08

Matching

Matching is the process of evaluating a job by establishing the extent to which its characteristics are similar to those set out in grade or level definition (job-to-grade matching), or to a description of the characteristics of another job (job-to-job matching). In job-to-grade matching, when a reasonably good fit is established between a job and the definition of a particular grade or level in a structure, the job is allocated to or ‘slotted’ into that grade. In job-to-job matching, when it is established that the characteristics of a job to be evaluated are similar to those of another job that has already been evaluated (a benchmark job), the job under review is allocated to the same grade or is eligible for the same rate of pay as the benchmark job.

Matching can be analytical or non-analytical. This chapter includes descriptions of matching schemes and their development. Matching was formerly known as job classification.

Job-to-grade analytical matching

In job-to grade analytical matching, jobs are analysed and described in terms of a set of job evaluation factors as in a conventional point-factor scheme. This leads to the production of a job description, often called a job or role profile to distinguish it from a conventional job description which simply sets out the main tasks carried out by the job holder. A grade or level structure is developed consisting of a sequence or hierarchy of grades or levels that have been defined analytically with the same set of factors used in the job profiles. The job profiles are then compared factor by factor with the range of grade or level profiles to establish which grade provides the best match and thus grade the job.

An analytical matching system can be underpinned by a traditional point-factor scheme that supplies the factors but also defines each band in terms of a points range by means of the evaluation of a representative selection of benchmark jobs. When a job cannot readily be matched to any grade the point-factor scheme is used to evaluate it and establish the points range and therefore grade to which the job belongs.

Job-to-job analytical matching

In job-to-job analytical matching, profiles for jobs to be evaluated are matched analytically against a set of common factors or elements with benchmark job profiles. A benchmark job is one that has already been graded as a result of an initial job evaluation exercise. It is used as a point of reference with which other jobs can be compared and valued. Thus, if benchmark role A has been evaluated and placed in grade 3 and there is a good fit between the factor profile of role B and that of role A, then role B will also be placed in grade 3. Generic role profiles, ie those covering a number of like roles, will be used for any class or cluster of roles with essentially the same range of responsibilities such as team leaders or personal assistants. Job-to-job matching may be used in combination with job-to-grade matching.

Job-to-job matching can be used on its own or it can be applied as a supplement to job-to-grade matching. This functions as a check on the job-to-grade match or an alternative if that type of match is difficult. Benchmark jobs can provide an additional method of defining or illustrating a grade definition or profile.

Non-analytical matching

This approach is based on a definition of the number and characteristics of the levels or grades in a grade and pay structure into which jobs will be placed. The grade definitions may refer to such job characteristics as skill, decision making and responsibility but these are not analysed separately. Evaluation takes place through a process of non-analytical matching or ‘job slotting’. This involves comparing a ‘whole’ job description, ie one not analysed into factors, with the grade definitions to establish the grade with which the job most closely corresponds. The difference between non-analytical matching and job-to-grade analytical matching as described above is that in the latter case, the grade profiles are defined in terms of job evaluation factors, and analytically defined role profiles are matched with them factor by factor. However, the distinction between analytical and non-analytical matching can be blurred when the comparison is made between formal job descriptions and role profiles which have been prepared in a standard format that includes common headings for such aspects of jobs as levels of responsibility or knowledge and skill requirements. These ‘factors’ may not be compared specifically but will be taken into account when forming a judgement. But this may not satisfy the UK legal requirement that a scheme must be analytical to provide a defence in an equal pay claim.

Developing a matching scheme

The steps required to develop a matching scheme are set out below.

Step 1: Decide on type of scheme

The following decisions have to be made on the type of matching scheme:

1. Should it be analytical or non-analytical? Conceptually, because jobs are analysed and compared in greater detail across a number of headings an analytical scheme will produce more accurate results. And it can be used to defend an equal pay claim. But non-analytical schemes are less trouble to develop and use and reasonably accurate results can be obtained if care is taken over the definition of job and grade profiles, by, for example, providing for them to be drawn up in a standard and readily comparable format.

2. Job-to-grade or job-to-job or both? The framework provided by a defined grade structure (analytical or non-analytical) will help to make grading decisions that are consistent and defensible. The definition of a grade structure can have other uses, for example in organization design and development and career planning. The sole use of job-to-job matching allows for more flexibility in association with a spot rate pay structure (one without grades) and it may be easier to respond to market rate pressures. Adding job-to-job comparisons to job-to-grade comparisons can increase the accuracy of evaluations and, where benchmark jobs have been assigned to a grade, they provide examples that illustrate the characteristics of the grade and thus serve to reinforce judgements. Job-to-grade matching is frequently adopted as the basic approach in conjunction with job-to-job matching.

3. Use of a point-factor evaluation system. Matching based on written role and grade profiles can be carried out without the use of a point-factor scheme. But such a scheme has three possible uses that can increase the accuracy of evaluations. First, it can provide definitions of the factors to be used in matching; second, it can be used to allocate benchmark jobs to grades; and third, it can reinforce evaluations by defining grades or benchmark jobs in points terms so that if required (for new jobs or ones which have been difficult to match in the usual way) a conventional points evaluation can be made. A combined development will start with the point-factor evaluation of benchmark jobs and the allocation of points ranges to grades but matching jobs to grade profiles will be the main form of evaluation.

Step 2: Prepare benchmark job profiles

A representative cross-section of jobs covering different levels and functions is selected at this stage. The number of jobs required varies according to the size and complexity of the organization. Even in a simple structure it will be 10 per cent or more and it could be much higher in some complex organizations (30 per cent or more). In a small organization this stage may involve preparing profiles for all jobs, rather than a benchmark sample. A typical profile will incorporate basic information about the job – the title, to whom the job holder is responsible and who is responsible to the job holder, the overall purpose of the job and a list of the key activities carried out (the key result areas).

An analytical job profile as shown in Table 8.1 also summarizes the characteristics of the job against a set of factor headings. If an existing point-factor scheme is being used as the basis for the evaluation, the factors contained in that scheme will be adopted. If not, a decision will need to be made on what factors are appropriate. The factors used in the job profile will be the same as those used to define grades in Step 3. Guidance on selecting factors is given in Chapter 5.

TABLE 8.1 Example of a job profile

Job title		Call Centre Team Leader
Responsible to		Call Centre Manager
Responsible to job holder		Twelve call centre agents
Overall purpose of job		To control the efforts of a team of call centre agents to ensure they meet required standards
Key activities		• Monitor performance of complete team and each of its members against standard criteria, ie 80 per cent of calls to be answered within 20 seconds, average talk time no more than two minutes, no more than 3 per cent of customers hang up • Select agents • Train new agents • Encourage and guide agents who are not meeting targets • Invoke capability procedure if an agent persistently fails to achieve targets • Conduct regular team meetings to discuss performance issues and agree how performance could be improved
Factor analysis	Knowledge and skills (general)	• Knowledge of products on offer and company procedures • Knowledge of factors affecting the performance of agents and what can be done to improve their performance
	Interpersonal skills	• A high level of leadership, motivational and training skills required • Teambuilding skills • Ability to deal sensitively with performance problems
	Judgement and decision making	• Exercises own judgement on how to deal with people and performance issues in team although can request advice from HR business partner
	Complexity	• The work pattern does not vary much
	Responsibility for resources	• Leads a team of 12 people

Job profiles may focus on an analysis of the key characteristics of the job without going into the other details, as is illustrated in Table 8.2.

TABLE 8.2 Example of a job profile for a higher education lecturer

1 Teaching and learning support	• Plan, design and deliver a number of modules within subject area. • Deliver at undergraduate and/or postgraduate levels across a range of modules. • Use appropriate teaching, learning support and assessment methods. • Supervise projects, field trips and, where appropriate, placements. • Supervise postgraduate students. • Identify areas where current course provision is in need of revision or improvement. • Contribute to the planning, design and development of course objectives and material. • Ensure in conjunction with colleagues that modules complement other courses taken by students. • Set, mark and assess coursework and examinations and provide feedback to students.
2 Research and scholarship	• Develop research objectives and proposals, obtain funding and design research projects. • Conduct individual and collaborative research projects, lead small research teams or play a major part in research teams. • Identify sources of funding and contribute to the process of securing funds. • Extend, transform and apply knowledge acquired through scholarly activities. • Write and referee journal articles, or write or contribute to textbooks and make presentations at national and international conferences.
3 Communication	• Communicate straightforward through to complex information to a variety of audiences, including students, peers and external contacts. • Use high-level presentation skills and a range of media.
4 Liaison and networking	• Liaise with colleagues in other departments and/or institutions on professional matters. • Participate in departmental and other committee meetings. • Join external networks to foster collaboration and share information and ideas. • May represent the department at external meetings.
5 Managing people	• Lead the delivery of teaching in a module or programme: plan the timetable, allocate teaching responsibilities, and monitor the delivery of programmes to ensure that they achieve learning objectives and are meeting quality standards. • Lead small research teams. • Act as mentor to more junior lecturers. • Appraise staff and advise them on their personal development.
6 Teamwork	• Attend and actively participate in regular team meetings at which course development and delivery issues are discussed. • Collaborate with colleagues to identify and respond to students’ needs.
7 Pastoral care	• Use listening, interpersonal and pastoral care skills to deal with sensitive issues concerning students and provide support. • Refer students as appropriate to services providing further help. • Act as personal tutor.
8 Initiative, problem solving and decision making	• Identify the need for developing the content or structure of a course and put proposals together in conjunction with colleagues on how this should be achieved. • Develop creative ideas as a result of research and scholarship. • Deal with admission queries and problems concerning student performance. • Sole responsibility to decide how to deliver own modules and assess students.
9 Planning and managing resources	• As module leader or tutor, liaise with colleagues on content and method of delivery. • May plan and implement consultancy projects to generate income for the institution.
10 Emotional demands	• Work under pressure to deliver results.
11 Work environment	• Work in a stable environment or a laboratory or workshop.
12 Expertise	• Possess in-depth knowledge of the subject. • Possess the required levels of expertise in teaching and research. • Update skills and knowledge continuously. • Understand equal opportunity issues as they impact upon the delivery of teaching and collegiate working.

Step 3: Design grade structure

If job-to-grade matching is to take place it is necessary to design a grade structure. This may have already been done following the initial benchmarking exercise when developing a point-factor scheme. If not, decisions on the structure have to be made. These will initially determine whether the structure should be a single one covering all jobs, or whether it should be a job family structure with differently defined structures for clusters of jobs with common characteristics. A decision will also have to be made on the provisional number of grades or levels (this number may be amended when the grade definition process takes place). This can be done at the outset based on an a priori view that is made empirically by reference to the existing hierarchy or a belief that the present number of grades should be reduced to a more manageable number. A less judgemental approach is to base the decision on a ranking of benchmark posts, possibly using paired comparisons, and an analysis of the clustering of jobs based on the identification of common characteristics. The ranked jobs are then divided into grades according to views on the number of the distinct levels of responsibility that exist in the organization.

Another approach is to get a project team to sort benchmark job descriptions, role profiles or questionnaire responses into levels, with the criteria for allocating jobs to different levels being discussed as part of the process. The outcomes from the discussion and the number of levels arrived at through the process can be built into the matching definitions, while information about which jobs fell into each level can be discarded pending a more thorough matching process. Whichever approach is used, the number of levels may be amended at a later stage if it is shown to be inappropriate.

Analytical matching grade profiles

In an analytical matching scheme both grades and jobs are defined in terms of the selected set of factors or elements. These can be chosen specifically for the scheme using the methods suggested in Chapter 7, or the matching criteria could reproduce the factors in a point-factor scheme (one that already exists or one developed specially to back up matching). It may be desirable to combine sub-factors or any factors that are highly correlated (eg freedom to act and decision making). The degree to which matching is analytical will depend on the extent to which the elements represent discrete job dimensions (and then whether jobs are analysed separately according to each of these dimensions).

Where there is no pre-existing point-factor or analytical proprietary scheme the grade or level profiles will need to be developed from scratch. The easiest way to produce definitions is simply to draw up the grade profiles on the basis of assumptions about the characteristics of any jobs that would be placed in the various levels. An alternative approach is to select benchmark jobs covering all levels, analyse and rank them, allocate them to grades on a judgemental (felt-fair) basis and then prepare grade profiles by reference to the analyses of the benchmark jobs. However, where there is a pre-existing point-factor or analytical proprietary scheme the most robust method is to refer to the analyses of benchmark jobs that have already been graded and distil these to produce a generic definition. This is done by reviewing the job evaluation scores for each grade and creating a description for each level that reflects the typical pattern of responses for that grade.

Grade profiles can also indicate career paths. For this reason, at Friends Provident Insurance they are called career bands, as shown in Table 8.3.

TABLE 8.3 Friends Provident career band profiles

Career band A	Job example: clerical and administrative staff
Technical knowledge/business experience and qualifications	Developing a knowledge of one or more key areas within the function or business unit, together with an understanding of the systems utilized. Ensures that technical information is appropriately presented and correct.
Problem solving	Solves problems by following well-defined procedures and precedents. Will consult with more experienced colleagues on more difficult or novel situations.
Leadership	Takes responsibility for management of own workload, delivering against performance standards and individual/team objectives.
Communication/influence	Communicates information clearly and concisely, applying standards of common courtesy to all contacts.
Career band B	Job example: customer services consultant
Technical knowledge/business experience and qualifications	Demonstrates a good understanding of a range of non-standard processes, procedures and systems to be utilized in carrying out responsibilities. Is likely to have two or more years’ relevant experience working within the function or business unit or to have gained relevant experience elsewhere. May be starting to study for specific technical exams, eg FPC or ACII.
Problem solving	Works within procedures and precedents determining solutions from a number of appropriate alternatives.
Leadership	Offers guidance and technical support to less experienced members of the team.
Communication/influence	Applies developed communication skills in effectively handling more challenging contacts.
Career band C	Job example: customer services team leader
Technical knowledge/business experience and qualifications	Fully conversant with the procedures, policies and systems applied within the function or business unit, having gained relevant experience over a period of five or more years. Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of one or more well-defined areas for which they will provide technical leadership. Is developing an understanding of the relationship between different subject areas/business units. Is likely to have gained a qualification in a technical subject in a relevant discipline.
Problem solving	Applies specialist knowledge of own area in making judgements based on the analysis of factual information in straightforward situations.
Leadership	Plans and co-ordinates the work of the team and/or provides technical leadership, eg through delivery of on-the-job training, quality audits or application of developed specialist skills and knowledge.
Communication/influence	Explains technical information clearly and effectively, adopting a style of communication to fit differing levels of audience understanding. Is able to persuade colleagues and gain commitment to new ideas or approaches by expressing own views confidently and logically.
Career band D	Job examples: customer services team manager, analyst, programmer
Technical knowledge/business experience and qualifications	Is able to apply and consolidate specialist skills and knowledge gained over a period of eight or more years’ relevant experience to ensure essential procedures are followed and standards maintained. Demonstrates an understanding of the relationship between different subject areas and applies this knowledge in delivering cross-functional support, projects or advice. As a professional entrant to the business, will be developing professional skills through exam success and be increasing their contribution to the business.
Problem solving	Uses analytical skills and evaluative judgment, based on the analysis of factual and qualitative information to solve problems of a non-routine or more complex nature. Will be guided by precedents.
Leadership	In a team management role will be handling staff management issues including recruitment, resource management, training, coaching and performance management, and playing a leading role in determining salary recommendations for team members. Alternatively, will be a technical specialist with well-developed technical skills and specialist knowledge.
Communication/influence	Demonstrates strong verbal and written communication skills in influencing the outcome of decisions. Involves appropriate contacts in developing the final solution.

Grade definitions or profiles can be specifically linked to a point-factor scheme as illustrated in Table 8.4.

TABLE 8.4 Grade definitions based on a point-factor scheme

Level	Definition
1	• The use of the skills required to carry out straightforward work. • Requires the skills to work well with others and respond politely and competently to requests and enquiries. • The work is well defined and relatively few new situations are encountered. The causes of problems are readily identifiable and can be dealt with easily. • Work requirements involve a fairly limited range of activities. • Responsible only for the equipment required to carry out the work.
2	• The application of specific administrative or technical skills. • Requires the skills to exert some influence over others, getting them to accept a proposal or point of view. • Evaluation of information is required to deal with occasional new problems and situations and to decide on a course of action from known alternatives. Specific guidelines exist on what needs to be done and the more complex problems are referred to a higher authority. • There is some diversity in the work, which involves a number of non-routine elements and the exercise of a variety of skills although they are quite closely related to one another. • May have two or three staff reporting to him or her, and/or monitors expenditure.
3	• The application of a range of professional, specialist, technical, administrative or operational areas of knowledge and skills. • Requires the skills frequently to relate to people inside and outside the organization, providing advice and guidance, dealing with problems affecting people and exerting influence on important matters. The skills may be used in negotiations and joint problem solving on relatively straightforward issues. • Exercises discriminating judgement in dealing with relatively new or unusual problems where a wide range of information has to be considered and the courses of action are not immediately obvious. Takes independent action within defined policy frameworks. • The work is diverse, consisting of a number of different elements, which are only broadly related to one another, and the exercise of a wide variety of skills. • May lead a small team, and/or manage a small budget or be responsible for a range of facilities or equipment.
4	• The application of high levels of professional, specialist, technical or administrative expertise. • Requires the skills constantly to relate to people at senior levels inside and outside the organization on non-routine issues, providing advice and guidance internally on the interpretation and application of company policies. • Frequently exercises independent judgement when faced with unusual problems and situations where no policy guidelines or precedents are available. • The work is highly diverse, involving many different elements, which may not be closely related to one another. • Leads a large team or department of more than 10 people, and/ or acts as budget manager for a department or office.
5	• The application of authoritative expertise in a key area of the organization’s activities. • Requires the skills to deal with internal and external contacts at high levels, handling important and non-routine issues and involving the exercise of considerable persuasive ability, sensitivity to others and tact. The skills may be used when conducting important negotiations, dealing with difficult and sensitive cases or acting as the recognized representative of the company on key issues externally. • Deals on own initiative with widely differing problems calling for extreme clarity of thought in assessing conflicting information and balancing the risks associated with possible solutions. • The work is multidisciplinary and involves making a broad range of highly diverse decisions. • Leads a major function or range of activities and manages a commensurately sized budget.

An example of a more comprehensive framework produced for a large charity is shown in Table 8.5.

TABLE 8.5 (a) Grade profiles

Factor	Grade 1	Grade 2	Grade 3
Supervisory responsibility	Little or no supervisory responsibility other than helping/inducting less experienced staff in the work of the group.	Minor supervisory responsibility, eg in the absence of Section Head allocation of work and checking for quality and quantity.	Occasional supervision of staff temporarily assigned or shared supervision of permanent staff.
Creativity	Work with very limited opportunity for creative work or innovatory thinking.	Work largely regulated by laid down procedures, but needing occasional creative skills.	Creativity is a feature of the job but exercised within the general framework of recognized procedures.
Contacts	Contacts and exchanges information within the organization beyond the immediate associates, but usually within the post’s own department. Exchange usually on non-contentious and well-established matters.	Contacts with employees of other departments or occasionally receiving enquiries from outside the authority as first contact. Contacts beyond the organization’s employees would be within limited terms of reference and generally be restricted to situations where information is readily available.	Contacts which are generally not contentious but where the need or potential outcome may not be straightforward, or where the circumstances call for an element of tact or sensitivity. Contacts at this level would include interviewing to establish details or service needs, the supply of straightforward advice and initiating action to provide assistance. Contacts within the organization would require the provision of advice or guidance on matters which are less well established.
Decisions	Post requires little freedom to act, work is carried out within clearly defined rules or procedures and advice is available if required. Decisions have limited and short-term effect on employees beyond immediate colleagues or on the public. Effects of decisions would be quickly known and readily amended if necessary.	Work is carried out within clearly defined rules and procedures involving decisions chosen from a range of established alternatives. Decisions have an effect on the internal operations of the post’s own or other departments or on the individual or on the provision of service to the public.	Work is carried out within policies and objectives where there is a wide range of choices and where advice is not normally available. AND/OR Decisions where policy, procedures and working standards provide only general guidelines. Decisions which have significant implications for the organization or significant effects on employees or other individuals or other organizations.
Knowledge and skills	Ability to undertake work, consistent with a basic knowledge and skills requirement, which involves a limited range of tasks that can be carried out after initial induction.	Ability to undertake work, consistent with a comparatively basic knowledge and skills requirement, which encompasses a range of tasks involving application of readily understood rules.	Ability to undertake work concerning more involved tasks confined to one function or area of activity which requires a good standard or practical knowledge and skills in that area of activity.
Work context	Work where the programme of tasks is not normally interrupted.	Work subject to interruption to programme of tasks but not involving any significant change to the programme.	Work subject to changing problems or circumstances or demand.

TABLE 8.5 (b) Grade profiles

Factor	Grade 4	Grade 5	Grade 8
Supervisory responsibility	Supervision of staff carrying out tasks in one identifiable area of work.	Supervision or co-ordination and planning of the work of groups of staff carrying out work of a diverse nature.	Plan and organize a large department or highly significant area of activity and/or manage a portfolio of important short- and long-term projects to meet both internal and external requirements.
Creativity	Creativity is essential to the job and needs to be regularly exercised within general guidelines.	Work which requires creative input in a number of diverse subjects and range of expertise where the frequent opportunity and need for imaginative thinking is not limited by defined policies.	Carry out work in unprecedented situations frequently involving innovatory response on diverse subjects, which have extensive policy or service implications. Make a major contribution to high-profile reviews of key organization policies.
Contacts	Contacts which deal with situations where the content and outcome are not straightforward. Contacts within the authority with staff on matters which are not well-established and where some authority in the provision of services is required.	Contacts regularly dealing with a range of complex and contentious matters where the outcome will have substantial implications for the contact or the organization’s service provision. Though the post operates within broad policy guidelines, the handling of contacts would demand a consistently high degree of discretion, sensitivity and advocacy.	Contacts advising the organization on high-level complex matters with profound implications for the person or the organization contacted or which require a responsibility to act on behalf of the organization and commit the organization to a course of action involving substantial impact on resources. It would be expected that the expert guidance would be accepted and only ever overruled as a result of a change in policies.
Decisions	Decisions which lead to the setting of working standards in the provision of operational services or changes in important procedures or service practice.	Decisions involve independent action within precise policy frameworks.	Decisions made within broad policy frameworks, which have a profound impact on the organization’s policies and activities across a number of departments or on large numbers of people or on organizations in receipt of the organization’s services.
Knowledge and skills	Ability to undertake work on a variety of advanced tasks confined to one function or area of activity which requires detailed knowledge and skills in a specialist discipline.	Undertake work of a highly complex and diverse nature which requires advanced/high-level knowledge and skills in a range of specialist disciplines.	Possess highly developed specialist knowledge across a range of work procedures and practices underpinned by theoretical knowledge and relevant practical experience.
Work context	Work subject to frequently changing circumstances	Work is highly complex and frequently involves the resolution of conflicting priorities.	Work demands are largely unpredictable; may be involved in crisis management on issues deeply affecting the organization.

Separate grade profiles may be defined for each job family (groups of jobs with common characteristics) in job family structures. An example is given in Table 8.6. The definitions of knowledge and competency requirements at each level define the career path in this job family.

TABLE 8.6 Job family level profiles

Level	Role	Key responsibilities	Key competencies
8	HR Director	• Contribute to development of business strategy • Develop HR strategies aligned to business strategy • Exercise overall direction of all HR activities required to support achievement of business goals • Oversee human capital management projects	Knowledge of: • the business, its strategy and its drivers • HRM/HCM at a strategic level Ability to: • articulate a vision and set a leadership agenda • contribute to business strategic planning on equal terms with other directors • develop and implement HR strategies which are aligned to the business strategy and integrated with one another
5	Learning and Development Manager	• Contribute to the development of the learning and development strategy • Identify learning needs and plan blended learning and development programmes to meet them • Deliver major programmes • Direct the activities of learning and development consultants	Knowledge of: • current thinking and good practice in learning and development • advanced concepts and techniques in the field (Fellow CIPD) Ability to: • analyse key factors affecting activities in the function • coordinate and direct complex HRD programmes
4	Assistant Head of Talent Management	• Contribute to the preparation of human capital plans • Assist in preparing management succession plans • Coordinate performance management activities • Analyse human capital data and prepare reports	Knowledge of: • techniques of human resource and management succession planning • HRM at the level of Member, CIPD with at least eight years’ experience Ability to: • analyse business plans and draw conclusions on talent management requirements • carry out the analysis and diagnosis of people issues and propose practical solutions
3	HR Business Partner	• Contribute to the effective management of the division • Ensure the division has the skilled people it requires • Work alongside line managers and provide help and advice on HR issues • Deliver HR services required by the division	Knowledge of: • HRM techniques at the level of Member, CIPD with at least four years’ experience • business imperatives in the division • corporate HR policies and practices Ability to: • provide efficient and cost-effective services in each HR area • promote the empowerment of line managers to make HR decisions but provide guidance as required. • anticipate requirements and set up and operate appropriate services
2	Reward Analyst	• Maintain information systems on pay and benefits • Assist in the conduct and analysis of market surveys • Maintain data bank of information on market rates • Prepare role profiles for job evaluation purposes	Knowledge of: • the labour market and sources of market data • reward management techniques at the level of the CIPD Certificate in Reward Management Ability to: • carry out numerical and statistical analysis • use IT systems, software and spreadsheets • conduct role analyses
1	HR Assistant (recruitment)	• Place job advertisements • Arrange interviews • Deal with routine correspondence to applicants including standard offer letters • Ensure records created for new employees	Knowledge of: • HR techniques relevant to recruitment (studying for CIPD) Ability to: • select appropriate media • administer fairly complex procedures
1	Administrative Assistant	Provide word processing services • Maintain records • Operate office machinery • Deal with routine queries	Knowledge of: • Microsoft Office – Word, Excel, PowerPoint Ability to: • word process all types of documents, including reports and complex tabulations • prepare PowerPoint presentations • administer standard procedures

Non-analytical matching scheme grade profiles

Non-analytical matching grade profiles may be limited to a simple sentence describing the work done, such as ‘carries out routine support or administrative services’. But as shown in Table 8.7, grade profiles may include common elements and thereby become semi-analytical. In such cases, the job profiles would have to cover each of the elements.

TABLE 8.7 A semi-analytical grade profile framework

Grade	Grade profiles
A	Provide basic administrative and support services. Work largely prescribed.
B	Provide fairly complex administrative and support services. Work is largely standardized but there is some freedom to decide on methods and priorities.
C	Provide complex administrative and support services or technical support. There is some diversity in role requirements but acts within specific and detailed policy and procedural guidelines.
D	Manage certain operations within a function or provide professional services in a key area. The work is diverse – act within broad policy guidelines.
E	Manage a function or department within an operational or technical area or is the main provider of professional advice and services in a key aspect of the organization’s activities. The work is highly diverse there is freedom to act within broad policy frameworks.
F	Operational head of a major department, making a major impact on the performance of the organization. The work is complex and involves making a broad range of highly diverse decisions. A considerable amount of independent action is required within the framework of the organization’s strategies and plans and subject only to general guidance.
G	Involved in creating a shared vision and mission and strategic goals for the organization as a member of the board. Formulate strategies for a key function and ensure that functional strategies are implemented to achieve strategic goals.

Step 4: Develop matching procedure

Matching will be job profile to grade profile or job profile to benchmark profile or both. It is necessary to decide who does the matching, how they should do it and the documentation to be made available.

Matching is usually carried out by a matching panel. This may be a group of line managers facilitated by HR, but it should preferably include employee representatives. Guidelines are required on matching. These may define a perfect profile match as one in which all the elements in the job profile match all the elements in the grade or benchmark role profile. In the event of the failure to attain a perfect match the guidelines may indicate:

· the number of matches required of individual elements to indicate that an acceptable profile match has been achieved, for example five out of six; it is usual to restrict the mismatches allowed to fairly small variations – if there are any large ones, the match would be invalidated;

· any elements which must match for there to be a profile match, for example it may be decided that there must be a match for an element covering knowledge and skills;

· the procedure for grading if there has been a mismatch; this may require further information about the job or a full evaluation of the role if the matching process is underpinned by a point-factor scheme.

Step 5: Test the matching procedure

In a large job evaluation project where there are a number of panels it is advisable to test the grade profiles and the matching protocol by preparing a representative set of individual role profiles or questionnaire responses using the same format of factors and then matching the latter to the former. Any difficulties in doing this and achieving a sensible result, or any problems with the matching rules, will indicate what changes need to be made to the grade profiles.

Step 6: Train matching panel

The panel should be trained in the matching process and the use of the guidelines or protocols using real examples. It is essential to carry out this training thoroughly as the process is likely to be completely unfamiliar to the panel members, except in a small organization where the project team may have been involved throughout the development process. Training is needed even where the scheme is non-analytical and the matching process is on a whole job basis, as panel members will still need to be reminded about basic principles of job evaluation, including the need to match the job not the person, and how to avoid potential bias.

Step 7: Conduct matching

The panel conducts matching in accordance with the guidelines. If matching cannot be agreed the panel may request further information or refer the job to be evaluated by the basic job evaluation scheme, where matching is underpinned by a factor plan.

Examples

Syngenta

Syngenta is involved in agribusiness – the research, development, manufacture and sale of agrochemicals, seeds, plants and lawn-care products. It has around 2,000 employees in the UK.

Syngenta was formed in 2000 from a merger of the agribusiness interests of AstraZeneca and Novartis. The company wanted to move away from its existing points-based job evaluation arrangements and try to bring together the inconsistent pay structures across the business areas in the UK. It also wanted an approach to job evaluation and pay that would operate across the UK and fit the culture of the newly merged company.

A new job grading and linked pay structure was introduced consisting of six broad bands or work levels, covering everyone in the UK except for the most senior leaders and some workers in the manufacturing environment. This replaced a 15-grade structure.

The company previously used Hay, but did not wish to continue with the laborious and analytical processes involved in writing job descriptions to a particular format, preparing cases and getting senior managers together to review them. The complexity of the Hay system meant that managers needed technical job evaluation skills to manage the system rather than applying their knowledge and understanding of the roles and discussing their content and impact. The mathematical nature of the system also led to little ownership of the outcomes of the job evaluation system. More often than not, they were seen to be the results of a mysterious process carried out behind closed doors. In addition, even a points-based system requires judgement and interpretation, so it was decided that a less analytical and mathematical system would reduce the unproductive time spent on process and need not undermine the robustness of the final outcomes. Under the previous system it was easy for people to spend fruitless time working out how they could get additional points in order to reach a higher grade.

Syngenta wanted the new arrangements to be owned by line managers. There was a desire to use managers’ knowledge about the roles in their functional areas to best effect in a simple, line-owned grading structure. The system was therefore designed to encourage line managers to contribute to grading decisions and to set both pay benchmarks and individual salaries. To underpin this, the new arrangements were ‘co-created’ with senior managers and owned by them.

Job matching

There are six work levels, populated with a number of generic role profiles. The levels are defined by a number of factors, the most significant of which is the degree of responsibility and autonomy. The role descriptions vary in each of four business areas: research and development, manufacturing, marketing and sales, and business support. Most business activities (such as HR) have job families – a ladder of generic roles. This provides clarity for leaders and employees on potential career paths available, and supports the allocation of new roles into existing ladders. In the science area, for example, there are 10 different generic roles spread over several work levels, each of which is benchmarked against the market. In order to manage career progression and recognize growth in role size and contribution, there are often two benchmarks within a work level.

There is no direct linkage between work levels and salaries, although the on-target annual bonus increases by work level, and work level six roles typically receive a car allowance to reflect the external market.

Process

There are three local job-sizing panels – one for research and development, one for UK manufacturing, and one for commercial and support staff. In addition, there is a UK job-sizing panel, which takes an overview for consistency between the different parts of the business. The UK manufacturing panel, for example, consists of the head of UK manufacturing, the site managers for the two manufacturing sites, the head of HR and the head of UK engineering. The UK job-sizing panel consists of the site heads and other senior managers, including some from outside the UK. HR managers are members of panels alongside other managers, but their role is no different to that of the other managers. The function of the panel is to question, challenge and fully understand any rationale for a change of work level or benchmark. The company recognizes that it is important to have people on the panel with the credibility and confidence to challenge their colleagues, even in different functional areas where they may have less expert knowledge.

The panels usually meet once a year and approve promotions, grade changes and changes to benchmarks. They also set the benchmarks for all the jobs for their area, following recommendations from managers and HR managers who have reviewed salary survey data. The company takes part in a number of surveys and benchmarks the ladders of generic roles. External data influences what Syngenta pays but does not directly determine it – management judgement and data in combination will determine the final benchmark changes. Syngenta wishes to pay competitively in the markets in which it competes for talent. In practice, this means that benchmarks are often set at the median of market data. Actual pay is generally between 80 per cent and 120 per cent of the benchmark, and is very largely based on performance.

Involving first line managers

HR worked with senior managers to design and implement the new structures but it is necessary to build and develop for all leaders their knowledge of and comfort with the job evaluation and benchmarking systems. The HR team is now trying to provide more support to first line managers when they are having pay-related discussions with their employees. Information on the background to the salary budget, the link to total pay, and how salary benchmarks are set needs to be shared more openly and employees and leaders need to feel confident to engage in conversations around this often difficult and uncomfortable area. Syngenta is therefore trying to provide opportunities for first line managers to discuss pay-related matters with senior leaders so that they have the opportunity to ask whatever questions they need in order to deepen their understanding.

Advice

Syngenta is satisfied with its job evaluation arrangements, which it describes as ‘a good balance between robustness and pragmatism, ensuring that grading is robust and consistent but that the time spent on it is focused on discussing and comparing role content and impact rather than mathematical points allocation’. It advises others introducing job evaluation systems to look for opportunities to involve line managers in role-sizing discussions and to ensure that managers feel ownership of the process. It advises against having a system policed by HR, or which HR are implementing because ‘they know best’. It is very easy to turn job evaluation into a mathematical process that underutilizes the understanding and knowledge of managers in the business, and makes role sizing a purely theoretical and analytical process. Resisting this temptation and balancing analysis with knowledge and judgement has proved a far better approach for Syngenta.

The NHS job evaluation scheme

The NHS job evaluation scheme was first developed to support the programme for modernizing the NHS pay system, called ‘Agenda for Change’. With some modifications it is now used to grade jobs throughout the NHS. Essentially, the scheme uses analytical matching but it is underpinned by a bespoke point-factor scheme.

Development stages

The stages in developing the NHS job evaluation scheme, which were overseen by a joint management/trade union job evaluation working party (the JEWP), were:

1. Identify draft factors by reference to schemes already in use in the NHS.

2. Test draft factors. This was done using a sample of around 100 jobs. Volunteer job holders were asked to complete an open-ended questionnaire, providing information under each of the draft factor headings and any other information about their jobs, which they felt was not covered by the draft factors. The draft factors were then refined.

3. Develop factor levels. The information collected during the initial test exercise was used by small joint teams to identify and define draft levels of demand for each factor.

4. Test draft factor plan. A benchmark sample of around 200 jobs was drawn up, with two or three individuals being selected for each job to complete a more specific factor-based questionnaire, helped by trained job analysts, to ensure that the information provided was accurate and comprehensive.

5. Evaluate completed questionnaires – this was done by trained joint panels. The outcomes were reviewed by JEWP members and the validated results were then put on a computer database.

6. Decide scoring and weighting. The job evaluation results database was used to test various scoring and weighting options for consideration by the JEWP and the JSG (the Joint Secretaries Group).

7. Produce provisional guidance notes on how to apply the factor level definitions to jobs consistently. These were then expanded as a result of the benchmark evaluation exercise and have continued to be developed following successive training and profiling.

8. Computerize. The scale of implementing the NHS job evaluation JE scheme meant it was essential to consider how it could be computerized. A bespoke computerized JE software package was developed to assist in the process of matching and evaluating local jobs under the rules of the scheme.

The main features of the scheme are described below.

The factor plan

TABLE 8.8 The factor plan

	Levels
Factor	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1 Communication and relationship skills	5	12	21	32	45	80
2 Knowledge, training and experience	18	38	80	88	120	158	198	240
3 Analytical skills	8	15	27	42	80
4 Planning and organization skills	8	15	27	42	80
5 Physical skills	8	15	27	42	80
6 Responsibility – patient/client care	4	9	15	22	30	39	49	80
7 Responsibility – policy and service	5	12	21	32	45	80
8 Responsibility – finance and physical	5	12	21	32	45	80
9 Responsibility – staff/HR/leadership/training	5	12	21	32	45	80
10 Responsibility – information resources	4	9	18	24	34	48	80
11 Responsibility – research and development	5	12	21	32	45	80
12 Freedom to act	5	12	21	32	45	80
13 Physical effort	3	7	12	18	25
14 Mental effort	3	7	12	18	25
15 Emotional effort	5	11	18	25
16 Working conditions	3	7	12	18	25

The model has a maximum of 1,000 points available. The number of points available for each factor is distributed between the levels on an increasing whole number basis. Groups of similar factors should have equal weights but because the NHS is a knowledge-based organization, a higher weighting to knowledge was justified. It was considered that differentiation worked best when scores were stretched and this was achieved through a non-linear approach to scoring.

Profiles

Profiles for benchmark jobs were developed in order to make the processes of assigning staff to a pay band as straightforward as possible. The matching procedure allows most jobs locally to be matched to nationally evaluated profiles, on the basis of information from job descriptions, person specifications and oral information.

The matching process

The matching process is based primarily on agreed and up-to-date job descriptions for the jobs to be considered. The matching is carried out by panels. Their function is to:

· identify possible profile matches (there are unlikely to be more than three possible matches);

· compare the profile job statements with the job description, person specification and any other available information, including that provided orally by job group advisers/representatives, for the job to be matched;

· on a factor-by-factor basis, compare the information on the job with that in the selected profile and determine the extent to which they match.

A perfect match is achieved if all factor levels are within the range specified on the profile. If most factor levels match, but there are a small number of variations, there may still be a match so long as all the following conditions apply: (1) the variations are of not more than one level above or below; (2) the variations do not relate to the knowledge or freedom to act factors (3) the variations do not apply to more than five factors; and (4) the score variations do not take the job over a grade boundary. If there is no match the process is repeated with another profile. If there is no other possible profile, the job is referred for local evaluation.

Matching in universities

The matching approach to job evaluation has been adopted by a number of British universities. At Birmingham, Imperial College, Southampton and other universities the method involves the development of job families. This is done by means of the Hay Group job family modelling technique. As defined by Hay, a job family describes a number of different roles which are engaged in similar work, and a job family model considers how many levels of that type of work there are and defines them in a way that clearly differentiates the levels. Jobs are evaluated by slotting them into the level in their job family that provides the closest match. A position has to match a level description by at least 80 per cent to be slotted into a level.

The matching process is underpinned by the Hay Guide Chart system of job evaluation. If a good match cannot be obtained, the Hay system is used to evaluate the job. Below is an example of a level descriptor used in Southampton University for level 3 posts in the Operational Services job family.

General

Roles at this level either manage operational services work of some volume or complexity or provide advice and technical input based on extensive practical learning. Dealing with people is an important ingredient, whether they are staff managed by the jobholder, contractors or customers, and there is often budgetary responsibility or impact.

Representative work activities

Managerial roles:

· establish and review work requirements taking account of customer needs, college policies and available resources;

· plan own and others’ work for weeks and months ahead;

· implement plans for a service area ensuring effective operation;

· ensure staff are trained to required standards;

· monitor staff performance and take action to improve where needed;

· review customer satisfaction and, following discussion with more senior managers if appropriate, take steps to improve the service where necessary;

· review expenditure against budget, instigating corrective actions as necessary;

· ensure health and safety regulations are met.

Non-managerial roles:

· provide advice to colleagues and customers based on in-depth knowledge and technical expertise;

· analyse problems, diagnose and implement solutions, seeking agreement where appropriate;

· plan own work for weeks and months ahead;

· discuss and resolve problems or new requirements with customers, line managers and other colleagues;

· coach others to help them acquire skills and experience.

Either role type:

· contribute ideas for service improvement, changes to procedures and forward planning;

· discuss and resolve problems and concerns with customers and/or contractors;

· ensure that the service meets agreed needs.

Knowledge, skills and experience

· Vocational training plus practical experience, or the equivalent in practical experience;

· knowledge of college policies and processes;

· ability to solve a range of day-to-day problems without reference to others;

· skills in planning and organizing work and services;

· for managerial roles, ability to motivate staff, dealing with poor performance.

Performance criteria

Evidence of:

· quality and reliability of services provided/individual work, eg from customer feedback;

· effectiveness of planning and prioritizing;

· effective problem solving;

· customer satisfaction;

· flexibility;

· effectiveness in staff supervision, where appropriate;

· quality of contribution to the service and its development.