An A-Z Perspective on Job Analysis-Part III

Job analysis can be like a Gordian Knot; it's up to the job analyst to be Alexander with the sword.

-Amy J. Bray

Let's Recap

In part 1 you learned the importance of job analysis as well as what happens if you skip it. In part 2, the process was laid out in steps so you could see what a job analysis looked like. This last part is going to cover common errors, followed by the value of outsourcing.

Despite the fact that the job analysis is a vital part of every HRM system, a recurring set of errors are frequently made in conducting a job analysis. The consequences of making one or more of these mistakes not only undermine the ability of an organization to perform the twelve HRM functions listed herein but challenge the credibility of HRPs and the entire organization.1

Common Errors to Avoid2

While it’s important to understand the necessary steps to completion, it is also imperative to be aware of possible errors and their ramifications.

• Failure to Focus on Contribution to Mission. Each organizational position exists to contribute to the organization’s mission and purposes. The focus of a job analysis requires identifying tasks performed but those tasks sometimes get out of balance with the organization’s fundamental goals. Conducting the job analysis must always be done with the organization’s mission and purpose clearly in mind.

• Overlooking Key Stakeholders. The value and credibility of the job analysis demands that key stakeholders -- both internal and external customers – have input in either developing the job analysis or reviewing the final product. Inviting departmental or union employees into job analysis development meetings and explaining the process for developing the job analysis can increase employee trust in the HRM role and build credibility. Don’t forget to pull your clients into the loop-they can provide valuable insight especially when it comes to customer service and retention. Show them that their input matters.

• Imposing Unnecessary Job Requirements. Occasionally, managers and supervisors who participate in a job analysis make the mistaken but well-meaning assumption that it is in the interest of their organization to establish higher standards for job qualifications than are actually needed to perform the required job tasks. Imposing such qualifications that are not required is in conflict with the law (see Griggs vs. Duke Power Co.) and job requirements must be validated as Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications (BFOQ).

• Failing to Update Old Analyses. Jobs change over time. Technology evolves. Yet organizations continue to act as if job requirements and job content are unchanging. It is not unusual for organizations to pull out an old job description or job analysis and “short-cut” the job analysis by substituting old information that no longer applies.

• Overlooking Team Collaboration and Interpersonal Skills. Focusing on technical job requirements can help insure that individuals are qualified to perform job functions that are absolutely necessary for successful performance. At the same time, individuals in organizations must also work effectively as members of a team and must cooperate effectively with others within their department and within their organization. Overlooking key interpersonal skills can be an expensive mistake in conducting a job analysis and can result in hiring technically skilled individuals who are ineffective in working with others.

• Skipping Steps. Although conducting a job analysis may seem to be a detail-oriented and time consuming process, with effective planning the process can be conducted both quickly and correctly. Unfortunately, a common error made in many organizations is the skipping of steps in the process due to the press of time and other responsibilities. The result of skipping steps is often the costly error of developing an inaccurate job analysis – a mistake which can create a negative domino effect throughout many parts of an organization.

Not only can errors occur, but they can be very costly to the organization. Does this make you rethink handling the process in-house? Let’s look at a few points in defense of outsourcing job analysis…

Consider the Value of Outsourcing Job Analysis

• In order to meet the requirements set by the?Uniform Guidelines a job analysis should be conducted by a qualified individual, for example an I/O Psychologist.3

• Don’t allow the?“we have always done it this way” be your downfall. By allowing someone to critically evaluate your hiring practices it will likely improve performance and?defensibility of the process.4

• The process of job analysis is?detail-oriented and time consuming, so it is no surprise that a common error is skipping steps. Unfortunately, the result of skipping steps is the costly error leading to a negative domino effect throughout many parts of the organization.5

• The person chosen to complete the job analysis in-house?may not have the appropriate skills to conduct the process.6

• If the job analyst is an?employee of the same organization, the process may involve his or her personal likes or dislikes. Because we are dealing with words that have a strong subjective element, human resource personnel are driven to make assumptions and inferences that weaken validity of the data.7

• Left to their own devices, respondents, whether incumbents or analysts,?introduce subjective elements into the descriptive material. They have a world of words to choose from, and one observer’s choice may not be that of another. This calls the reliability and validity of the observations into question.8

Outsourcing Job Analysis with Cornerstone

As mentioned above, the Uniform Guidelines advise that job analysis be conducted by a qualified individual, for example an I/O Psychologist (Amy Bray is trained in I/O psychology as well as the developer of The Broadscale job analysis methodology).

At Cornerstone, our concern is that each job analysis is crafted into a holistic picture, not just a list of responsibilities. We believe a job analysis must: 1) specifically tackle the language of job description; 2) identify not only “what employees do,” but “what gets done”; and 3) result in a conceptual framework that anyone can consult.

Our job is to oversee the process and participants from start to finish. We pride ourselves on employing a variety of evidence-based data collection techniques beyond a one-size-fits-all questionnaire and distill down what is important.

It also includes a means of controlling the language so that all the parts of a personnel operation will work from a common understanding as essential for effective selection, training, and management of workers.

Wrap Up

From competencies to task statements, hopefully you gained a much clearer, more reliable understanding of the process of job analysis. If you would like further information, please don't hesiate to reach out to Amy J. Bray at Cornerstone Human Capital, LLC

References

1/2/5https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322525643_Job_analysis_The_building_block_of_human_resource_management

3 Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978) www.uniformguidelines.com

4 https://www.talogy.com/en/blog/5-ways-to-improve-the-legal-defensibility-of-your-hiring-process/

6/7 https://www.managementstudyguide.com/advantages-disadvantages-job-analysis.htm

8 Fine, S,; Getkate, M. (1995). Benchmark Tasks for Job Analysis: A Guide for Functional Job Analysis Scales. Mahwah, New Jersey.

?