
participating organisation are also important factors. Jobs in
automation are differently valued/rewarded in software firms
from those, for example, in paper companies. The distinction
between companies and non-profit organisations is important.
2. If the survey also wants to investigate the salaries of jobs lower
in the hierarchy, this should be done on a regional level, rather
than on a national level. Employees for these jobs are usually
recruited regionally and not nationally.
Salary surveys 195
3. Companies in the survey, which in general pay relatively high

salaries, are less important to the companies with a relatively
low level of remuneration.
4. The composition of the total pay package, and the policy
concerning the relationships between pay, benefits and other
provisions, influence the results of the survey to such an extent
that wrong conclusions may be drawn.
5. Participating organisations should co-operate where possible
and ensure the highest possible level of consistency of the
input. Large changes in the survey population have a notice-
able influence on the results of the investigation.
Preconditions which the jobs/job-holders must meet

1. The job must be representative for the job family to which it
belongs. For each job family jobs of various levels must be
included.
2. The jobs must be comparable externally. It makes little sense
to include jobs which are specific to a particular company,
because these are not comparable with others or are only
comparable by chance.
3. The jobs should be relatively stable. Functions of which the
content frequently changes or jobs with a high turnover rate
are bad material for comparison. The remuneration level for
these jobs depends too much on coincidence.
4. The jobs must have been described clearly and preferably
concisely (in the case of a job title survey). If not, compar-
isons become difficult.
5. If carried out consistently and in a controlled fashion, job
evaluation provides a very useful contribution to the
comparisons.
Preconditions which must be met by the consultancy firms carry-

ing out a salary survey.
1. In the case of a survey on the basis of job evaluation points, the
consistency with which the job evaluation is used must be care-
fully monitored. Job inflation could result in shifts in the remu-
neration practice, as will be demonstrated in this report.
2. In the case of a survey on the basis of job titles plus summaries,
care must be taken that the job summaries are correctly inter-
preted when applied to the jobs of the participant. Job
summaries must be of high quality, to make real comparisons
possible. Personal guidance from the consultant of the organis-
ing firm is required. In addition, the place of the job in the
organisation must be clearly delineated.
3. Set-up and format of the report sent to the participants must
allow for comparisons across several years. New elements
added to the survey must be clearly pointed out.
4. For data collection the consultancy firms in general use ques-
tionnaires. Practice shows that these questionnaires quite
frequently change in format. This not only causes differences
in interpretation, but requires extra effort from the participating
organisations. Restraint is in a sense a precondition.
5. The report should in clear terms provide insight into the statis-
tical calculation methods that have been used. The interested
participant should be able to compare (other) jobs in his
company (again) with the information from the survey.
6. Graphs should be easily readable. The use of logarithmic scales
should be restricted to what is absolutely necessary. A graph is
only useful if the values at the X- and Y-axes are clearly indi-
cated and can be read accurately. It is not so important if this
requirement results in straight or curved lines.
The degree to which the various elements of the requirements are

fulfilled has a major impact on the results of the investigation and the
salary surveys.
As we pointed out earlier, a salary survey can be set up and imple-
mented in a number of ways:
– as a survey on the basis of job evaluation points (JEP), or on the

basis of job titles plus summaries (JTS);
Salary surveys 197
– adding elements which the investigator thinks important for

reasons of comparison;
– addressed to different participating organisations and jobs.
In carrying out the salary surveys, agencies and consulting firms may
use the following calculation methods:
Determining quartiles
For each job (in a survey on the basis of job titles plus summaries) or
each measuring point (in surveys on the basis of job evaluation
points) the values of the upper and lower quartiles and the median of
the values (salaries) obtained are calculated. Thus for the same job, or
for the same job level, all quartile values are calculated.
Linear or multiple regression analysis

Regression analyses are used to determine and test the relationships
between a number of elements (independent variable) and the salary
(dependent variable). An example is provided by the Hay method
which opted here for an approach on the basis of linear regression
calculus to determine the relation between job evaluation score and
salary for each individual participant. The Tower Perrin method has
opted for the non-linear multiple regression approach.
Regression calculations combined with determination of

quartile values
For each participating organisation the (linear or multiple) regression
line is determined. For each measuring point in the job evaluation
surveys, quartile values of all regression lines are calculated. The Hay
survey may also serve here as an example for the presentation of the
survey results to all participants; in the report it includes the line of
central tendency.
5.3 SALARY SURVEYS

5.3.1 Hay Management Consultants
In their survey report Hay Management Consultants clearly distin-
guish between their salary survey and the so-called ‘packages
comparisons’. In the latter, emphasis is on benefits and tertiary provi-
sions for employees. The Hay Remuneration Survey is typically
tailored to participants who use the Hay method for job evaluation and
job profiling.
In a number of ‘job families surveys’ a different approach is taken.
There the basis of the comparisons is the total score of the job (in a
job evaluation based survey) as determined through the Hay method.
The job evaluation process within the participating organisations is
tested by Hay against its standard evaluations. Deviations from this
standard are rectified and adjusted before the potential participant is
admitted to the survey.
Table 5.2: Comparative model of the salary survey by Hay Management

Consultants based on job evaluation
JEP Survey
Job – Total score covering factors such as job content, required

– level of education and number of employees reporting
– to the job
Job-holder – Not applicable
Context – Total score covering factors such as sales, budget size,

– type of organisation
The core of Hay’s salary survey consists of a number of graphs which

reflect the situation on the market (Figure 5.2). The graphs are made
for basic salary and total pay, and differentiate between participants
with a variable remuneration system and those without such a system.
The essence of the method used is as follows. For each participant
the regression line is calculated, assessed and, if necessary, adjusted
on the basis of a total review of the participant’s data. Hay applies
strict rules for this calculation method and the assessment of the
outcome (regression line), paying special attention to the effects
caused by the input of new participants in the survey.
A large number of companies participate in this salary survey
which covers tens of thousands of jobs. The huge amount of regres-
sion lines produced by this number of participants would make the
graphs unreadable and incomprehensible, because lines of individual
participants would barely be distinguishable. This is why Hay calcu-
lates the percentiles (upper decile, upper quartile, median, lower quar-
tile and lower decile) for a series of fixed measuring points. Next, a
graph is constructed for each participant which compares the pay
policy line of that participant with these percentiles.
Salary surveys 199
Hay differentiates between participants with variable remuneration

systems and those without, because this results in practice in clear
differences in the basic salaries. Each graph is accompanied by a table
providing the formulas for both quartiles and the median with which
sample points on the regression line can be calculated. The formulas
(see Table 5.3) are provided only for segments of the lines in the
graphs (see Figure 5.2), because the percentile lines are not straight.
In order to make comparisons with the results of salary surveys of
other firms, we have drawn a separate graph for the job of Profit
Centre Manager in which the pay practice is shown both on the basis
of the points scored according to the Hay method, and on the basis of
sales.
Table 5.3: Formulae for calculating individual positions on the pay policy
line from Figure 5.2
Market line Hay points Formula*
Q3 100– 300 46.8P + 7654

300– 800 53.78P + 5559
M 100– 400 48.49P + 6798

400– 800 45.31P + 8071
800– 900 87.26P – 25491
900– 1000 32.98P + 23361
Q1 100– 400 44.41P + 5428

400– 500 64.93P – 2778
500– 600 22.25P + 18562
600– 700 71.37P – 10910
*For P the number of Hay points must be substituted.
Details included in the report are:

– comparisons of wage costs and net pay for a number of European
countries;
– list of participating organisations;
– summary of the characteristics of groups of participants;
– comparison of pay practice and pay policy;
– difference in remuneration between large, medium-sized and small
companies;
– comparisons of total cash for various functional areas (see Table
5.4).
Table 5.4 Comparison of differences in remuneration of functional areas or

job families
Functional area
<300 300–600 600–1000 >1000
All jobs 100 (38) 100 (41) 100 (46) 100 (48)
General management – – – 106 (48)
Finance/accounting/
controlling 101 (37) 100 (39) 99 (43) 103 (47)
Automation
Personnel 97 (39) 98 (41) 99 (45) 101 (47)
Sales
etc
Note: The average ages of job-holders are given between brackets.

The numbers give the ratio to the totals of all participants in the
category.
Also details are provided on:
– the impact of differences of age;

– trends in the labour market concerning basic pay and total cash in
the previous five years;
– developments in the growth of individual salaries (separate
chapter);
– the expected growth of salaries in the coming period running
from 2 July to 1 July of the following year.
5.3.2 Towers Perrin

Towers Perrin produces and sells a report that concentrates on
comparing salary policy and salary practice. In addition, it includes
comparisons of a series of benefits and tertiary provisions for employ-
ees. The report also contains a rather (too) concise explanation on the
statistical analysis methods used by this firm. As a basis for these
comparisons Towers Perrin uses the job title plus a short summary of
the content of the job. The participant and Towers Perrin’s consultant
jointly establish whether the function in question is lighter, equal or
heavier than the standard job of Towers Perrin.
In its survey based on job title plus summary, Towers Perrin follows
a somewhat different approach in that it relates the position of each
Salary surveys 201
60000 Q3
M
Q1
50000
D9
40000
Annual Salary
D1
30000
20000
10000
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Total Points
*Head of Personnel Department: score 657 points, basic salary

£35,500.
Figure 5.2: Base salary of all participants (Hay)
70000
60000
50000
Annual Salary
40000
30000
20000
COMPARABLE SALES TURNOVER RANGE
5 MM 50 MM
10000
0
500 600 700 800 900 1000
Total Points
Figure 5.3: Basic salary of Profit Centre Manager related to sales (Hay)
individual job-holder to the labour market conditions (see Table 5.5).

Using multiple regression analysis the survey investigates at the same
time the impact of various individual remuneration factors and combi-
nations of factors. Specifically multiple regression analysis is applied
to factors that:
– determine the remuneration of individual job-holders;
– influence the predicted remuneration.
Table 5.5: Comparative model of the salary survey by Towers Perrin – the
standard job of Towers Perrin
JT Survey
Job – Job title plus short summary of the content of the job
Comparisons with ‘own’ job are made at three levels
– Level of education required by job
– Level to which the job reports
– Member of the Board
– Number of employees reporting to the job
– International experience
– Eligible (or not) for bonus
Job-holder – Age
– Number of years in employment
– Number of years in job
Context – Sales
– Total number of employees of the organisation
– Industry/line of business
– Type of organisation, eg local subsidiary, regional
A total summary in the form of a graph illustrating the position of the

participating organisation in relation to the other participants is
usually only provided upon request. Such a graph shows the differ-
ence in value of: 1 of pay of the ‘own’ organisation and 1 of pay of the
other participants. In other words, the X-axis of the graph shows the
salary level of the participating organisation, while the Y-axis shows
the corresponding salary level of the other participants. There is still
another difference, compared with other salary surveys. The data of
the ‘own’ organisation is separated from the data of other participants.
In this way the position of the participating organisation can be clearly
contrasted with that of the other participants, without affecting the
position of those participants.
Salary surveys 203
The first comparison in the survey report between basic salary and
total cash is based on calculations of Q1, M and Q3 of the actual
amounts. The tables are made ‘for all participants’ with a separate one
for the individual participant. The latter shows the position of each of
the jobs covered by the survey.
Next, a table (5.6) is given in which each individual job of the
participating organisation is compared with the market rate. Multiple
regression analyses are used to compare the position of the job-holder
with the market rates and of the job itself and the market rates.
Table 5.6: Position comparison table
Towers Perrin Remuneration Database

Position Summary Table
All Participants Analyses – Revenue Group 2 £51 – £200 Million
Position title: Profit Centre Manager

Job code: 101
Total cases: 71
Pay data Your Valid 25% ILE Mean Median 75% ILE
data cases
Base pay (£) 48398 71 31607 37630 35376 42874

Actual bonus(£) 11715 59 5125 7510 6131 10644
Other cash (£) 1343 59 N/A 671 671 1343
Total cash (£) 61457 71 55440 62348 64199 74297
Car value (£) 16790 59 16790 16790 16790 15670
Last base %
increase 3 55 4 6 5 9
Month since
adjustment 2 65 1 3 3 3
Target bonus * 25 61 N/A 18 17 36

Maximum bonus* 25 61 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Annual bonus El 55 are eligible

Share options El 4 are eligible
Other LTI El 1 are eligible
[*l]% of base
Scope data
Sales (£M) 115 71 51 81 88 125

Employees 210 71 92 125 134 251
Incumbent data
Age 48 71 37 43 43 47
Years in service 19 55 5 10 8 14
Years in position 6 59 1 4 4 6
EES supervised 12 59 2 7 4 8
Job impact data
Board membership 1Subsid Exec 0 Subsid Co 0 Corp Exec 0 Main B

Reporting level – this entity 0 RL 1 1 RL 2 6 RL 3 5 RL 4
Reporting level – total organisation 0 RL 1 0 RL 2 0 RL 3 0 RL 4
International responsibility 45 None 12 Incident 0 Signific 0 Major
Job match 0 are + 18 are –
The remainder of the survey report provides:
– information on the use of variable remuneration systems as part of

the remuneration policy and as a practical solution;
– the proportion of their total salary which the job-holders receive as
bonus, as well as the average amounts and percentages of the bonus
(provided in a separate table for each job title);
– information on the development of consumer prices;
– budgets for pay rises/reviews;
– overview of company cars given to holders of each job as well as
the average value of company cars;
– information on expense accounts;
– information on sundry provisions and facilities;
– overview of job titles and summaries.
Finally we give some examples of job summaries that Towers Perrin

uses in its survey.
Salary surveys 205
ERD – Capsule job descriptions
Job code 21 Quality Assurance Manager

Alternative position title Quality Control Manager
Job purpose To maintain and improve quality of manufactur-
ing processes and finished goods to meet
customer/internal requirements
Typical responsibilities Develops, defines and audits quality standards,
measures and methods throughout the design,
procurement and manufacturing processes;
establishes and maintains inspection and control
procedures; increases quality awareness in the
manufacturing function, eg through training,
quality initiatives; may have responsibility for total
quality management programme
Reporting structure Typically reports to Head of Manufacturing or to
Plant Manager; manages a small team of QA
technicians; reporting level 3/4
Typical minimum Technical degree: eight years’ relevant
experience/knowledge experience
Job code 22 Engineering Manager

Alternative position title Manufacturing Engineering Manager
Job purpose To provide technical/engineering support for the
production processes
Typical responsibilities Advises on production methods, quality and
procedures, changes and installation of equip-
ment; defines production processes and tech-
niques, including writing technical company
documents; liaises with external suppliers and
consulting firms as appropriate; may be respon-
sible for plant maintenance
Reporting structure Typically reports to Head of Manufacturing or
Plant Manager; manages a team of engineers;
reporting level 3/4.
Typical minimum Degree, qualified engineer; eight years’ relevant
experience/knowledge experience
5.3.3 Watson Wyatt

A distinctive feature of the Watson Wyatt report is the extensive infor-
mation it contains on the statistical techniques used. This information
is useful for understanding the formulas with which the individual
salary of, for instance, a senior executive can be calculated or deter-
mined. However, it is somewhat confusing that in the explanation of
the calculation methods and the sample calculations attached, in some

cases the influence of age and number of years in the job are demon-
strated, whereas in others immediately following, they are not. No
explanation is given. In addition, age and seniority are not taken into
account in the formulas represented in the graphs (Figure 5.4). In
calculating the amount of salary these formulas include only the
factors of sales and hierarchical level.
All jobs included in the report are represented in tabular form. The
amounts in the tables are the quartile and decile amounts directly calcu-
lated on the basis of the factual salary amounts. The individual salary
amounts in the ‘own’ organisation are not represented in the tables. In
order to be able to determine the correct position of the organisation
itself relative to the general data in the Watson Wyatt salary survey
report, the organisation has to preserve its own input data carefully.
The format of the report is the same for all countries in which
Watson Wyatt publishes salary surveys.
The report provides information on direct pay and benefits. Its
basis consists of short summaries of job which, in addition to a brief
description of the content, give a clear indication of the position of the
job within the organisational context. For this the report uses a model
of an organisation chart which comprises all the jobs in the organisa-
tion included in the survey. The content of the job will be classified
into three levels: A, B and C. The individual jobs of the own organisa-
tion are matched to these levels in order to establish their specific
levels. In the calculations and comparisons concerning jobs of senior
executives, factors such as level of sales, age, number of years in the
job, are taken into account. The factual pay practice of the organisa-
tion is determined through multiple regression analyses.
JT Survey
Job Job title with short summary at three levels: A, B and C
Job-holder Age
Number of years in job
Context Sales
The core of the report is the tables containing information for each
job. This information provides insight into the following characteris-
tics (see Table 5.7):
Salary surveys 207
ᔢ characteristics of the total sample, including details on sales,

manpower, age and years in the job;
ᔢ direct pay, giving details on the pay practice for the three levels as
a whole (A + B + C) and for each of the individual levels;
ᔢ bonuses and sales commission, the number of persons receiving a
bonus as well as the level of bonuses as a percentage of the salary.
Similar information is provided on sales commission.
The basic salary (which Watson Wyatt calls annual base salary or
ABS) corresponds with the definitions given in this chapter. The same
is true for total cash (which Watson Wyatt calls annual total remuner-
ation or ATR).
This report, too, starts with information on the participating organ-
isations, a review of trends and developments in salaries in the previ-
ous period and a preview of the expected increases in pay for the
coming period. Company cars are discussed and details are given on
company use of private cars and sundry benefits.
100000
LEVEL A
ANNUAL BASE SALARY
LEVEL B
LEVEL C
10000
10000 100000
SALES TURNOVER* 1000
level A: Log (salary) = 4,2123 + 0,0474 (log sales) + 0,1045
level B: Log (salary) = 4,2123 + 0,0474 (log sales)
level C: Log (salary) = 4,2123 + 0,0474 (log sales) - 0,0331
Figure 5.4: Product manager, annual base salary against company sales.
Table 5.7: Some examples of job summaries that Watson Wyatt uses in
its survey
Individuals covered: 86 D1 Q1 M Q3 D9 A
Total sample characteristics
Company sales 8 12 14 20 58 24
Company total
employment 100 140 190 250 550 237
Job-holder’s age 34 37 43 47 53 43
Years in present position 1 1 4 6 9 4
Direct compensation
All levels
A+B+C ABS 28462 31829 35307 40969 49865 37221
ATR 33831 38716 49023 60262 65213 50088
Level A ABS 32633 43749 49112 52511 56086 46672

ATR 59833 60262 63653 65189 71310 63983
Level B ABS 26113 31829 37506 40969 48972 36729

ATR 29941 38716 47807 53158 56731 45693
Level C ABS 28434 30853 32850 36548 39051 33562

ATR 33831 35612 38397 39214 46391 38689
Director of marketing
The position reports direct to the Chief Executive with responsibility
for initiating, planning, developing, co-ordinating and executing
marketing policies and programmes, determining marketing opportu-
nities and demand. May also have overseeing responsibilities for liais-
ing with agents, market research, sales promotion, advertising, public
relations and development of a marketing budget. If also responsible
for direction of field sales force and the achievement of a sales target,
the job should be matched against the Director of Sales.
Level A
The job-holder is responsible for marketing on an international scale
or alternatively in a very large or diversified organisation. Would
normally supervise a large team, either directly or indirectly, and have
a key impact on company performance.
Salary surveys 209
Level B
The job-holder heads up marketing for a domestic market in a large
organisation. Would normally supervise a medium-sized team.
Level C
The job-holder heads up marketing in a smaller-sized operation. May
supervise a small team of marketing support staff
Quality Control Manager

The position usually reports direct to the Director of Manufacturing and
may also be called Quality Assurance Manager. Responsibility for over-
seeing all quality control procedures and implementing policies as
directed by senior management to ensure conformity with legal or
corporate specifications and standards. Supervises inspection and test-
ing procedures and recommends corrective action as necessary.
Level A
The job-holder is responsible not only for quality control but also for
quality assurance, ie anticipation of regulations and standards to be
imposed in the future and initiating corrective action before mainline
production activity commences. The product is usually highly sensi-
tive (eg chemicals).
Level B
The job-holder heads up quality control in a large manufacturing
operation, with full responsibility for all stages of the quality control
activity. Likely to supervise a large team of quality inspectors, dealing
with a technical product range.
Level C
The job-holder is responsible for quality control restricted to the
final stage only, ie testing and discarding of substandard finished
products. The job-holder may report to the Manufacturing Manager
at this level.
6
Summary
Three groups of stakeholders in the organisation need to communicate

on the remuneration policy and parts thereof. It becomes increasingly
important that line management is well informed on all technical
aspects of job evaluation and remuneration. Only then can it appreci-
ate and approve the policy proposed. The personnel officer needs to
master these technical aspects in order to develop sound proposals for
this important element of personnel policy. The employees and their
representatives need to agree with the proposed remuneration policy,
which implies that they too must be familiar with the technical aspects
and concepts.
The employees, their representatives (and in some European coun-
tries the official workers’ council) are in general by no means experts
on the subject. Employees need to form an opinion and agree with
certain elements of the pay policy.
Frequently all parties lack knowledge of the various techniques
discussed in this book, in spite of the fact that this knowledge is essen-
tial to arrive at sound judgements. The book has therefore explained,
step by step, the technique of evaluating jobs and designing a salary
structure.
Grading jobs and classifying job-holders demands insight into the
elements that determine the weight of jobs. In addition, jobs in
entirely different areas and disciplines need to be ‘weighted’ in rela-
tion to each other – a rather abstract and abstruse process. The way in
which jobs are weighted is quite similar in most methods. Assessing
the required knowledge or know-how, for instance, can be found in
almost every method. How this characteristic of jobs is translated into
a certain number of points has been demonstrated through a number
of examples. Also, in methods in which jobs are ‘weighted’ by means
of comparisons of job level descriptions, ‘knowledge’ is a major
consideration in the evaluation. These methods, too, express the
differences in know-how in to a number of points.
Summary 211
Some three (computerised) job evaluation methods have been

compared, in each case using the treatment of ‘knowledge’ or ‘know-
how’ as the main example, in addition to a characteristic that typifies
the individual method. This approach provides, we expect, insight into
the various versions on the one hand and into the similarities which, in
principle, they all share on the other hand. A sound understanding of
the characteristics for which a job is evaluated and weighted is very
important. Only then will a personnel officer or consultant be able to
draft a clear description of the so-called level indicators and sample
summaries of jobs. These instruments are used in, for instance, a job
level matrix. However, persons who are not responsible for the design
of a job level matrix may also benefit from understanding these tech-
nical aspects. By developing a job level matrix the rigidity that
surrounds job evaluation is broken up to a large degree. This is not
only because the job level matrix lowers the threshold for grading and
classifying jobs, but also because with the job evaluation matrix the
organisation does not have to start from the existing situation and first
carry out a so-called ascertaining job analysis. The job level matrix is
a method of a rather normative nature, ie with this methodology tasks,
responsibilities and accountabilities are considered from a logically
coherent perspective of the organisation as a whole. The starting point
is not what the job-holder does, but what he is supposed to do. The
job-holder is evaluated for the degree in which he meets the job
requirements; the method sets targets and objectives against which
performance can be measured. The next logical step would be a struc-
turing approach, in which a job is evaluated on the basis of the
demands which the organisation sets in specific situations. It will be
clear that such a structuring methodology will go back to the very
rationale of the organisation. Why does the organisation exist? How
can work in the organisation be divided and co-ordinated? The job
level matrix fits excellently into this structuring approach.
Job evaluation needs not only to be more flexible in its design; it
also needs to be smoothly linked with the remuneration policy. A
change in the remuneration policy requires knowledge and insight
into the underlying technique, so that a proper design can be made.
This book provides the tools with which a salary structure can be
designed and developed.
Rewarding is not simply setting a salary amount. The whole area of
income in recent years has become more open for discussion.
Individual salaries and salary scales used to be private or at least
confidential issues. These days salary scales are more or less well
known, depending upon the business or the organisation. Employees

want to compare their classification to grades and pay lines. There are
still only relatively few managers who know how a salary scale is
built and what its components are. What are the rules? How do salary
scales relate to the quality of life in the organisation? How can an
enduring commitment to the organisation be made attractive?
Some organisations are best served by the traditional salary scale.
It provides certainty to the employee, and the line manager is able
simply to read off the scale the next salary amount to which an
employee is entitled. However, in this way the responsibility for the
remuneration of employees is not really being transferred to manage-
ment. The ‘open scales structure’, which was discussed in Chapter 4
and which constitutes the basis for flexible salary structures, is a first
step to shift this responsibility from the personnel department to the
line manager. He will then have to explain differences in pay to both
his subordinates and his superiors, especially if these differences are
linked to the evaluation of employees.
If performance-related pay becomes an integrated element of the
salary structure, a manager cannot any longer avoid assessing the
performance of employees before he can decide on the real level of
salaries. This causes an inherent conflict between the flexibility of the
job evaluation and the traditional salary structure. Therefore, flexible
remuneration structures are combined with the job level matrix in a
new methodology.
Chapter 4 ended with a discussion on the so-called career remuner-
ation model (CRM). This model offers flexibility in grading jobs and
setting salaries. In setting performance-related pay levels the model
makes a distinction between the qualitative and quantitative commit-
ments underlying the achievements. In addition, it provides the oppor-
tunity to differentiate the remuneration in accordance with
developments in the labour market.
With the CRM the added value an employee offers to the organisa-
tion can be rewarded. This added value is created when the employee
acquires useful knowledge, skills or competencies which exceed the
strict requirements of the job. At the same time the CRM can be used
to manage the development of careers in terms of the salary both
vertically and horizontally.
The model, however, also makes it possible to hire an employee at a
lower grade (within the series of the job family) than fixed rules
would prescribe. Arrangements concerning acquiring the skills to
meet the job requirements and the assistance being offered can be
Summary 213
made to provide clarity on the prospects.

Variations are conceivable and not all the possibilities of the CRM
need to be exploited at once. Of course, flexibility of the remuneration
policy is very much at the centre of attention. However, that does not
mean that everyone knows how to take advantage of or even deal with
this flexibility. The starting point of the remuneration policy should
therefore always be the preconditions as they have been formulated by
the organisation.
7
Definitions
Absolute maximum salary

Generally, this is the amount which an employee can reach when he
performs ‘very well’ or ‘outstandingly’. If a (limited) assessment or
performance causes that salary to be higher than 100 per cent, then the
sum of standard salary plus performance bonus is the absolute maxi-
mum salary.
Age-related pay
Within a specific grade the salary that is paid according to age.
Assessment increment
See Performance increment.
Base salary
Agreed standard salary plus (guaranteed) fixed remuneration compo-
nents, such as a regional allowance, job supplements, guaranteed
payments unrelated to performance, a fixed bonus, but excluding
overtime, shift premiums, unsocial hours allowances. If other fixed
components are part of the basic salary, the organisation needs to
point this out explicitly in its salary survey questionnaire.
Benchmark job
A job that may serve as an example for a large number of jobs within,
eg a certain function, trade, discipline, organisational unit or level, etc.
Both parties, employer and employee, have agreed on the description
and evaluation of the benchmark job.
Bonus
A once-only payment granted as a reward for extra effort. In some
organisations agreements are made in advance on the level of effort.
Definitions 215
Deciles/quartiles
D9: Upper or ninth decile
The upper or ninth decile represents the level at which 10 per cent of
the observations have a score or value higher than that level and the
other 90 per cent have a score or value lower than that level.
Q3: Upper or third quartile

The upper or third quartile represents the level at which 25 per cent of
other 75 per cent have a score or value lower than that level.
M: Median
The median represents the value of the middle observation.
A : Average
The average is the arithmetical middle of the values or scores of the
observations.
Q1: Lower or first quartile

The lower or first quartile represents the level at which 75 per cent of
the observations have a score or value lower than that level and the
other 25 per cent have a score or value higher than that level.
D1: Lower or first decile

The lower or first decile represents the level at which 90 per cent of
other 75 per cent have a score of value lower than that level.
These concepts are illustrated in Figure 7.1.
Evaluation
Determining the relative weight of jobs, systematically using a weigh-
ing or measuring instrument.
General (initial) pay rise

This term refers to the increase of the basic salary that in principle
every employee receives. Usually these increases are the outcome of
(collective) negotiations with trade unions or other representatives of
MAXIMUM MAX
10%
UPPER DECILE D9
UPPER
Q3
QUARTILE
MEDIAN M
100%
75%
LOWER
Q1
QUARTILE 50%
25%
LOWER DECILE D1
10%
MINIMUM MIN
Figure 7.1: Concepts of deciles and quartiles
employees. The increment can be differentiated according to the

weight and the hierarchical level of the job. If the increase is applied
uniformly, it is nevertheless called an initial pay rise.
General once-only bonus

Such a bonus is usually the result of collective bargaining and has the
form of a gross amount and/or a percentage of the basic salary. The
actual payment is incidental and once only. In contrast to profit shar-
ing and a bonus, it is not regarded as part of the basic salary.
Geometric scale
The difference between two consecutive values in a series is
expressed as a percentage of the preceding value. For instance in the
series, 100, 112, 136, 150 are transformed into the geometric scale of
1, 1.12, 1.21, 1.1.
Grade, job
A grade is a group of jobs which are accepted to be of a similar
level and therefore receive a similar remuneration.
Definitions 217
Grading
See Evaluating.
Individual increment
An added increase in salary to the general (initial) pay rise. This
includes periodical increments or scale step increments, assessment
increments and performance increments. Typically the level of the
increment may vary for each employee. Also, in organisations that do
not know general (initial) pay rises, an individual increment may
mean the total rise in salary for each employee.
Increment
The amount by which the salary as a rule will be increased until the
maximum salary of the grade is reached. The periodical increment is
in general granted annually. See also Individual increment.
Initial salary rise

See General (initial) pay rise.
Job
A set of tasks which are linked to responsibilities and competencies.
Job analysis
The process by which the content of a job is analysed and relevant
information for evaluating/grading of jobs is collected and recorded.
Job characteristic
Characteristic relevant for determining the level of a job. The content
and importance of a job characteristic is defined by the job evaluation
method.
Job description
A description of the job which is not exhaustive, but surveys the
requirements and aspects of the job which are used in the job evalua-
tion method and which provide insight into the factors which deter-
mine the weight of the job.
Job family
A number of jobs which are comparable in terms of content and tech-
niques used. A job family can be grouped on the basis of a function or
discipline (for instance, sales, accounting, production) on the one
hand or on the basis of the nature of the work (for instance, secretarial
jobs) on the other.
Job series
A series of jobs from the same job family which forms a logical
sequence in terms of content and weight.
Line jobs
Jobs that are ultimately responsible and accountable for the output
which a specific part of the organisation is expected to realise.
Logarithmic scale
The consecutive values of the scale are a factor 10 higher than its
predecessor.
Maximum salary
The maximum salary that an employee obtains if he performs at a
‘standard good’ level. This maximum salary, sometimes called ‘stan-
dard salary’ or midpoint salary, is equated with 100 per cent; the indi-
vidual salary, the minimum salary and the absolute maximum salary
are expressed as a percentage of this maximum salary. The standard
salary (100 per cent) can be taken as the benchmark of the compar-
isons.
Metrical scale
The consecutive values on a scale have equal distances to each other.
An example is the length of a yardstick.
Midpoint
The midpoint of a grade is the salary amount that every employee
reaches if he carries out his job normally. In terms of the weight of a
job the midpoint is the middle of the grade, expressed in job evalua-
tion points.
Definitions 219
Minimum salary
The starting salary for an adult employee in a specific grade or salary
scale. In general only salaries for young employees may be lower than
this minimum salary.
Points range
The limits of a grade, usually expressed in job evaluation points, by
which jobs of a similar level are grouped.
Overlap
The difference between the maximum salary of a grade x and the
minimum salary of the next higher grade x + 1.
Pay line (within the same salary band)

Line along which the salary of an individual progresses to its assigned
maximum in the salary band based on assessment of his performance.
Pay policy line

The line connecting the midpoint salaries or, in some organisations,
the maximum salaries of consecutive grades.
Pay practice line

The line indicating the relationship between, for instance, the total
score of job evaluation points and the factually paid full-time salaries.
Instead of job evaluation points another measure can be used as well.
The line representing this statistical relationship is also called the
regression line.
Pay range
The difference between minimum and maximum salary within a
salary band.
Performance increment
See Performance-related pay.
Performance-related pay
The (extra) remuneration that an employee receives as a reward for
recognisably higher performances than can be expected if a job is
carried out normally. In general this remuneration is determined as a
percentage of the scale salary and is granted as long as the higher
performances are realised. Sometimes an amount of money will be
paid afterwards for extra efforts during a certain period. This form of
performance-related pay is sometimes called a bonus.
Progression in a salary scale

The difference between the level of salaries in consecutive grades.
The progression is usually expressed as a percentage of the difference
between maximum salary amounts.
Prospects
The distance between the factual salary and the maximum of the
grade in which the employee has been classified. Prospects may also
refer to the opportunities for progress of an employee’s salary through
various grades (for instance, as a result of a re-evaluation of his job).
Ranking
Putting jobs in the order of their increasing weight, expressed in a
total number of job evaluation points.
Remuneration policy
The series of standard salaries or midpoint salaries which have been
established for the consecutive grades or scales. The ‘pay policy line’,
which is formed by this series of standard or midpoint salaries, can be
used for external comparisons. The ‘pay practice line’ is determined
in the same manner provided that instead of the standard or midpoint
salary the corresponding factual salaries are taken.
Salary band
The area which is formed by the salaries of jobs of similar level (job
grade). A coherent set of (salary) bands is called a salary scale.
Salary practice
The (gross) salary that is periodically paid to a full-time employee.
The limits for this salary are usually set by the minimum and the
absolute maximum salaries. See Pay practice line.
Definitions 221
Salary rise, across the board

This refers to the increase in salary that applies in principle to all
employees.
Salary rise, promotion

The increase in salary as a result of the employee being assigned to
a heavier job which is assigned to a higher grade.
Salary scale
A set of (salary) amounts which are systematically linked to each
other. A salary scale consists of several grades.
Salary scale amount

The amount of salary between the minimum and maximum salary of a
grade assigned to an employee. In the traditional salary structure the
amount of the salary is linked to a scale step.
Salary structure
The mutual ‘technical’ relationship on which a salary scale rests. The
technical relationship is the set of parameters that determines the
amounts of salaries in the salary scale.
Scale step
The serial number referring to a fixed amount somewhere between the
minimum salary (scale step 0) and the maximum salary (scale step x).
Supporting positions
Jobs that are created to provide specialist knowledge in a certain field
and have the task of supporting line management in developing and
implementing policies and making decisions.
System formula
The formula which defines the relationship between the remuneration
levels within a series of consecutive grades.
System-holder
The organisation which owns the job evaluation method and is there-
fore responsible for a correct application of that method.
Task
A set of similar or corresponding activities.
Total cash
Total cash is the basic salary plus all variable (non-guaranteed) remu-
neration components. It excludes all forms of costs allowances
because these components are not formally part of the remuneration.
Examples of variable remuneration are: bonuses, profit-sharing, gain
sharing, emoluments, etc.
Weighing factors
Multipliers in a job evaluation method with which the relative value
of a job characteristic can be expressed.
Width of grade
See Job ... headings.
Appendix 1
Request for a job analysis

To: Personnel Department
From: Head/chief of department/function/unit
Date:
I request that an analysis be made of the following job of which:

អ no job description has been made (new job)
អ a job description has already been made (existing job)
New job
អ The job has not yet been filled
អ The job is/will be carried out by:
Name:
Department/unit:
The tasks of the job are/will be carried out under the direct supervision of:
Name :
Department/unit:
Existing job
The job is being carried out by job-holder:
Name:
Department/unit:
Job title/name:
Job code:
In the current conditions the existing job description does not reflect the job
content any longer, due to the following reasons:
Applicant’s signature
Appendix 2
Request for bringing an appeal against the results of a job evaluation
Name:
Department/unit:
Job title/name:
Job code:
Contents of the appeal

(Clearly indicate whether the appeal is against the content of the job
description or against the grading or assignment of the job. If possible, indi-
cate whether data are omitted, errors are made in the job description, or the
grading, or assignment of the job is in your opinion not correct in view of the
grading/assignment of other jobs. Please indicate why you think so.)
Signature Date
Any comments by superior

(The superior is expected to give an opinion not only on the complaint as
such, but also on the reasons for the complaint having been brought
forward.)
Signature Date
Comments by Personnel Department

(Conclusions, decisions, arrangements, etc.)
Dealt with by:
To be considered and filled out after the complaints have been dealt
with by the Personnel Department.
The employee asks to submit his complaint before the supervising commission:
អ Yes អ No
Appendices 225
The employee asks to be given an opportunity to explain his complaint in

person before the commission of appeal.
អ Yes អ No
To be considered and filled out after the complaint is treated by the
commission.
The employee requests to submit his complaint before the commission of

appeals:
អ Yes អ No
The commission of appeals is requested to record its findings in writing and
to attach these to this form.
General
Received by Personnel Department:
Received by commission of appeals:
The job will be reassigned to/remains to be assigned to grade:
Appellant/complainant informed on (date):
Appendix 3
Rules for review and appeal

Section 1
The job-holder may only request a review of the results of a job evalu-
ation after being informed by the Head of the Personnel Department
of these results and of the position of the job in question relative to
similar jobs.
Section 2
The request for a review must be made in writing by the job-holder,
must state the reasons why a review should be made and must be
submitted to the Head of the Personnel Department within two
months after the date on which the job-holder has been informed in
writing of the results of the job evaluation.
Section 3
Paragraph 1
The request for a review must be treated by the supervising commis-
sion of the evaluation project. If possible, a decision should be taken
within three months after the request has been submitted. The job-
holder/complainant must be informed of that decision and the reasons
in writing.
Paragraph 2
An appeal against the decision of the supervising commission may be
brought before the commission of appeals, in writing within two
months. Before taking a decision the commission of appeals will give
the supervising commission an opportunity to be heard. During the
discussions on the appeal a member of the supervising commission
may be present.
Appendices 227
Paragraph 3
If possible the commission of appeals will decide on the appeal within
three months after the submission of the written appeal and state the
reasons for this decision.
Section 4
If, as a consequence of a review or a decision of the commission of
appeals, a job is re-evaluated and assigned to a different grade, any
salary adjustment will be backdated over the period during which the
salary should have been paid according to the review or the decision
of the commission.
This appeal procedure only applies to internal appeals. In some
cases there will be a need to have a procedure for appeals before an
external body, for instance before a joint committee of employers and
trade unions.
In addition to the procedure for the implementation of job evalua-
tion and for bringing appeals, many organisations create a supervisory
commission. The task of such a commission is to supervise the
correct and timely implementation of the agreed procedures and to
advise parties involved if asked.
For the proper functioning of that commission it is recommended
that rules and regulations are drafted in which the composition, objec-
tives, tasks and competence, etc are settled. An example of such rules
and regulations is provided in Appendix 4.
Appendix 4
Rules and regulations for Supervising Commission for job

evaluation
Section 1: Definitions
In these rules and regulations the following definitions apply:
ᔢ Company: Fiction Publishing Limited
ᔢ Management: Board of Directors and Managing Director of
Fiction Publishing Limited
ᔢ Commission: Supervising Commission for job evaluation
ᔢ Experts: Specialists appointed by the Company who on its behalf
carry out the job evaluation project
Section 2: Appointment of the Commission

2.1 A Supervising Commission will be appointed for the duration of
the job evaluation project. The number of members of the
Commission will depend upon the size of the company, respec-
tively of the subsidiary.
2.2 The members of the Commission will be partly selected from
representatives of the employees concerned and partly appointed
by the management. In addition, the members selected by the
employees and appointed by the management will jointly
appoint one of the specialists carrying out the project as an
adviser to the Commission. The Commission will be resolved at
the end of the job evaluation project.
2.3 If a member withdraws from the Commission, the party which
that member represented selects or appoints a new member
within two months.
2.4 The members of the Commission must be mature in their disci-
pline, or trade and have been in the employment of the company
for at least two years. The members of the Commission must be
prepared to take part in a special training programme.
Appendices 229
2.5 Membership of the Commission ends:

ᔢ after the job evaluation project is completed;
ᔢ when leaving the employment of the company;
ᔢ by resigning;
ᔢ if the representatives of the employees and the management
jointly decide to end the membership of a person on the
grounds that he or she does not act in accordance with the
spirit of co-operation necessary for achieving the objectives
of the project.
Section 3: Purpose of the Commission

To supervise and monitor the preparation, implementation and
completion of the job evaluation project and the procedures it requires
in such a way that acceptance of and adherence to the results by the
employees involved is as wide as possible.
Section 4: Duties and competencies of the Commission

4.1 The Commission will monitor and support the preparation,
implementation and completion of the job evaluation project
with regard to the methods, procedures, planning and progress. It
promotes the communication of effective information on the
system and its techniques to the employees concerned. The
Commission contributes to the smooth progress of the project by
preventing, signalling or rectifying misunderstandings and
incorrect information.
4.2 The Commission performs a monitoring/advisory role in dealing
with complaints about procedures and/or differences of opinion
between the employee concerned, his departmental head and/or
experts with regard to the job descriptions. In doing so it will not
interfere with the authority of the management of the department.
4.3 The Commission forms an opinion on the preparatory job rank-
ing the experts have made as a basis for comparisons. It may
advise the experts to carry out further investigations if it cannot
agree with this job ranking. The experts remain ultimately
responsible for the final ranking of jobs which will be presented
to the management.
4.4 The Commission has access to all data and records which may
provide insight into the implementation process and must be
informed about complaints regarding this process in order to
make an independent and objective judgement. The information
provided must be kept confidential.
4.5 The Commission is competent to hear the parties involved in

disputes and to obtain advice from third parties.
4.6 Proposals for changes in the approach, implementation, proce-
dures, planning, etc of the project can be submitted to the
Commission by its members, the Personnel Department and the
experts. Its decisions are binding for the parties concerned in so
far as these recognise the competence and responsibility of the
management of the department and of the system-holder.
Section 5: Rules for the meetings of the Commission

5.1 The Commission appoints a chairman from its members.
5.2 The Commission meets at least once every two months or more
frequently if required in the course of the project.
5.3 The Commission may invite experts to attend its meeting.
Section 6: Confidentiality
6.1 The members of the Commission and its advisers are to keep
confidential all information they obtain in their capacity as
members or advisers of the Commission, unless explicitly stated
differently.
6.2 The pledge of confidentiality is not removed by terminating the
membership of the Commission for whatever reasons.
Section 7: Protection
The management of the company ensures that the members of the
Commission will not be infringed in their rights, or put at a disadvan-
tage in their position in the company, as a result of their membership
of the Commission.
Section 8: Interpretation of and changes in these rules

and regulations
8.1 In case of disputes on the application and interpretation of
these rules and regulations the management and a delegation of
the employees decide jointly after hearing the parties
concerned.
8.2 These rules and regulations can be changed or supplemented
by a joint decision of the management and delegates of the
employees.
Appendices 231
Appendix 5
Questionnaire for job analysis

As was pointed out earlier, the questionnaire is an excellent instru-
ment for collecting relevant information on the jobs to be analysed. It
is also very useful as a preparation for the interview with the job
analyst. The structure of the questionnaire should match the job evalu-
ation method that will be used. In addition, the format of the question-
naire should be such that it collects sufficient information on both
operational and staff jobs. It is recommended that a short explanation
be given on each question. The following example contains the
essence of the questionnaires used by the Hay method.
Name of the company: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Name of the sector/department: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Name of the job-holder: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reports to (job title): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organisation chart
Please draw an ‘organisation chart’ which clearly indicates the posi-
tion of your job. Indicate whether subordinate jobs report to your job
and if so, which jobs report to the same immediate superior as yours.
Also, stipulate any relationships with another functional job. In the
organisation chart use a full line for hierarchical relationships and a
dotted line for functional relationships.
Please indicate some of the areas which your job influences directly
or indirectly. Quantify the areas which your job influences as far as
possible in terms of numbers, amounts, percentages, etc. In Table
A.5.1 you will find some examples.
Table A.5.1: Quantitative information
Last year This year In three years’ time
Number of subordinates
Annual sales
Costs budget
Labour costs
Value added
Capital investment
budget
What are the major activities?

What are the main activities expected from you? In addition to ‘what’,
please indicate ‘why’.
Summary of the functional area

Please give a short summary of your job and of the area in which its
activities are. You should consider issues such as: type and nature of
work and activities; the most important characteristics of the func-
tional area; the features and characteristics that distinguish this area
from other functional areas within the organisation, etc.
Communication skills/human resource skills

Please indicate the major internal and external contacts and relation-
ships that you, in the capacity of your job, need to maintain. Specify
the function/department/organisation with which you maintain rela-
tionships and describe the nature and the purpose of these contacts.
Give an estimation of the frequency of these contacts.
In the capacity of your job you may be a member of one or more
commissions and councils. Of which major bodies are you a member
by virtue of this job? What is your role in these bodies? List the
names of these bodies, their nature and purpose and the frequency
with which they meet.
Do you have to use a foreign language in your job?
Appendices 233
Specific questions
Functional accountability
Please indicate the jobs from which you receive immediate instruc-
tions and assignments and on which your immediate superior has no
authority, as in projects, or in some of your tasks as a specialist. Give
a short description of the nature and purpose of these activities.
Hierarchical leadership
In your job are you in charge of subordinate employees?
If so, please list these jobs, give a short description of the results that
are expected of these jobs and what your contribution is towards
achieving these results.
Functional leadership
Please list any other (non-subordinate) employees to whom you give
direct instructions and assignments and on which the immediate hier-
archical superior has no authority, such as in projects in specialist
activities, and give a short description of the nature and purpose of
these jobs.
Complexity of issues
What is the nature of the problems and issues you need to solve?
What is the nature of the solutions expected from you?
Specific problems
Give two controversial issues for which a solution is expected from
you.
Instructions and constraints
With which rules and constraints do you have to comply in carrying
out your job? (For instance, prices, discounts, budgets, systems,
codes, reports, procedures, etc.) Which decisions do you have to
submit to your direct superior?
Specific skills
Do you have to operate special equipment?
Do you have to work or process specific materials? If so, which?
Does your job demand special attention, accuracy or precision? If so,
in what sense?
Are special faculties required (smell, taste, distinguishing colours,
etc)? If so, which?
Accountablities
Specify the main results which you are expected to achieve. We do not
want you to describe the various duties and activities, but are looking
for a concise summary of the main results. What are your main
responsibilities? What levels must be attained?
Objective of the job

Please try to describe briefly and concisely (in one or two sentences)
the objective of your job. What does it contribute to the organisation
as a whole; what is the share of your results in the total activities?
Inconveniences
Does your job include activities which require physical force? If so,
which?
Does your job include activities which require an unnatural, forced
position? If so, which?
In your job do you run the risk of catching a disease or having an
accident?
In this questionnaire other items can be included as well, depending
on the job evaluation method used. These differences are not essen-
tial, but may assist in the ranking of a job or in subdividing the ‘char-
acteristics’ which the method uses in to ‘factors/aspects’. It is
recommended that the questionnaire should start with detailed ques-
tions of the job and gradually progress to the final descriptions of the
objectives and responsibilities of the job.
The above questionnaire includes items which are typical for jobs
of a supporting or advisory nature (staff jobs); other items apply more
to operational activities. It may be sensible to draft one questionnaire
for both categories of jobs and then make a specialised questionnaire
for certain groups of jobs.
Appendices 235
Appendix 6
Business characteristics of Fiction Publishing Limited

(basic document for the Personnel Department)
History
Fiction Publishing Limited was founded in 1948. Its original business
was to publish school books for primary education. After a number of
take-overs of smaller companies between 1981 and 1982 its activities
were substantially extended. In the mid-eighties the publishing
company had a comprehensive list of titles intended for higher profes-
sional education and for practising professionals of an advanced level.
Because of its strong position in both market segments, the company
was bought by the publishing corporation INFO in 1990.
Main activity
Fiction Publishing Limited produces (intellectually and technically)
and markets high-level educational and informational publishing
products, in particular in the field of marketing, personnel, social law,
and insurance and pensions.
The products are distributed by a sister company (Distrifiction).
Organisation structure
The organisation structure is market-oriented and product/market
departments have been separated from supporting departments. The
product/market departments are business units which are responsible
for sales and profit margin. These departments are headed by a Head
of Publishing Department (see Figure A.6.1). Together these heads of
departments form the so-called executive team, which is chaired by
the managing director. In total, Fiction Publishing employs some 280
persons.
The primary functional areas are as follows:
Board of Directors
Managing Director
Personnel Finance &

Accounting
4 EES 10 EES
Business Business Business Business Business Editorial Sales Production

Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Dept Dept Dept
Scientific/ Personnel Social Commercial Insurance
Educational Law
60 EES 20 EES 20 EES 30 EES 40 EES 15 EES 35 EES 25 EES
Figure A.6.1: Main organisation structure of the company
Publishing department
The objective of the publishing department is to develop and realise
products and series of products which transfer targeted information to
specific market segments. This should be done on a commercial basis
in a way which ensures the continuity of the company and contributes
to achieving its long-term and short-term objectives. At an opera-
tional level this involves shared responsibility for the systematic
development of products that meet the information needs of the target
market segment. This requires:
– developing a strategic plan for the publishing departments, which
focus on long-term objectives in terms of return on investment and
market share, taking into account trends and developments in the
market;
– drafting an annual budget, a marketing plan and a budget for devel-
oping, producing and marketing (new) products;
– monitoring trends and developments in the relevant markets and
collecting and interpreting marketing information in order to find
new opportunities for further growth of market shares;
– implementing the plans, managing the budget and realising the
expected contribution to sales and profits; after consulting the
marketing department, formulating capital investment plans for
new markets, publishing projects, marketing programmes, design
of products, etc.
Editorial department
Main tasks of the editorial staff are editing and styling manuscripts
and preparing these manuscripts for production and printing.
Appendices 237
Trade-offs must be made between preparation and production costs on

the one hand and the wishes of publishers and authors as well as tech-
nical features on the other. The editorial staff is responsible for a
balanced distribution of text and illustrations and for the structure and
logical progress of texts, while ensuring the maintenance and
enhancement of the publishing style of the company and checking
texts on spelling and references. The editorial staff represents the
company in dealing with authors and co-ordinates editorial tasks,
production and marketing. In addition, it monitors and manages the
costs of publishing projects.
Sales department
The tasks and responsibilities of the sales department include:
– implementing the marketing plan, which should result in growth in

market share, successful sales of publishing products and improved
profitability;
– improving the market position of the business units through market
research, drafting proposals concerning product/market combina-
tions and marketing programmes for market (segments);
– developing sales plans for products and services of the company
and initiating, implementing and co-ordinating promotional
programmes;
– systematically enhancing the relationships between the business
units and their target groups through public relations and marketing
communication.
Production department
The objectives and tasks of the production department are:
– planning, implementing and managing the transformation process
from manuscript into a final publishing product. The process
includes designing illustrations, purchasing, printing and book-
binding services, and lithos and paper from third parties. The
production department is responsible for budgeting and costing
projects.
– requesting bids for annual purchasing needs, assessing the techni-
cal features, quality and prices of bids by suppliers, preparing
purchasing contracts.
– keeping well informed of and advising the business units on techni-
cal developments, databases, new media, publishing software, etc.
Finance and Accounting department

The main objective of the department Finance and Accounting is to
create and improve financial conditions and management information
systems which the company requires to achieve its short-term and
long-term objectives. This involves:
– supporting the development of strategic plans and the translation of
these plans into annual plans and budgets;
– advising on financial and accounting issues (acquisitions, reorgani-
sation, studies, external business information);
– designing and maintaining an appropriate accounting system,
including a financial accounting system and a management infor-
mation system, which provide accurate and timely financial state-
ments and reports for managing the business operations and the
financial position of the company;
– managing the financial resources of the company;
– ensuring compliance with accounting standards (internal
control);
– providing information and computer services in support of
company objectives.
Personnel department
The main objective of the decentralised Personnel Department is to
create or to contribute to personnel and organisation conditions which
effectively and efficiently support achieving the long- and short-term
objectives of the company. This requires:
– integrating the personnel policy into the overall policy and strategy
of the corporation as a whole and the company in such a way that
balances the capabilities, expectations, wants and interests of
the people in the company with its financial and commercial
objectives;
– designing and implementing the personnel policy which is
supported by an integrated system of (personnel) management
instruments and systems for personnel development and coaching;
– (participating in) developing the structure of the organisation;
– in consultation with line managers carrying out advisory, support-
ing, operational and controlling activities in the area of personnel
management;
– developing and implementing the personnel administration.
Appendices 239
Products and market

The company’s main products, delivery systems and markets are
summarised in Figure A.6.2.
The conventional printed periodicals are distributed by mail in
frequencies ranging from fortnightly to bimonthly. The one-off publi-
cations are supplementary to the various periodicals.
Currently, the emphasis in both publishing and organising confer-
ences is on employment and labour law and industrial relations, with
health and safety being the only field of real growth. As a conse-
quence of this subject area, the market of the company is primarily the
UK (85 per cent of sales).
Until 1989 the development of products/market was incidental and
evolved exclusively from the company’s publishing activities. In the
PRODUCTS DELIVERY MARKETS PROFESSIONAL/

SYSTEMS EDUCATIONAL
LEVEL
BOOKS
LOOSE LEAFS
JOURNALS
CD-ROM
NEWSLETTERS
HRM PROFESSIONAL IN:
INSURANCE PROFIT-SECTOR
NON-PROFIT-SECTOR ACADEMIC
PENSIONS
GOVERNMENT PROFESSIONAL
LABOUR LAW
CONSULTANCY
DIRECT MAIL
SALES FORCE
Figure A.6.2: Market shares
PRODUCTS TARGET GROUPS

BOOKS CONSULTANTS
35.0% 29.2%
INDUSTRY
20.8%
JOURNALS
20.0%
GOVERNMENT
CD-ROM
8.3%
1.0%
OTHERS
SCHOOLS
8.3%
LOOSE LEAFS 33.3%
44.0%
Figure A.6.3: Market shares

four years since the company was acquired by the INFO Group, only
two new titles were developed and launched.
In the new company strategy currently being developed, a more
systematic approach towards new product development and acquisi-
tions will be adopted. As a first step in this strategy a rigorous evalua-
tion will be made of the current market position and opportunities for
future growth in the key markets. The new strategy, however, cannot
be fully implemented until the new editorial structure has been
completed (next budget period) and the forthcoming arrival of a new
marketing manager who has been selected for his knowledge and
skills in market research.
Production process
The contents of the majority of the Fiction publications have been
produced internally by the editorial and research staff. Feature contri-
butions and in-depth case studies are written after extensive research,
including interviews and written exchanges with a wide range of
influential sources in industry, government, trade unions, employers’
confederations and also with academics. Producing these texts
requires a combination of skills, command of the art and techniques
of investigative journalism, plus subject expertise and thorough
research skills and a close proximity to the information sources, who
in many cases are also subscribers. Accuracy, credibility and diplo-
macy are essential requirements.
In addition to writing feature contributions and checking their
contents with external sources, the production process includes the
following steps:
– Editorial planning. This generates themes for future feature contri-

butions, case studies and in-depth investigative reports.
– Interviews with key sources by researchers/editors who then create
a built-up story and check with advisers and other contacts.
– Editorial copy. This is written and edited – for style and length – by
a production editor.
– Marking up and preparing copy for external typesetting by the
production department.
– Typeset copy is made proof-ready by the production department
and editorial staff.
– Corrected copy is reset, pages are agreed and copy is sent to
printers.
Appendices 241
– Printed volumes are sent direct from printers to subscribers

and buyers on the basis of mailing lists supplied by the sales
department.
The editorial production process includes in-house keyboarding (on

typewriters or microcomputers) and re-keying and typesetting.
Negotiations are under way with editors’ trade unions to prepare for
the automation of the editorial production process and the elimination
of re-keying. Currently little advantage is taken of the state-of-the-art
technology, but it is envisaged that in the near future the entire process
will be completely ‘re-engineered’.
With high frequency publications and labour intensive production
processes, schedules are tight and people are always working under
pressure. Some internal cost rates are set high, emphasising the need
for quality and fast cycle times.
Research and development costs and investments are not traced
separately, but are included in the general marketing and editorial
budgets. It is estimated that R & D consumes less than 1.5 per cent of
gross sales. This situation is similar to that of competitors.
As can be expected with the close relationships between editorial
staff and subscribers, the most effective sales channel is direct market-
ing, ie orders received in response to direct mail promotions.
Depending upon the market segment, the list of publications and
the individual product, Fiction Publishers Limited uses a variety of
marketing and sales techniques: premium offers, price reductions,
trial offers and sample copies. One of its main challenges is to
continue to find new approaches for a mature market. This challenge
is the more important as sales to cross subscribers is the most cost-
effective approach in the business.
In its markets for professionals Fiction Publishing Limited’s pricing
is a difficult and continuous problem for which there are no simple
answers. Due to a lack of research into price elasticity, pricing is
unsystematic and not scientific and therefore tends to be rather
conservative.
The major components of the cost price of products are:
Periodicals Printing/typesetting/paper
Distribution
Fees for external editorial contributions
Editorial staff
Marketing/sales promotion
Conferences Location/speakers
Staff
Marketing/promotion
More than a quarter of total sales is generated by publications and one

quarter by conferences.
Table A.6.4: Strategic issues

Basic financial figures
Profit and loss account 1996 2000
Total sales 45.0 51.0
Value added 4.5 6.0
Operating profit 2.0 2.8
Balance sheet
Total assets 40.0 45.0
Capital employed 11.0 12.0
Working capital 13.0 19.0
Number of employees 250 280
Strategic issues
This part of the business characteristics provides details of the SWOT
analysis (see Table A.6.4).
Appendices 243
Corporate objectives
a significant amount of effort will be focused on profit improvement to
increase the operating income to 12 per cent of sales within the next 3 years
to invest in (electronic) products and product lines that offer the highest
profit opportunities and cutting back in those areas that have been growing
more slowly and take a maintenance level posture
to build subscription business
Opportunities Relative strengths

ᔢ technological advances in ᔢ strong management team with
equipment and procedures significant seniority at Fiction
ᔢ automation ᔢ reputation for producing high-
ᔢ rapid expansion in allied quality products
health, social law and ᔢ large, responsive direct mail
insurance customer file
ᔢ strong presence and
reputation in markets Fiction
represents
Threats
ᔢ government cost-cutting
regulations that reduce moneys
ᔢ reduced numbers of health care
professionals and
declining numbers of hospitals
ᔢ increased competition
Relative weaknesses
ᔢ highly dependent on one
Key success factors market for sales and profits
ᔢ erosion of subscription base
ᔢ good reputation in hospital for established products
and insurance market ᔢ difficulty in establishing new
ᔢ niche approach businesses and striving to
ᔢ leading edge technology meet profit objectives
Strategic actions
ᔢ carefully balancing new products development and growth especially in
electronic products with investment in existing products
ᔢ steady sales growth
ᔢ to move away from the reliance on health administration and to grow
and rapidly expand in allied health, insurance, social law
ᔢ establishing a presence in the law market
Appendix 7
Company: Fiction Publishing Limited

Department: Sales
Job title: Secretary
Purpose of the job:

Providing, in effective and efficient ways, full secretarial support to
the head and staff of the department so that they are able to carry out
their tasks, using the available time and resources as efficiently as
possible.
Organisation chart
Marketing
and Sales
Director
Secretary
Marketing Manager Sales

Manager Marketing Manager
Services
Marketing Customer Telesales Representative

Executive Liaison
Officer
Figure A.7.1: Organisation chart sales department

Appendices 245
Relevant quantitative information:

Sales 1995 :
Departmental budget :
Relevant accountabilities:
Communication
Ensuring efficient internal communication, in particular recording
and passing through messages and appointments.
Core activities:
– accepting, (if possible, screening) and passing through incoming

calls for head and staff;
– dealing with routine issues (such as providing information on the
basis of available data);
– keeping an office diary, co-ordinating and monitoring appoint-
ments of head and staff;
– making hotel reservations and travel bookings on the basis of
instructions/wishes of the head and staff.
Correspondence
Effectively processing and recording business information and
arrangements.
Core activities:
– selecting incoming and outgoing mail for head and staff;

– screening the main distribution to head and staff;
– handling the correspondence of the department on the basis of
guidelines and instructions;
ᔢ taking notes and drafting letters and reports, which may be of a
technical or confidential nature;
ᔢ independently handling routine correspondence which need not
be submitted to the head of staff (eg acknowledgements,
appointments, information, documentation);
ᔢ drafting letters and presenting them for signature by head or
staff;
ᔢ checking and correcting texts for style and spelling.
Information processing and management

Information which is available and accessible to head and staff.
Core activities:
– managing the mail and documentation files, which include confi-

dential material;
– providing data to others upon request of head or staff;
– requesting information from internal/external sources upon request
of head or staff;
– collecting and processing data on the basis of clear instructions;
– collecting data for meetings, distributing documents according to
instructions, taking notes and making a first draft of minutes or
reports, submitting these drafts for approval and distributing the
minutes;
– drafting special documents according to clear instructions of head.
Miscellaneous
Providing accurate support for specific tasks of department.
Core activities:
– welcoming and attending to visitors;

– dealing with standard administrative tasks related to secretarial
work.
Appendices 247
Appendix 8
Company: Fiction Publishing Limited

Department: Personnel
Job title: Head of Personnel
Purpose of the job

Developing and, after approval, implementing and managing the
company’s long-term and short-term policy concerning personnel and
organisation, including the personnel management instruments, in
such a way that an effective and efficient labour organisation is built
and maintained at acceptable costs.
Organisation chart
Managing Director Corporate HRM Director
HRM Manager
Secretary
Personnel Officer Payroll Supervisor Training Officer
Figure A.8.1: Organisation chart personnel department.


Number of employees:
Total amount of wages:
Training budget:
Sales:
Relevant accountabilities:
Personnel policy
Approved personnel policy for the organisation including principles,
guidelines and procedures for personnel management aimed at opti-
mum deployment of employees.
Core activities:
– monitoring developments in medium-term plans of the company,
keeping well informed of personnel issues in general, of relevant
laws and regulations and of trends in labour markets;
– translating this information into implications for personnel and
personnel management within the company;
– developing and adjusting (elements of) personnel policy;
– obtaining approval of management for personnel policy.
Annual plan and budget

Approved annual plan and budget for activities concerning personnel
issues within the company, which specifies objectives, programmes,
activities and available resources for the coming year within the
context of the corporate and company medium-term plans.
Core activities:
– translating the approved medium-term plans into targets to be
realised within the coming year;
– drafting an annual activities plan including a costs budget, which
looks forward to the years ahead;
– submitting the annual plan of the budget for approval.
Terms of employment
Developing and obtaining approval of a package of employment
conditions and terms that are competitive and in proper proportion to
the various jobs of differing weight in the company.
Appendices 249
Core activities:
– monitoring and ensuring the correct application of the job evalua-

tion method; monitoring the relative positions and weights of jobs
as a basis for developing a package of employment terms and
conditions;
– keeping abreast of developments in the market concerning employ-
ment terms for exempted and non-exempted jobs;
– analysing the position of the company in the labour markets on the
basis of information from salary surveys;
– drawing the attention of the corporate labour relations department
to issues to be considered in collective bargaining;
– making proposals regarding the elements of the package of
employment terms for various groups of jobs and obtaining
approval from corporate Personnel function.
Recruitment, selection and departure

Effective methods for the recruitment and selection of candidates for
vacant positions in the company and for employees who are leaving,
which support the decisions of line management and enhance the
continuity in the occupation of positions.
Core activities:
– investigating the present and future quantitative and qualitative

manpower requirements;
– profiling the company in the labour market; maintaining relation-
ships with labour markets;
– implementing recruitment activities, including arranging personnel
advertisements;
– monitoring and ensuring the uniform application of selection and
dismissal procedures by line managers;
– upon request of line management, supporting and advising on the
selection process;
– reporting deviations of employment terms to top management and
the corporate Personnel Function and, if necessary, arranging
personality and aptitude tests;
– drafting letters of appointment/dismissal and having these signed
by top management;
– designing and implementing or having implemented the introduc-
tion and trial programmes;
– concluding, managing and monitoring contracts with employment

agencies for temporary personnel; monitoring the observance of
these contracts by line management;
– co-signing the employment contracts of temporary employees and
monitoring the compliance with legal requirements concerning
dismissals.
Assessment
Effective methods for assessing employees in support of line manage-
ment and aimed at insight into the quality of personnel.
Core activities:
– monitoring and ensuring the (uniform) application of assessment
procedures by line management;
– initiating and supervising the annual assessment cycle as a basis for
adjustment of employment terms, training programmes and career
planning;
– upon request of line management of employees, providing support
and advice on the assessment process;
– signalling and reporting to top management deviations and abnor-
malities in completed assessments.
Training
Effective approach and organisation of training programmes for
employees aimed at optimising the work organisation on long and
short term.
Core activities:
– monitoring and ensuring the (uniform) application of training
procedures by line management;
– taking stock of the training needs and wishes of employees and
giving advice;
– maintaining contacts with external training institutes;
– organising training in company courses in collaboration with line
management.
Management development and career planning
Effective approach and implementation of management development
and career planning aimed at enhancing the long-term continuity of
the publishing company in terms of a qualitatively sound occupation
of management positions, now and in the future.
Appendices 251
Core activities:
– taking stock of the demands and requirements of future manage-

ment positions within the company;
– assessing (or having assessed) the required and available potential
within the company/corporation;
– assessing (or having assessed) career wishes of employees;
– drafting proposals for top management for adjustments or general
measures if the required future potential and talent is not available;
– ensuring the implementation of approved measures, if necessary in
collaboration with corporate staff Management Development.
Terms of employment/legal regulations

Correct and adequate terms of employment and working conditions,
including programmes for health and safety, in accordance with the
collective labour contracts and laws, government regulations and
adequate programmes for sick employees.
Core activities:
– keeping abreast of developments in laws and regulations concern-
ing employment, safety and health and workers’ participation;
– implementing measures to comply with these laws and regulations;
– maintaining contacts with trade unions and employees’ representa-
tives;
– keeping in contact with sick employees, providing for re-entry
facilities and arrangements after recovering;
Management reporting
Periodic management reports on personnel issues (quantitative and
qualitative data) according to established (corporate) guidelines
which can be used as steering information by management.
– operating the personnel information system (personal files of

employees, sickness, turnover, etc);
– periodically collecting relevant information concerning personnel
issues;
– drafting, explaining and presenting management reports to top
management.
Appendix 9
EC CODE OF PRACTICE
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Brussels, 17.07.1996
COM(96) 336 final
INFORMATION CONCERNING A CODE OF PRACTICE ON

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EQUAL PAY FOR WORK OF
EQUAL VALUE FOR WOMEN AND MEN WITHIN THE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
PART I: PARTIES CONCERNED
A Organisations
B Partners in negotiation
C Individuals
PART II: CONTENT OF PAY STRUCTURES

A Relevant information
B Assessing the general information
C Particular aspects of the pay system
CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION
The principle of equal pay for men and women for work of equal
value is based on Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome and on the 1975
directive relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for
men and women1.
Appendices 253
Despite these provisions of Community law having been adopted and

transposed into the legislations of the Member States 20 years ago, the
differences in pay between women and men remain considerable.
What is more, it is confirmed that these pay differences are even
greater for non-manual than they are for manual workers, which
reflects the many different types of job available and the tendency for
men to occupy managerial positions and women to be secretaries,
whereas in the case of manual workers, the distribution of jobs, and
therefore of pay is more restricted.
The difference between women and men’s incomes is due to many
factors and in particular:
– to the vertical and horizontal segregation of jobs held by women
and men (so-called female jobs are still generally less well paid),
– to the numerous sectors of the economy where mainly men work,
offering extra pay, working time bonuses etc, all of which widen
the pay disparities between the sectors outside of the base rates,
– to the considerable differentiation in pay resulting from collective
agreements linked to the recognition of skills, to the type of busi-
ness and the type of industry or sector. Gender-specific segregation
in employment applies to each of these divisions, increasing the
potential for such differentiation,
– to the systems of collective agreements which allow salary struc-
tures to reflect the negotiating power of different groups of employ-
ees. As a result, women are generally weaker in negotiations.
1
Directive (EEC) N. 75/117 of the Council OJ N. L 45, 19.2.1975,
p.19
In order to help lessen this difference, the Commission has decided to

adopt this code of practice which follows on from its Memorandum
on Equal Pay for Work of Equal Value, published in June 19942.
The Code aims to provide concrete advice for employers and
collective bargaining partners at business, sectoral or intersectoral
level to ensure that the principle of equality between women and men
performing work of equal value is applied to all aspects of pay. In
particular it aims to eliminate sexual discrimination whenever pay
structures are based on job classification and evaluation systems.
The nature of the approaches and measures set out in the Code is
neither exhaustive nor legally binding but provides models for action
which could be taken in the area in question. The Code should be read
in conjunction with the memorandum, which illustrates the principle
of equal pay in the light of the decisions of the Court of Justice of the
European Communities.
Codes of practice are more widely and effectively applied when
they have been conceived in close co-operation with the intended
users. This is why the Commission consulted the social partners on
the content and drafting of the current code. It was essential for the
Code to reflect, as far as possible, the approach proposed by the social
partners, which was that the Code should be short, its use voluntary
and effective and that it should be capable of being used during differ-
ent stages of collective bargaining.
Essentially, the Code proposes two things:
ᔢ that a plan for follow-up should be drawn up and out an analysis

of the remuneration system and evaluate the data required to
detect sexual discrimination in the pay structures so that remedies
can be found,
ᔢ that negotiators at all levels, whether on the side of the employers
or the unions, who are involved in the determination of pay
systems, should carry
ᔢ implemented to eliminate any sexual discrimination evident in the
pay structures.
2
COM (94) 6 final
PART I
PARTIES CONCERNED
A. Organisations
The Code is principally aimed at employers regardless of whether
they are from the public or private sector because the principle of
equal pay for work of equal value must in the first instance be applied
by employers, who are required to pay equal wages whenever work of
equal value is being carried out by male and female workers and
whenever a difference in pay cannot be explained or justified other
than on the basis of the worker’s sex.
It is worth noting the particularly important role played by the
public authorities as employers. Indeed, the full application of the
principle of equal pay in the public sector would have an added value
Appendices 255
by serving as a good example.

Businesses, are of course invited, in agreement with their staff
and/or their representatives, to apply the measures proposed in the
Code, in the manner most suited to their size and structure.
B. Partners in negotiation
The Code targets the social partners directly. Indeed, most pay scales
are the result of collective bargaining at sectoral or intersectoral level.
The Court of Justice of the European Communities has also stated on
a number of occasions that collective agreements must respect the
principle of equal pay for the same work or work of equal value.
The task is therefore one of helping the parties in wage negotiations
to remove all direct or indirect discrimination from the collective
agreements concerned, thereby obtaining equal recognition for the
work of women and men when the job requirements to be met are
equal.
Indeed it would be desirable if at this level and subject to any
necessary adjustments, the type of approach proposed could also be
applied in relation to analysis of pay structures and follow-up action.
C. Individuals
Finally, the Code also aims to assist women and men who believe their
work is under-valued because of sexual discrimination to obtain the
necessary information to resolve their problem through negotiation or,
as a last resort, to bring the matter to the national courts.
It should be noted in this respect that the question of equal pay goes
far beyond a mere study of pay structures within any one business,
sector or group of sectors. It also requires action at national level not
only on behalf of employers’ and employees’ associations but also by
governments.
PART II
CONTENT OF PAY STRUCTURES
The study of the content of pay structures aims to reveal any possible
under-valuation of work typically carried out by women in compari-
son with that typically carried out by men and vice-versa. To this end
the employer must determine, preferably in agreement with the staff
and/or their representatives, what useful pieces of information should
be gathered and then evaluate this information to see if there are signs
of any procedures and practices relating to pay which are at the root of
instances of discrimination.
This study should comprise three phases. First the relevant infor-
mation should be collected and then it should undergo a two-stage
evaluation. The first stage would be to draw up a general table show-
ing the sex and pay of workers, and then the second stage would
consist in analysing those pay-related elements identified as poten-
tially discriminatory.
A. The relevant information

Information relevant for the purposes of the analysis should be
collected across the whole of the organisation’s workforce. Pay analy-
sis within one establishment or within an individual grading or
bargaining structure is not adequate as problems of sex discrimination
may well arise between employees who work at the same or separate
establishments, across grading structures or in different bargaining
units. The focus of the information collected will vary according to
the structure of the company and its pay system. Some of the informa-
tion set out below will not be relevant to some organisations. It is for
the organisation to determine, in conjunction with its employees, what
information is relevant and necessary for the analysis.
1. Pay arrangements and policies

Information about pay arrangements, policies and practices should be
obtained from the organisation’s rules, handbooks and collective
agreements. This will vary from organisation to organisation but may
include:
– job descriptions
– grading, classification and evaluation systems
– grading/classification criteria
– pay provisions of collective agreements
– rules governing entitlement to pay and other contractual benefits
– job evaluation system
– performance pay handbook (including competencies, skills-based
systems)
– rules governing the operation of bonus and incentive schemes
– piece work or contract work pay arrangements
– information on the market situation of individual jobs where
Appendices 257
relevant.
It is important that information is also obtained on pay arrangements
and pay practices which follow custom and practice as well as formal
rules.
2. Employees
Information about employees should be obtained from personnel and
payroll records to show:
– gender
– grade
– job title
– hours of work excluding breaks
– bargaining unit or collective agreement
– required entry qualification
– other relevant qualifications
– length of service with organisation
– length of service with other relevant organisations
– basic pay
– additional payments and contractual benefits
The information should include temporary staff as well as those who

are on permanent contracts and any employees who work as home-
workers/outworkers.
B. Assessing the general information

The first stage of the assessment of the information should be the
establishment of a general picture on gender and pay. An analysis may
reveal that the pay system rewards employees by reference to qualifi-
cations. It may be that the qualifications rewarded do not reflect the
informal qualifications which women have acquired. For example, in
some Member States sewing skills might not attract a certificate but
sewing machinists could not undertake the work without such skills.
The definition of qualifications may need to be reviewed and in some
cases expanded. Are the qualifications necessary for the jobs
performed?
Where a large organisation has a complex (different structures for
different levels or job families) pay structure, a clear course of action
to address discrimination identified may not emerge. Therefore the
wage structure should be transparent.

The general picture will provide an overview of pay arrangements
and will assist in the identification of areas for priority attention.
Particular aspects of the pay system will require a greater depth of
analysis.
Examples of key indicators of potential sex bias are given below:
– women have lower average earnings than men with the same job
title.
– women have lower average earnings than men in the same grade.
– women in female dominated unskilled jobs are paid less than the
lowest male dominated unskilled job.
– jobs predominantly occupied by women are graded or evaluated
lower than jobs predominantly occupied by men at similar levels of
effort, skill or responsibility.
– women are paid less than men with equivalent entry qualifications
and length of service.
– where separate bargaining arrangements prevail within one organi-
sation those dominated by men receive higher pay than other
bargaining groups dominated by women.
– the majority of men and women are segregated by different grad-
ing, classification and evaluation systems.
– part-time or temporary workers, who are mainly women, have
lower average hourly earnings than full-time or permanent employ-
ees in the same job or grade.
– part-time or temporary workers, who are mainly women, have
access to fewer pay and other contractual benefits.
– different bonus arrangements, piece rate and other ‘payments-by-
result’ systems, apply in different areas of production affecting
disproportionately one gender.
– different bonus, piece rate and other ‘payment by results’ calcula-
tions apply to different jobs in the same department affecting
– different overtime rates apply in different departments affecting
– holiday entitlements vary between jobs in the same grade affecting
Whilst the findings above do not in themselves mean that there is

unlawful sex discrimination in the pay system, they all merit further
investigation. Each element in the make-up of pay or in the entitle-
Appendices 259
ment to pay and other contractual benefits needs to be analysed to

ensure that there is an objective justification which is not affected by
the sex of the workers explaining the differences in pay.
C. Particular aspects of the pay system

Practices will vary from organisation to organisation and this will
affect the outcome of the analysis. Set out below are examples of
practices which might prove to be discriminatory together with guid-
ance on how to address them. However, it should be stressed that these
practices are only mentioned as examples and that it is in no case
implied that they are to be found in all organisations.
1. Basic Pay
– Women are consistently appointed at lower points in a pay scale
than men are.
– Women are paid less than male predecessors in the job.
– Women progress more slowly through incremental scales and/or
seldom reach higher points.
– Men are paid more, by supplement or by a higher grading, because
of ‘recruitment and retention’ problems.
2. Bonus/Performance Pay and Piece Rates

– Female and male manual workers receive the same basic pay but
men have access to bonus earnings.
– Performance pay is only available to senior posts/full
timers/employees covered by the appraisal system.
– Women consistently receive lower performance ratings than men.
3. Pay Benefits
A smaller percentage of women employees than men are covered by
the organisation’s pay benefits.
4. Part-time Workers
Part-time workers receive lower hourly pay rates or they are excluded
from bonuses and benefits.
5. Job Classification, Grading, Evaluation and Skills/Competency-

based System
Job evaluation, grading classification and skills/competency-based
systems are mechanisms which are used in some Member States to
determine the hierarchy or hierarchies of jobs in an organisation or
group of undertakings as the basis for pay systems. The following

comments are to assist those organisations which use such schemes to
analyse them to check they do not inadvertently discriminate against
typically female workers in particular. Pay systems based on such
schemes may have been in place in organisations for many years,
without any review and many incorporate features which contribute to
the undervaluing of work undertaken by women.
a. Nature of the Organisation

What is the objective of the organisation? What is its nature? What
services and/or products does it provide?
Asking these questions will contribute to a determination of whether
the design of the scheme reflects the priorities of the organisation. It
may transpire that by valuing certain elements in work the priority of
the organisation is not reflected. For example, a scheme in a hospital
which fails to value at all the care of patients but over-emphasises
financial or engineering skills and responsibilities may require review.
b. Type of Scheme
Is the scheme capable of measuring the different elements in diverse
work or does it rank jobs without such assessments?
Are different jobs covered by different schemes, for example one for
manual and one for clerical workers, or are all jobs covered by the
same scheme? In the latter case, is the system capable of evaluating
evenly the work performed by different groups of employees?
Is it appropriate to the jobs covered?
Because of gender segregation in the labour market and the argument
that traditional job evaluation and classification schemes are not capa-
ble of classifying inherently different work on a uniform scheme,
often there has been no common yardstick for measuring typically
male and female jobs. Schemes which do not cover certain types of
predominantly female work obviously cannot determine whether such
work may be equally demanding, albeit in different ways, as male
work. The concept of equal pay for work of equal value requires the
measurement of diverse work by reference to a common standard.
Whilst this approach is not common, some organisations are attempt-
ing to integrate manual and clerical jobs into unified systems. If such
a scheme is put in place it assists in the removal of sex bias normally
associated with gender-segregated pay structures.
Appendices 261
c. Job Titles
Are different job titles given where similar work is undertaken?
Different job titles may be given to the same or similar jobs distin-
guished only by the gender of the job holder eg: Storekeeper, Stores
Assistant. This may have implications for status and pay levels.
d. Job Content
Do the job descriptions describe all the work of the jobs and of typi-
cally female jobs in particular?
Do the job descriptions accurately describe the content of the tasks
performed? In particular, is traditionally female work adequately
captured? Is attention drawn to aspects of women’s work which have
previously gone unrecognised?
Is the work content of jobs consistently described?
Job descriptions should be constant in format irrespective of the sex
of the person carrying out the occupation. There are often inconsis-
tencies in the way male and female work is described.
e. Factors
A factor in a formal job evaluation scheme is an element of a job
which is defined and measured, such as skill or mental effort. A factor
may in turn be divided into sub-factors which go into greater detail
under a particular heading. Jobs to be evaluated are assessed against
the factors and sub-factors chosen.
Have any significant job features been omitted?
Some factors may favour one sex only. It should be ensured that
factors capture both male and female work.
Factors which are more likely to be present in female jobs may not
be identified at all by a scheme and therefore not valued at all, for
example caring skills and responsibilities, human relations skills,
organisational skills/responsibilities, manual dexterity and/or co-ordi-
nation, etc. Categorising jobs by reference to light or heavy work or
weighting different factors without taking account of other elements
in female as opposed to male work impacts adversely on women.
Does the job classification based on factors, or the weighting of these
factors, respond to objective criteria?
Classifying work by reference to formal qualifications alone can in

some instances impact adversely on women. There are skills which
cannot be learned by experience alone but which benefit from formal
education and qualifications. However, the qualifications or skills
which many women have gained are frequently not identified as
qualities to be counted positively when classifying work in the labour
market. For example, nurturing, cleaning and caring skills may be
assumed in certain types of work and not rewarded in pay systems. A
kindergarten nurse’s training may be school-based and therefore less
well rewarded than typically male jobs which may be apprenticeship
based.
Formal qualifications are generally rewarded but those learnt
through a different process are frequently ignored. For example, expe-
rience learned in the home or by example from another worker may
not be credited in the payment system. Thus the basis on which train-
ing and qualifications are rewarded may need to be reviewed.
Further to this assessment, the determination of the pay rates to be
attached to the final job evaluation should reflect the relativities of
actual demands of the work not ‘the rate for the job’ which may be
influenced by traditional sex-based assumptions of worth. Therefore
women should attract the pay levels enjoyed by male occupations with
which their work has been found to be equivalent.
CONCLUSION
The aim of the Code is to serve as a working tool for the greatest
possible number of social actors who are likely to be in a position to
further the principle of equal pay for women and men for work of
equal value.
This initiative should therefore be seen as part of a dynamic follow-
up exercise involving management and labour plus other parties
concerned at all levels capable of ensuring both a wide dissemination
and an effective use of the Code.
At European Union level and in the context of the Fourth
Community Action Programme on equal opportunities for men and
women (1996–2000), which was adopted by Council Decision
95/593/EEC3, the will to mobilise all those who are concerned with
the economic and social questions of everyday life as well as those
who work in the legal sphere to focus on this problem has already
been clearly expressed.
In the light of the recommendations by the European Parliament in
its Report on the Memorandum on Equal Pay for Work of Equal Value
Appendices 263
(PE 213.161/final), adopted on 21 December 1995, the Commission

in cooperation and/or jointly with the social partners and other appro-
priate authorities, will be able to develop further and/or support initia-
tives aimed at promoting such schemes as:
– campaigns to raise awareness and provide information on equal pay

for work of equal value, targeting, in particular, employers,
employees and/or their representatives, as well as the parties
involved in collective bargaining;
– the training of experts who can study and propose practical solu-
tions to resolve problems affecting equal pay;
– the greater involvement of women in the processes of collectively
negotiated wage settlements;
– the identification, examination and exchange of best practice likely
to enrich the Code by providing concrete examples of the type of
measures that it proposes, as well as their practical implementation.
3
OJ L 335, 30.12.1995 p.37
Bibliography
Allen, K.R. (1990) Compensation in context: adapting to the needs of the nineties, in
Benefits & Compensation International, December.
Armstrong, M. (1995) A handbook of personnel management practice, Kogan Page,
London.
Armstrong, M. and Brown, A. (1995) The job evaluation handbook, Institute of
Personnel Development, London.
Armstrong, M. and Murlis, H. (1994) Reward management: a handbook of remuneration
strategy and practice, Kogan Page, London.
Arvey, R.D. Sex bias in job evaluation procedures, Personnel Psychology, 39, pp.
35–335.
Bowey, A.M. and Lipton, T. Prof. (1982) Managing salary and wage systems, Gower
Publishing Group, Aldershot.
CBI Equal pay for work of equal value, Report of the CBI Equal Value Group, London.
CBI (1985) Job evaluation schemes free of sex bias, Equal Opportunities Commission,
London.
Commission of the European Communities (1996) A code of practice on the implementa-
tion of equal pay for work of equal value for women and men, COM(96) 336 final,
Brussels.
Dessler, G. (1994) Human resource management, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.
EC 92 (1990) Are your compensation programs ready? in EC 92 The impact on pay deliv-
ery in B. Brooks, M.C. Haller and J.R. ViguiJ Benefits & Compensation International,
January/February.
Flannery, T.P., Hofrichter, D.A. and Platten, P.R. (1996) People, performance and pay,
The Hay Group, New York.
Foulkes, F.K. (1991) Executive compensation, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Gross, S.E. (1995) Compensation for teams, The Hay Group, New York.
Henderson, R.I. (1994) Compensation Management, Prentice Hall, Englewood, New
Jersey.
Hewitt Associates (1990) Total compensation management, Blackwell Publishers,
Oxford 1991.
Lawler, E. (1990) Strategic pay, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
Lawler, E. (1984) The strategic design of reward systems, in E.A. Fombrun Strategic
Human Resource Management, Wiley & Sons, New York.
Pay and benefits sourcebook, Croner Publications Ltd, Kingston upon Thames.
Rock, M.L. and L.A . Berger (1991) The compensation handbook, McGraw-Hill, Inc.,
New York.
Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993) Competence at work, John Wiley & Sons Inc.,
New York.
Index
References in italic indicate figures or tables
A-profiles 51 bonuses 163, 164, 214, 216

ABS (annual base salaries) 207, 207 budget description 37, 241–2
absolute maximum salaries 214 business characteristics 24, 34–40, 35
accountability characteristics (ACC) example 235–43, 236, 243
46, 47 ‘business expertise’ 111–12, 112,
examples 245–6, 248–51 115–21
Guide Chart method 49, 49, 50,
50–3, 51, 53 career counselling, as job description
‘activities’ descriptions 37, 39, 235 objective 27
administration tasks, personnel 14, 15 career remuneration model (CRM)
‘advanced vocational knowledge’ 178–86, 179–85, 212–13
57–60, 59 ‘characteristics’ comparisons 72, 73,
age-related pay 144, 214 74–8, 76, 77, 217
analytical methods 12, 72, 73 EFP 109
see also EFP; Framework method; Framework 91, 92
Guide Chart method Guide Chart 78
annual base salaries (ABS) 207, 207 ‘Chart’ module 62, 63, 85, 86, 87,
annual total remuneration (ATR) 207 88
appeal procedures 31, 224–7 checklists
‘aspects’ comparisons 74–8, 76, 77 job evaluation 69–70
EFP 109 remuneration 186–9
Framework 91 club surveys 191
Guide Chart 78 clusters of jobs 154, 154, 155, 157,
assessment (performance) increments 158
219–20 Code of Practice on Equal Pay 134,
assignments, personnel 14, 15 252–63
ATR (annual total remuneration) 207 communication
‘average’ definition 215 Framework questions 101
average increments 168 job evaluation procedures 21, 23,
31–4, 32
bands, salary 143, 220 remuneration system 188, 210
see also grades CompaRatio 169–72, 171, 176
base (basic) salary 160, 214 ‘Comparison’ module 62, 63, 85, 87
EFP 207, 207 questionnaires 86–7
benchmark jobs 21, 57, 63–4, 214 competency factors 7
blind evaluation charts 31–2 computer support 61–2
266 Index
EFP (REWARD) 110, 123–33, general once-only bonuses 216
125–33 general pay rises 215–16
Framework 94 geometric scales 216
Guide Chart 62–3, 62, 79–80, 84–5 grades 139, 142–3, 146–8, 161, 216
core jobs 160 steps 160–1, 161, 162
‘creative thinking’ questions 100–1, see also width of grades
122–3 Guide Chart method 56, 57–61,
CRM see career remuneration model 58–9
comparisons with other methods
deciles 193, 194, 215, 216 78, 79–91, 86–8, 152
definitions 214–22 job analyses 47–51, 49–51, 53
departmental business characteristics job descriptions 45–6
39–40 examples 244–51, 244, 247
‘design’ element 13, 14, 15, 34–6
different evaluation methods, use of
Hay Management Consultants
150–2
job evaluation method see Guide
Chart method
EC Equal Pay Code of Practice 134, salary survey 197–200, 198, 199,
252–63 200
EFP (European Factor Plan) 109–25, HayXpert system 62–3, 62, 79–80,
109, 111–14, 125–33 84–5
employability factors 9 ‘Head of Personnel’ job illustration
European Factor Plan see EFP Hay evaluation 60–1
‘evaluation’ definition 215 job description 247–51, 247
evaluation procedure 61 job family system 64, 66
evaluation tables 54–7, 56 salary structure 144
expert systems 62–3, 62 headquarters co-ordination 38–9
‘external approach’ 61 historical descriptions 36, 235
external labour market factors 143, HRXpert modules 62–3, 62, 79–80,
155–6 84–5
externally developed methods 20–1 human resource skills 60, 61, 82
fact-finding skills questions 97 inconveniences 77, 78, 109

‘factors’ comparisons 74–8, 76, 77 increments 139–40, 159, 169, 217
EFP 109 average 168
Framework 91 performance 219–20
Guide Chart 78 ‘independence’ questions 98–100
factual v standard descriptions 42 individual increments 217
‘features’ definition 74–8, 76, 77 initial pay rises 215–16
flexible salary structures 165–9, 167, ‘initially expected salary’ 144
170, 171, 212–13 ‘initiative’ questions 97–100
see also career remuneration innovative thinking 97–8, 122–3
model; CompaRatio integrative model 14, 15
Framework method 91–104, 91–3, ‘internal approach’ 61
102–8 internally developed systems 20, 21
‘freedom to think’ 83–4 interviews, job-holder 29–30
Index 267
JEP (job evaluation points) surveys knowledge questionnaires
190–1, 192, 192, 198, 198 EFP 115–21
JFS see job family systems Framework 94–6
job analysis 19, 24, 30, 46–54, Guide Chart 57–60, 59
48–51, 53, 217 knowledge transfer scale example 89
questionnaire example 231–4
request form 223 L-profiles 51, 52
job characteristics see ‘characteris- labour market factors 143, 155–6
tics’ comparisons laws 134–5
‘job’ definition 217 EC Equal Pay Code 252–63
job descriptions 15–17, 24, 25–6, 30, line jobs 218
40–6, 41 line managers 20, 210
definition 217 linear analysis 197
examples 244–51, 244, 247 logarithmic scales 218
‘job evaluation’ definition 9 long profiles 52–4, 53
job evaluation points (JEP) surveys
190–1, 192, 192, 198, 198 ‘main activities’ descriptions 37, 39,
job family systems (JFS) 20, 26, 235
63–8, 65, 66, 178–80 management know-how 57, 60, 81–2,
definition 218 90
questionnaires (Hay) 89 market descriptions 37, 239–40, 239
job/job-holder distinction 40–1, 42 marketing director job summary
job knowledge factors 111, 111, 208–9
115–21, 127 matrices 54–7, 56
job-level matrices 63–8, 65, 66, 178, job level 63–8, 65, 66, 178, 211
211 maximum salaries 139, 140, 161,
job profiles 162, 174–5, 218
Framework 105, 106 ‘median’ definition 215
Guide Chart 50–4, 51, 53 methods, job evaluation 10, 11–12,
‘job-related experience’ questions 95 71–8, 72, 73
job series 64, 218 comparison model 74–8, 76, 77
job title plus summary (JTS) surveys development 19–20
190–1, 192, 192 see also EFP; Framework method;
‘jobless organisations’ 11 Guide Chart method
jobs ranking lists 152, 153 metrical scales 218
JTS (job title plus summary) surveys midpoint salaries 139, 150, 151, 161,
190–1, 192, 192 218
‘just noticeable difference’ 49–50, 56 minimum salaries 140, 161, 162,
219
key figures descriptions 39 ‘mistakes’ 156
key products descriptions 37 mixed model questionnaires 91
know-how (KH) characteristics 77 multiple regression analysis 197
EFP 109
Framework 91, 92, 93 new employees 143
Guide Chart 47–9, 49, 50, 52–4, ‘new’ jobs 143–4
53, 57–61, 58–9, 78, 80–2 non-analytical methods 11, 72, 73
examples 86, 88 ‘number of years’ pay basis 10–11
268 Index
objectives point factor methods 12, 63, 71, 73
departmental 39 see also EFP; Framework; Guide
job 43–4, 244, 247 Chart method
job evaluation 23, 25–8, 25 points range see width of grades
‘open scales’ model 137, 167–9, 167, policy lines see pay policy lines
170, 171, 212 ‘potential’ factors 9
operational skills questions 96 preconditions, salary surveys 194–6
organisational analyses, as job problem solving (PS) characteristics
description objective 27 77
organisational factors 22–3 EFP 109, 112–13, 113, 121–3, 128
business characteristics 34–40, 35 Framework 91, 92, 93, 97–8,
organisational structures 37, 39, 100–1
44–5, 44 Guide Chart 49, 49, 50, 50–3, 51,
EFP questionnaires 114, 114 53, 78, 83–4, 88
examples 235–8, 236, 244, 247 procedures, job evaluation 21, 23,
‘outliers’ 154, 154, 155 28–31, 29, 223–30
overlap 140, 161, 162, 219 process, job evaluation 21–5, 22, 30
product outlines 37, 239–40, 240
P-profiles 51 production process descriptions 37,
pay lines 180–1, 181, 184–5, 184, 240–2
185, 219 proficiency level questions 95–6
pay policies 17–18, 134 profiles
implementing 152–61, 153–5, 158, Framework 105, 106
159, 162 Guide Chart 50–4, 51, 53
pay policy lines 146, 148, 148–9, progression, salary scale 140, 161,
157, 161, 219 162, 220
performance-related pay 174–6, promotion 145, 146
174 ‘prospects’ definition 220
pay practice lines 153, 158, 159, 219 PS see problem solving character-
pay range 139, 146, 150, 151, 161, istics
162, 219
qualitative performances 173, 173
performance increments (bonuses)
quality control manager job summary
163, 164, 219–20
209
performance-related pay 162–5, 163,
‘quality of working life’ element 13,
165, 212, 220
14, 15, 17, 34–6
and salary structure 172–8, 172–4
quantitative job information 45
personnel assessment, as job descrip-
examples 244, 248
tion objective 27
quantitative performances 173, 173
personnel function 13–17, 14, 16
quartiles 193, 194, 197, 215, 216
headquarters co-ordination 38–9
questionnaires 28–9
job evaluation role 13–17, 12, 14
EFP 110, 113–23, 114
use of job family systems 66–7
Framework 94–102
personnel planning, as job description
Guide Chart 63, 86–91, 231–4
objective 27
physical skills questions 96 range see pay range; points range
‘place in organisation’ descriptions ranking of jobs 24–5, 68, 68, 69, 73,
44–5, 44 220
Index 269
‘rationale’ element 13, 14, 15, 34–6 163, 165, 172–8, 172, 173, 174
reasoned comparisons methods 12, salary surveys 12, 17, 190–209, 192,
71, 72, 73 194
recruitment, as job description objec- conditions 194–7
tive 26 Hay Management Consultants
re-evaluations 144–5, 146 197–200, 198, 199, 201
regulations Towers Perrin 200–5, 202, 203–4
equal pay 134, 135, 252–63 Watson Wyatt 205–9, 207
job evaluation 31, 228–30 ‘scale step’ definition 221
remuneration scatter diagrams 152, 154, 154, 155
definitions 9, 220 secretarial job illustrations
job description objective 26 career remuneration model 180–1,
response tables samples (Framework) 181
95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 Hay evaluation 57–60
responsibility, areas of 77 job analysis 47–8, 244–6, 244
EFP 109 job family system 64
Framework 91, 92, 93 selection, as job description objective
Guide Chart 78, 90 26
REWARD system 110, 123–33, short profiles 50–3, 51, 53
125–33 skills questionnaires 94–6
role evaluation 10 slopes, pay policy lines 146, 147,
148
salary bands 143, 220 specialists, use of 10
see also grades standard v factual descriptions 42
‘salary practice’ definition 220 steps see increments
‘salary rise, across the board’ 221 strategic issues, descriptions of 37,
‘salary rise, promotion’ 221 242, 243
‘salary scale amount’ definition 221 Supervising Commission rules exam-
salary scales 134, 138, 139, 221 ple 228–30
salary structures 11, 134–89, 136, ‘supporting positions’ definition 221
211–13, 221 surveys see salary surveys
application 141–6, 142, 146, 151 SWOT analysis 38, 242, 243
career remuneration model ‘system formula’ definition 221
178–86, 179–81, 183–5 ‘system-holder’ definition 221
checklist 186–9
CompaRatio 169–72, 170, 171 tasks
EC Equal Pay Code 252–63 accountabilities compared 46, 47
EFP example 133 definition 222
flexible 165–9, 167 descriptions 26
Framework example 107 ‘technical know-how’ questions
implementing pay policy 152–62, EFP 111–12, 111, 112
153, 154, 155, 158, 159, 161, Framework 95
162 Guide Chart 57–60, 59, 81
model 137–41, 137, 138, 141 ‘thinking challenge’ 84
multi-evaluation methods 150–2 Thomas Cook 10
parameters 146–50, 147, 148 total cash 160, 222
performance-related pay 162–5, EFP 207
270 Index
Towers Perrin universal questionnaires 90
evaluation scheme see Framework up-down comparators 102–3
method
salary survey 200–4, 201–5 value interpolations 54–6
traditional salary structures 136,
137–41, 137, 142, 212 Watson Wyatt
application 141–6, 146 evaluation scheme see EFP
grade steps 160–1, 161, 162 salary survey 205–9, 207, 208
new employees 143 weighing factors 10–11, 222
parameters 146–50, 147, 151 weight of the job 10–11
salary scale 138, 139–41, 141 width of grades (points range) 143,
training 146, 150, 151, 161, 162, 219
as job description objective 27, implementing policies 157–9, 158
33–4 multi-method comparisons 152
Framework questions 94–5

Job Evaluation and Renumeration Strategies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Job Evaluation and Renumeration Strategies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Job Evaluation and Renumeration Strategies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the main topic covered in the document?

What is the main topic covered in the document?

What organization issues licenses for photocopying copyrighted material?

What organization issues licenses for photocopying copyrighted material?

JOB EVALUATION

HOW TO SET UP AND RUN

The Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA) is an organisation which issues licences to

The Copyright Licensing Agency Limited, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London,

First published in 1997

Kogan Page Limited

© Frans Poels, 1997

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

ISBN 0 7494 2280 7

Typeset by Saxon Graphics Ltd, Derby

Part I JOB EVALUATION 19

Part II REMUNERATION 134

1.1 The integrating model 14

needed. The question is, how these comparisons can or should be

ᔢ Analytical methods in which jobs are analysed by reference to one

By far, analytical methods are the most used systems. A well-known

1.2 FOR WHOM IS THIS BOOK INTENDED?

1.3 THE FUNCTION OF JOB EVALUATION AND

Education/training on the job

Job evaluation system/

Figure 1.2 Subjects discussed in this book

1.3.1 General principles of a pay policy

1.3.2 Conditions of a pay policy

ᔢ The methodology must be logically sound and fit closely to other

The conditions will serve as a guideline for the discussions throughout

ᔢ In general methods have been simplified continuously so that they

they can be adapted to the differences in organisation structure,

Because jobs or functions are part of an organisation, job eval-

coherence and interrelationships should therefore be clearly estab-

Before any investigation is started, the objectives of that investigation

This is why communication is such an essential element (see section

consideration. If these issues have not been made clear on department

The business characteristic is an excellent instrument for bringing

When the interrelationships within the organisation have been

Figure 2.2 The process of job evaluation – objectives

tional considerations or applications. If, at a later stage, the organisa-

A job is a collection of tasks in conjunction with certain

A task is a collection of similar activities

The job description is therefore first of all aimed at recording the

Recruitment and selection

Training and development

Career counselling and personnel planning

In this section job evaluation has been reviewed in a much broader

Figure 2.3 The process of job evaluation – procedures

Interview with the job-holder

characteristics of the organisation or the department and on the

Approval of the job description

Job analysis and job evaluation

Procedure for appeals

Figure 2.4 The process of job evaluation – communication

This certainly does not complete the communication process.

ᔢ procedures and practices;

Preferably the communication process should take place in small

These groups and individuals need to be addressed at their own level,

2.5 BUSINESS CHARACTERISTICS

Figure 2.5 The process of job evaluation – business characteristics