Job Evaluation
Guidelines
2
All rights, including translation into other languages, reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in print, by photostatic means or in any other
manner, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or sold without the
express written permission of the International Council of Nurses. Short excerpts (under
300 words) may be reproduced without authorisation, on condition that the source is
indicated.
Copyright © 2010 by ICN - International Council of Nurses,
3, place Jean-Marteau, CH-1201 Geneva (Switzerland)
ISBN:
978-92-95094-16-1
Printing:
3
Table of Contents
Introduction 5
Definition and Importance of Job Evaluation 7
Steps in the Job Evaluation Process 8
Avoiding gender bias 9
Job Evaluation Methods 10
Ranking method 10
Classification method 11
Factor comparison method 12
Point-rating method 13
Definition of Remuneration Factors for Nursing 16
Equal Remuneration and Job Evaluation 18
International Classification of Nursing 19
Taxonomy for Job Evaluation 20
National Nurses Association Role in Job Evaluation 21
Conclusion 23
References 24
Appendices
Appendix I: Job Evaluation Questionnaire 25
Appendix II: Job Description for Nurses 32
Appendix III: Factors Definition 34
4
5
Introduction
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the
world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead
Nurses have a right to practice in an environment that is conducive to quality care;
to expect competitive wages/benefits and to work in a family-friendly environment
that promotes the occupational safety and health of its employees. …The work of
nursing personnel and its importance for the life, personal safety and health of
persons in their care demands measures that encourage and promote the full
development and implementation of negotiating mechanisms between employers,
nurses and their representatives. …The principles of equal pay for work of
comparable value and pay equity should be applied. These principles should be
supported by gender-neutral job classification and performance evaluation tools,
and non-discriminatory access to education and promotion opportunities.
ICN Position Statement
1
Although remuneration has not traditionally been a factor in attracting people to the
profession of nursing, there is no doubt that financial considerations increasingly influence
the recruitment and retention of nurses worldwide. For a new generation of nurses, wages
represent a primary consideration as they determine the direction of their professional
lives. Retaining nurses is increasingly dependant on the ability to offer them competitive
salaries. Findings from the annual ICN Nurses Wage Survey repeatedly highlight that
nurses are by and large paid less for their work than professionals in comparable
occupations, such as physicians, physiotherapists, teachers and accountants. Nurses are
in high demand and universally short in supply. Despite this, salaries and working
conditions often remain unattractive, and more importantly, uncompetitive. Research
indicates that many nurses are underpaid because job-related skills are not treated as
professional assets but as qualities intrinsic to being a woman.
2
Forty years after the
Equal Pay Act men still earn, on average, 22 percent an hour more than women in the
UK.
*3
According to the U.S. Census Bureau female physicians’ wages average 63 cents
for every dollar earned by their male colleagues.
4
A recent study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University examines
women’s negotiating skills and found that women of all ages are less likely to initiate salary
negotiation and more likely to accept what their employer or prospective employer
offered.
5
When job evaluation systems are gender-biased and fail to capture or value the
work of nurses and other women workers, this perpetuates existing wage inequities. It is
important that the nursing profession, dominated by women, define the nature of its work
and assist in the development of relevant evaluation tools that are objective, transparent,
and non-discriminatory. The profession should not tolerate complacency about the lack of
equitable rewards for women and must hold leadership accountable for redressing
unconscionable gender differences in salary.
As witnessed by the nursing profession, the pay gap between men and women workers
will not disappear through educational achievement or qualifications alone. The social
*
There are a number of different ways of calculating the gender pay gap. The UK Government’s
preferred measure compares the pay of all men and women in work (full- and part-time) and looks
at the median. By this measure, the gender pay gap is 22.0 per cent.
6
partners, including national nurses associations and professional unions, must urgently
undertake a systematic reform of cultural attitudes, employment policies and institutional
structures that perpetuate direct and indirect discriminatory practices against women.
6
This monograph is prepared to draw nurses’ attention to job evaluation planning. It is
designed to give good practice guidance to evaluators in the field on how to formulate,
implement and measure job evaluation plans. The objectives of this monograph are to:
Provide nurses and national nurses associations (NNAs) with information on the
definition and importance of job evaluation.
Describe the steps in a job evaluation process.
Define remuneration and discuss the importance of equality for nurses when
developing a job evaluation plan.
Identify the potential roles of the NNAs in the ongoing development of job evaluation
planning.
Provide guidance to practitioners in organisations on how to formulate, implement and
maintain job evaluation plans which are free of sex bias.
7
Definition and Importance of Job Evaluation
Job evaluation is a technique to provide a systematic, rational, and consistent approach to
defining the relative worth of jobs within an organisation. This process is based on the
assessment of the relative importance of the tasks involved. It is not concerned with the
volume of work, or with the person doing it, or with determining pay. It is used in order to
provide the basis for an equitable and defensible pay structure, particularly in determining
equal pay for work of equal or comparable value.
7
Through its focus on the nature of jobs,
job evaluation provides a practical means of implementing this principle. It also offers a
convenient method for revealing discriminatory practices in any organisation before a
complaint is made.
8
It is important to note that job evaluation is not performance evaluation. Job evaluation
determines the relative value of a job to the organisation while performance evaluation
determines the relative value of an individual / employee to the organisation.
It is the job
that is being evaluated, not the person who is doing that job.
9
This process assesses the
qualitative aspects of the job, not the quantitative aspects. In other words, it is not the
amount of work allocated to a job which is primarily measured, but its relative demands,
complexity and responsibility and the competency required to carry out the job
effectively.
10
The technique of job evaluation has developed largely as a response to various pay
administration problems encountered in large-scale modern enterprises. With large
numbers of workers being employed, clear rules for payment are essential if labour costs
are to be accurately estimated and controlled and meaningful personnel policies to be
followed.
Therefore, an objective, transparent and systematic way of calculating the worth
of jobs must be mutually agreed upon between employers and employees. A systematic
job evaluation is an aid to reveal the values that consciously or unconsciously discriminate
against female occupations.
11
Those in charge of an organisation often consider an analysis of the job evaluation
process for the following reasons:
12
Determining pay and grading structures
Ensuring a fair and equal pay system
Deciding on benefits provision, i.e. bonuses
Comparing pay rates against the external market
Undergoing organisational development in times of change
Undertaking career management and succession planning
Reviewing all jobs post-large scale changes, especially if roles have also changed.
Job evaluation develops a means of providing competence-based pay progression, an
approach that would bring equity to those working in an organisation and, importantly, offer
a means to support lifelong learning and career progression. Therefore, government,
employers and workers should all recognise that an effective job evaluation plan offers a
reliable and valid tool to review jobs and their inherent worth in terms of salaries and
benefits for competent individuals.
8
Steps in the Job Evaluation Process
There are many variations of job evaluation methods. Some are more complicated than
others. The choice of an evaluation method is important and will depend on the number
and type of jobs to be evaluated and available resources. However, they all basically
follow the same approach, which is to value each job based on a common set of factors.
1. Job identification
The first step in the job evaluation process is to conduct a job analysis, to examine and
analyze the tasks and activities necessarily entailed by a job. Job analysis begins by
establishing a list of all the positions in a given population in order to group those that
are identical or essentially the same “job”. This process is called “job identification”.
This process will require exact information on the nature of each job, such as the
content and level of the jobholder’s responsibilities, and the surroundings and
conditions in which the job will be performed. Information to be gathered includes
personal characteristics (i.e. knowledge, skills and individual abilities) that the job
holder must retain to perform these tasks.
Although job evaluation is based on factual evidence, these data must be interpreted
so it is important that those who have to make judgements on the evidence presented
are trained to do so appropriately.
13
To ensure the process of job evaluation is going smoothly, someone needs to be
appointed to take charge. This is the central project person the project manager or
project coordinator. A project manager will need assistance from others with various
expertise and together they form a project group or working group. In addition, a
number of people are needed to take responsibility for the project’s implementation a
steering group or steering committee.
2.
Job description
The information obtained by job analysis is then recorded concisely in a “job
description”. The job description is a summary of the most important features of a job,
including the general nature of the work performed and level of the work performed.
Ideally, the job descriptions should be written so that any reader, whether familiar or
not with the job, can see what the worker does, how the worker uses various methods,
procedures, tools or information sources to carry out the tasks, and why the worker
performs those work activities for the completion of tasks. Since the purpose of the job
description is to enable jobs to be evaluated by comparison with each other, it usually
has a standardized format, and typically includes three broad categories: (1)
identification, (2) work performed, and (3) performance requirements.
14
The degree of
precision and the kind of information required vary in different methods.
3. Methods
The next step in the job evaluation process is to select or design a method of
evaluating jobs. Four basic methods have traditionally been used: ranking,
classification, factor comparison, and point-rating. A more detailed description on
these methods of job evaluation is presented in the next section. No matter which
method is used, the result of the evaluation procedure is the ranking of jobs in order of
importance. After this stage, it is usual to group into different grades those jobs to
which substantially the same values have been ascribed.
9
4. Wage determination
Translating grades into wage levels is the logical culmination of any job evaluation
process. However, the level and range of wages are not fixed as a direct consequence
of job evaluation, which is normally concerned only with the relative positions of jobs;
the determination of these tends to be influenced by wider considerations of overall
wage policy, including comparisons with external rates. In general, the level and range
of wages are determined by bargaining between the management and workers or the
workers representatives, unions or professional associations.
5. Evaluation
Lastly, as enterprises evolve, work organisation changes with time, thus affecting job
content and job-evaluated structures. As a final stage, it is therefore necessary to
establish appropriate procedures for monitoring, evaluating and revising the job
evaluation plan and for the settlement of appeals and disputes.
Avoiding gender bias
The process of job evaluation should be reviewed very closely to avoid gender
discrimination. Strongly ingrained attitudes still exist about what work is appropriate to
each sex. These attitudes can lead to acceptance of a grading and pay structure based
on possibly discriminating current or past practices. Gender bias in job evaluations can
occur when assumptions are made about the skills, responsibilities and demands involved
in a job – and these assumptions are coloured by stereotypes about the people who
usually do that work. Gender bias may also occur when characteristics traditionally
associated with women (e.g. caring skills) are less heavily weighted than attributes
traditionally associated with men (e.g. technical expertise) although both are required for a
given job.
According to the International Labour Organization, discrimination in employment or
occupation may be direct or indirect. Direct discrimination exists when laws, rules or
practices explicitly cite a particular ground, such as sex, race, etc. to deny equal
opportunities. For instance, if a wife, but not a husband, must obtain the spouse's consent
to apply for a loan or a passport needed to engage in an occupation, this would be direct
discrimination on the basis of sex.
Indirect discrimination occurs where rules or practices appear on the surface to be
neutral but in practice lead to exclusions. Requiring applicants to be a certain height could
disproportionately exclude women and members of some ethnic groups, for example.
Unless the specified height is absolutely necessary to perform the particular job, this would
illustrate indirect discrimination.
15
10
Job Evaluation Methods
There are four basic methods of job evaluation, which can be categorised into either
quantitative or non-quantitative, and that examine job content with a view to comparing
jobs directly or indirectly. Ranking involves creating a hierarchy of jobs by comparing jobs
on a global factor that presumably combines all parts of the job; the classification method
defines categories of jobs and fits jobs into these categories; the factor comparison
method involves job to job comparisons on several specific factors; and the point-rating
method compares jobs by rating scales of specific factors. Since the first two methods are
looking at the whole job as an entity, they are categorised as non-analytical or non-
quantitative; the last two methods involve an analysis and evaluation of job requirements
according to different factors, e.g. skill, responsibility and effort; they are categorised as
analytical or quantitative methods of job evaluation.
Ranking method
Ranking is a simple method which ranks the jobs in an organisation from highest to lowest.
Jobs are considered as a whole and compared with each other by means of comparatively
simple job descriptions. This method is one of the easiest to administer. Jobs are
compared to each other based on the overall worth of the job to the organisation. This
value is usually based on judgements of skill, effort (physical and mental), responsibility
(supervisory and fiscal), and working conditions. This method relies on job descriptions or
job titles for the positions to be ranked. Once evaluated, each job is placed in a 'felt fair'
rank order. It is considered the simplest method since there is no attempt to break down
or analyze the job in any way. It is therefore easy to understand and implement,
particularly with a small number of jobs.
Steps in the development of the ranking method
1. Obtain job information. Prepare descriptions for every job in the organisation.
2. Select raters and jobs to be rated. Raters must know the organisation well, and be
trained to make unbiased judgements, and become familiar with the rating
procedure. If there are many jobs to be ranked, the process can start by identifying
key jobs, or ranking jobs by department and later combining the ranking.
3. Select remuneration factors (more detailed information later in this document).
Although ranking is referred to as a ‘whole job approach’, different raters may use
different bases to rank jobs. It may be wise to appoint certain key attributes of the
jobs to be the most important basis for comparison.
4. Rank jobs. Although straight ranking may be feasible for a limited number of jobs (20
or less), paired comparison tends to produce more consistent results. Simply place
job titles with their job descriptions in mind on 3x5 inch index cards then pair them
comparing the titles by relative importance to the organisation.
5. Combine ratings. If several raters are involved in ranking the jobs independently,
any differences will need to be negotiated and a consensus reached.
Advantages
A relatively simple method.
A method with relatively little cost and less time involved for the introduction and
maintenance of the system.
Limitations
Information on jobs involved may be insufficient. The evaluators may not be very
clear on every job description.
11
There are no well-defined standards of ranking and the differences between jobs
may not be equal.
There are no safeguards against strong subjective influences. Every evaluator may
have different bases of comparison.
Since there is no standard used for comparison, new jobs would have to be
compared with the existing jobs to determine their appropriate rank. In essence, the
ranking process would have to be repeated each time a new job is added to the
organisation.
Classification method
The job classification method involves defining a number of classes or grades of jobs and
fitting jobs into them. It is a method whose main characteristic is that the various grades
and their structure are established before the jobs are ranked all jobs are classified into
an existing grade/category structure or hierarchy. Each level in the grade/category
structure has a description and associated job titles. To ensure equity in job grading, a
common set of grading standards and instructions may be used. Because of differences
in duties, skills and knowledge, and other aspects of trades and labour jobs, grading
standards are developed mainly along occupational lines.
Job classification is the most used form of non-analytical job evaluation because it is
simple, easily understood and at least, in contrast to whole-job ranking, it provides some
standards for making judgements in the form of the grade definitions. The United States
civil service, for example, uses a very comprehensive classification system based on
legally defined salary grades and scales which cover practically all government jobs.
Steps in the development of the classification method
1. Obtain job information. Prepare descriptions for every job in the organisation.
2. Select key jobs based on certain remuneration factors, e.g. knowledge and skills,
effort, responsibility and working environment. Key jobs can be analyzed first and
ranked. Distinguishable job features are then identified and used in developing grade
descriptions.
3. Determine the number of grades. It will depend on an organisation’s tradition, job
diversity and promotion policies to decide number of classes in an organisation. More
grades in the system allow for more promotion opportunities; fewer grades however,
permit more management flexibility and a simpler pay structure.
4. Develop grade descriptions. By defining grades in sufficient detail, the raters can
easily slot jobs into the different categories. Usually, titles of benchmark / key jobs are
used as examples of jobs that fall into a grade.
5. Classify jobs. The raters then can compare various jobs in each grade. The two
extreme positions within each class (highest and lowest) will be identified and the
others placed accordingly. The jobs considered to be sufficiently similar will receive
the same pay; jobs in other classes/ grades or steps within a given grade are
considered dissimilar enough to have different pay.
Advantages
A fairly simple method but demanding slightly more work than ranking. It may be
relatively easy to secure agreement about the classification of most jobs.
A system that is flexible under changing circumstances or in adapting to completely
new jobs.
The class/grade structure exists independent of the jobs. Therefore, new jobs can
be classified more easily than the ranking method.
12
Limitations
A difficult method to administer if a large number of classes/grades and steps are
involved.
A method prone to frequent ambiguity since it involves the difficulty of writing grade
level descriptions, and the judgment required in applying them.
Some jobs may appear to fit within more than one grade/category.
Therefore, the ranking method can be called job to job evaluation, in which a job is
compared with another job to decide whether it should be valued more, less or the same.
On the other hand, the classification method can be called job to scale, in which
judgements are made by comparing a whole job with a defined hierarchy of job grades,
which involves matching a job description to a grade description.
Factor comparison method
The factor comparison method compares jobs on several factors to obtain a numerical
value for each job and arrive at a job structure. A set of remuneration factors is identified
as determining the worth of jobs. Typically remuneration factors include knowledge and
skills, effort, responsibility and working environment. It begins with the ranking of jobs in
each of these factors. The ranking is usually transformed into relative values that
determine the ultimate job value for a given organisation. Hence, wage differentials are in
some cases, directly related to the ranking. The process starts with “key jobs” or
“benchmark jobs” which are scored factor by factor and ranked according to the total
value.
Steps in the development of the factor comparison method
1. Analyze jobs. Job descriptions are written in terms of the remuneration factors the
organisation selected.
2. Select key jobs. The major criterion for selecting key jobs is the essential correctness
of the wage rate; therefore, the jobs selected should represent the entire range of jobs
to be evaluated. Usually, 15 to 25 key jobs are selected.
3. Rank key jobs. Job evaluation committee members can rank the jobs based on the
remuneration factors individually, then consensus must be built among committee
members.
4. Distribute wage rates across factors. The jobs are then priced and the total pay for
each job is divided into pay for each factor. For example, if a nurse is paid for 20
dollars per hour, her payment may be divided by: $6 for knowledge and skills, $6 for
effort, $5 for responsibility and $3 for working environment conditions.
5. Construct the job-comparison scale. This begins by establishing the rate of pay for
each factor for each benchmark job. Then, slight adjustments may need to be made to
the matrix to ensure equitable dollar or currency weighting of the factors.
6. Use the job-comparison scale to evaluate the remainder of the jobs. The other jobs in
the organisation are then compared with the benchmark jobs and rates of pay for each
factor are summed to determine the rates of pay for each of the other jobs.
Advantages
The value of the job is expressed in monetary terms.
It can also be applied to newly created jobs.
The wage structure can be widely differentiated.
Limitations
It is a complicated and sophisticated approach.
Its application is a lengthy and time-consuming procedure.
13
The standard used for determining the pay for each factor may have built in biases that
would affect certain groups of employees (such as females or minorities).
Point-rating method
The point-rating method involves rating each job on several remuneration factors and
adding the scores on each factor to obtain a point total for a job. This method is an
extension of the factor comparison method. Again, it uses clearly defined factors, such as
mental requirements, physical requirements, skill requirements, responsibility and working
conditions the five universal remuneration factors. Under each factor, several divisions
called degrees or levels are developed based on levels of skills, responsibilities and effort
involved in order to do the job. Jobs are then analyzed factor by factor and points in each
degree or level awarded accordingly. A total point score is arrived at for the specific job by
adding together the points obtained for each factor. The total point score determines the
position of the job in the hierarchy. Jobs are then grouped by total point scores and
assigned to wage/salary grades so that similarly rated jobs can be placed in the same
wage/salary grade.
For example, the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service Job Evaluation (NHS JE)
system for all health care jobs was proposed by the Department of Health (DoH) in 2003
and revised in 2004. NHS Job Evaluation is used as a means of comparing one job with
another. It does this by breaking down jobs into their various components (called factors).
Once factors are identified these are, in turn, broken down into various levels of
responsibility. The job evaluation scheme will determine a new "rank order" of jobs in the
NHS and therefore of pay.
Since the point-rating method is an extension of the factor comparison method, the steps
in building this plan are very similar:
16
Steps in the development of point rating method
1. Analyze jobs. As in all other job evaluation methods, all jobs must be analyzed and
all job descriptions written.
2. Select remuneration factors. After job information is available, the next step is to
select remuneration factors. This step is especially important since the factors are
used for developing the organisation’s new pay scale.
3. Define remuneration factors. Factors must be defined in sufficient detail to permit
raters to use them as yardsticks to evaluate jobs.
4. Determine and define factor degrees / levels. Determining the degrees/ levels would
be like determining the inch marks on a ruler, it is necessary first to decide the
number of divisions, then to ensure that they are equally spaced or represent known
distances, and finally to see that they are carefully defined. The number of degrees
depends on the actual range of factors in the jobs.
5. Determine points for factors and degrees/levels. Usually each remuneration factor
will be assigned different weights based on its value of importance. Factor weights
may be assigned by committee judgement or statistically. Then, the total points
possible in the plan need to be decided. Applying the weights assigned to this total
yields the maximum value for each factor. Using 1,000 as an example, a factor
carrying 50% of the weight has a maximum value of 500 points; if there is 10
degrees / levels involved in this factor, then, each level will have the value 50 points.
6. Write a job evaluation manual. In the light of its complex nature, it is very important
to write a job evaluation manual. This manual conveniently consolidates the factor
and degree/level definitions and the point values which contribute to a more
transparent evaluation process.
14
Advantages
A systematic approach is possible.
It is a method relatively easy to understand and to operate.
It can be applied to a wide range of jobs.
It can be applied to newly created jobs.
Limitations
It is relatively inflexible in critical areas.
It is a relatively time-consuming procedure.
The standard used for determining the pay for each factor may have built in biases
that would affect certain groups of employees (such as females or minorities).
15
Table 1: Comparative Job Evaluation Methods
Method Advantages Limitations
Ranking Relatively simple
Less cost and time involved for
introduction and maintenance
Information on jobs involved
may be insufficient
No well-defined standards of
ranking and the differences
between jobs may not be equal
No safeguards against strong
subjective influences
New jobs would need to be
compared with existing jobs to
determine their appropriate rank
Classification Fairly simple method but
demanding slightly more work
than ranking
Flexible under changing
circumstances or adapting to
completely new jobs
Class/grade structure exists
independent of the jobs
Difficult method to administer if
large number of classes/grades
and steps involved
Method prone to frequent
ambiguity
Some jobs may appear to fit
within more than one
grade/category
Factor comparison Value of the job expressed in
monetary terms
Can also be applied to newly
created jobs
Wage structure can be widely
differentiated
Complicated and sophisticated
approach
Lengthy application and time-
consuming procedure
Standard used for determining
the pay for each factor may
have built in biases that would
affect certain groups of
employees (such as females or
minorities).
Point method Systematic approach possible
Relatively easy to understand
and operate
Applicable to wide range of
jobs.
Can be applied to newly
created jobs
Relatively inflexible in critical
areas
Relatively time-consuming
procedure
Standard used for determining
the pay for each factor may
have built in biases that would
affect certain groups of
employees (such as females or
minorities)
16
Definition of Remuneration Factors for Nursing
No matter which method your organisation chooses, it is important to develop the
indicating factors which reveal the important attributes of various jobs in the organisation.
These attributes are the determinants that the organisation is ‘paying for’, which aspects of
jobs place one job higher in the job hierarchy than another. These yardsticks are called
remuneration factors. Currently, most job evaluation systems cover knowledge and
skills, effort, responsibility and working environment as remuneration dimensions.
However, the number and definition of factors in each dimension may vary. Internationally,
job evaluation systems tend to be built around the five principal factors listed in Table 2.
Table 2: Skill, effort, responsibility, working conditions and freedom to act
New Zealand
17
Sweden
18
United Kingdom
19
Knowledge and Skills
1. Knowledge and
understanding
1. Education and
experience
1. Knowledge,
training and
experience
2. Physical skills 2. Physical skills 2. Physical skills
3. Mental skills 3. Knowledge and
skills updating
3. Analytical and
judgment skills
4. Communication
skills
4. Communication
skills
4. Communications
and relationship
skills
5. Human relations
skills
5. Application of
knowledge
5. Planning and
organisational skills
Effort
1. Physical demands 1. Physical effort 1. Physical effort
2. Mental demands 2. Concentration 2. Mental effort
3. Emotional demands 3. Emotional effort 3. Emotional effort
Responsibility
1. Responsibility for
information and
material resources
1. Responsibility for
material assets
and information
1. Responsibilities for
information
resources
2. Responsibility for
supervision
2. Financial
responsibility
2. Responsibilities for
financial and
physical resources
3. Responsibility for
well-being
3. Responsibility for
staff management
3. Responsibilities for
research and
development
4. Responsibility for
planning,
organisation and
development
4. Impact on the well-
being of the public
4. Responsibilities for
patient / client care
17
5. Planning and
coordination
5. Responsibilities for
policy and service
development
implementation
6. Responsibilities for
human resources
Working conditions / environment
1. Hazards 1. Hazards 1. Working conditions
2. Environment 2. Working conditions
3. Work pressure and
stress
Freedom to act
1. Freedom to act
See Appendix III, factor definitions used in NHS of UK.
18
Equal Remuneration and Job Evaluation
Job evaluation is the main mechanism available to ensure compliance with the principle of
equal pay for work of equal value. In order to avoid discrimination, it is necessary to pay
close attention to every step in the process. Job evaluation has aroused considerable
interest as a practical way of implementing the principle of equal remuneration for men
and women. According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), Equal Remuneration
Convention, 1951, rates of remuneration should be established “without discrimination
based on sex”, and men and women should receive equal remuneration for “work of equal
value”. It is generally recognised that the application of these laws is far from satisfactory
and partially because “work for equal value” is not easily defined. Job evaluation, when
properly done, appears to be one of the only means available to advance equal
remuneration for men and women.
A contemporary job evaluation system must be both gender neutral and modern. Gender
discrimination may occur at a number of stages along the way.
Recommendations to decrease the risk for discrimination include:
Selecting factors: Factors must be chosen systematically, irrespective of the
worker’s sex, and clearly defined.
Gender neutral weighting: Factors are given different weights according to their
importance. Weighting can have a considerable impact on the final outcome of a job
evaluation. If factors that benefit traditionally female jobs are accorded less weight,
the job evaluation system is not gender neutral, even if a balance has been achieved
between factors.
Gender neutral job descriptions: Acquire an accurate description of the demands
and responsibilities the work entails. The differences that exist between how women
and men describe their jobs may affect the job evaluation. Questionnaires used as a
basis for job descriptions must be carefully worded and gender-neutral.
Evaluation: When evaluating jobs, it is important to ensure the members involved
are comprised of both women and men and represent different age groups. There
must be a mechanism that allows for different interpretations to be discussed and a
consensus reached.
20
19
International Classification of Nursing
The International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) is a tool for organising
jobs into a defined set of groups according to the tasks and duties undertaken in the job.
ISCO-08 (2008 the most recent volume replacing the1988 and1968 versions) has been
developed to facilitate international comparisons of occupational statistics and to serve as
a model for countries developing or revising their national occupational classifications.
21
The ISCO organises occupations in a hierarchical, four layer structure, built on the basis of
the type of work performed as reflected in the level, and in the specialisation, of the skills
needed to execute a job. Jobs are grouped into occupations according to the degree of
similarity in their constituent tasks and duties. For example, the following nursing jobs are
grouped together in ISCO-88 to form the occupation unit groups:
222: Nursing and midwifery professionals (1
st
level/generally well trained workers in
jobs that normally require a university or advanced-level degree).
322: Nursing and midwifery associate professionals (2
nd
level/generally requiring skills
at a tertiary non-university educational qualification level).
532: Personal care workers in health services (support worker).
22
NNAs are strongly encouraged to become active in the process of providing feedback in
the discussions/negotiations with competent authorities regarding the classification of
nursing personnel. Using this system of classification, comparability issues may arise.
For example, while physicians are unambiguously identified among the professional major
group, the classification of nurses and midwives is less clear, crossing two major groups
where they could be recorded: ‘nursing and midwifery professionals’ (code 222) or
‘nursing and midwifery associate professionals’ (code 322). This distinction was designed
to reflect differences in tasks and duties that may be a consequence of differences in work
organisation as well as in education and training.
Use of ISCO-08 to the greatest detail possible would greatly improve cross-national
comparability and facilitate use of health workforce information for informed decision
making. Maintaining the professional status of the 1
st
level professional nurse in
discussions and negotiations with the competent authorities requires on-going diligence
and a strong voice, especially when health sector reform is being developed.
20
Taxonomy for Job Evaluation
Frequently, nurses have job descriptions that inadequately describe their role and fail to
differentiate between the role of the registered nurse, other categories of nursing
personnel and other health care workers. It is therefore essential that as professional
nurses we use the most appropriate terminology to describe the work we do. A taxonomy
is required that is capable of describing a set of relationships between various categories
or levels relating to those competencies required of nursing personnel at each level of the
continuum of care.
Many organisations use job evaluation systems that are on the whole based on complexity
and level of education. Unless nurses describe their work accurately it is more difficult to
ensure a correct level of reward. Documented data that reflects nursing practice
represents the knowledge and skills that belong uniquely to nursing as well as the
knowledge that nursing shares in collaboration with other disciplines. Colleagues, health
team members and patients benefit when standard terminology is used to describe and
assign nursing roles and functions.
Developing standardised nursing taxonomy will serve as a tool when drafting job
descriptions and articulating nurses’ contributions to the health of patients. It is important
to identify the generic skills and use the associated verbs linked to the role performed –
see ICN’s Describing the nursing profession: Dynamic language for advocacy.
23
21
National Nurses Associations Role in Job Evaluation
The objectives of national nurses associations (NNAs) can be categorised in three major
areas: protection of the public, advancement of the profession, and safeguarding the
professional, social and economic interests of nurses. As presented previously, in many
countries the monetary value of nursing often ranks lower than for comparative
professions. If adequate numbers of qualified nurses are to be recruited and retained in
active practice, equal pay is central to the further development of nursing. It is important
that the nursing profession define the nature of its work and assist in the development of
relevant evaluation tools.
The following roles are proposed for NNAs to assess, advocate and ensure the job
evaluation systems developed and used in their own countries are appropriate and non-
discriminatory.
1. Lobby for policy decisions influencing job evaluation.
It is the responsibility of nursing leadership to encourage the development of the
profession and of nursing services. Stimulating discussion on relevant job evaluation
issues, reinforcing positive initiatives and attacking negative positions, is useful as well
as vital. If a job evaluation exercise is to be undertaken, NNAs should be involved in
the preparation stages, as well as throughout the entire study process, in order to
ensure that the objectives and methodology selected are non-discriminatory. NNAs
must be positioned as expert resources on job evaluation by developing clear policy
positions. NNA printed policy statements, supported by data from relevant publications,
research studies, and respected opinions, should be widely disseminated.
2. Analyse the situation.
Job evaluation is a complex and often long-term process. Nurses represent a large
number of health care workers, frequently mobile and employed throughout the
geographic territory and at all levels of the health sector. NNAs must first analyse the
current nursing status. Are the nurses being paid fairly? Is the job evaluation system
presently applied gender-neutral and non-discriminatory?
3. Identify the specific categories of personnel to be included in the evaluation.
The complexity of the nursing profession’s infrastructure is compounded by its
interdependent relationship with a multitude of other professionals and various client
populations to develop clear job descriptions. NNAs must articulate the role of nurses
in health care delivery using action verbs that describe the wide range of nursing
functions and interventions. NNAs must sensitize public and health partners to the role
and functions of nurses, assist in the development of standard job descriptions that
can be adapted to specific job requirements, and negotiate (as a nurses’ union or
working with labour organisations) representing nurses in collective bargaining and
local negotiations).
4. Participate in data gathering.
NNAs must facilitate access to appropriate sources of data (e.g. registering body,
universities and field research results) and encourage their members to cooperate in
the generation of useful data. Information is a source of power and NNAs must take
advantage of their broad membership base and communication network to participate
at various levels of research and data dissemination. If possible, NNAs may initiate or
sponsor nursing research in these areas. Collecting all related materials in job
22
evaluation assists the development of guidelines for job evaluation to be used in health
sector organisations. NNAs can mobilise members to advocate the association’s
position, showing strength through unity. And finally, NNAs can keep members
informed and provide good feedback on the impact of job evaluation.
5. Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the job evaluation plan.
NNAs must monitor and evaluate the application of the system(s) used by various
organisations and the results of job evaluations carried out. Undertaking annual
reviews of the results and providing feedback sending strong messages for future
improvement will ensure the credibility and viability of job evaluation systems.
23
Conclusion
In conclusion, this monograph has introduced job evaluation as a systematic approach to
defining the relative worth of jobs within an organisation. This method can provide a
positive contribution in resolving some problems of gender based discrimination. It is
important to remember that evaluations are subjective and are influenced and revised over
time. The general view of what is acceptable and what is discriminatory will also change
over time. Jobs evolve and new jobs are created. So it is with job evaluations they
must be dynamic and flexible and adaptable to local conditions if they are to be useful.
The practice of job evaluation will be successful when participants are trained in job
evaluation, there is transparency when designing and planning job evaluation projects,
there is good communication throughout the project, careful documentation of processes
and results, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation of outcomes by gender. Hospitals and
other health facilities interested in recruiting and retaining nurses would be wise to adopt a
job evaluation system capable of sensing the work-related values held by the employees
within the organisation and develop reward structures that mirror the level of staff
competencies.
24
References
1. International Council of Nurses (2004). Socio-Economic Welfare of Nurses. ICN
Position Statement. Geneva.
2. International Labour Organization (1992). Equality of opportunity and treatment
between men and women in health and medical services, Geneva. pp 12, 22-29-33.
3. Government Equalities Office. Gender Pay Gap. http://
4. www.equalities.gov.uk/what_we_do/women_and_work/gender_pay_gap.aspx
5. Weinberg DH (2004). Evidence from Census 2000 about earnings by detailed
occupation for men and women. Census 2000 Special Reports. Washington, DC: US
Census Bureau.
6. Babcock L & Laschever S (2003). Women don’t ask: Negotiation and the gender
divide. Princeton: Princeton University Press. International Council of Nurses (2007)
Equal Opportunity: Poverty and Women. Guest Editorial, International Nursing Review,
December 2007.
7. International Council of Nurses (2007). Equal Opportunity: Poverty and Women. Guest
Editorial, International Nursing Review, December 2007.
8. BNET: Business Dictionary (2007). http://dictionary.bnet.com/definition/job+
evaluation.html.
9. International Labour Office (1993). International Labour Review, Volume 132, Number
1, 46; 1993.
10. Benton D (2003). Agenda for change: Job evaluation. Nursing Standard, 17(36), 39-42.
11. Department of Public Service and Administration, Republic of South Africa. Guide on
Job Evaluation. Available: www.dpsa.gov.za/documents/je/job_evaluation.pdf.
12. The Swedish Association of Health Officers (1997). IDA: Methods and structures for
non-discriminatory job evaluations.
13. Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (2007). Job Evaluation. CIPD, March
2007. www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/pay/general/jobeval.htm
14. Benton D (2003). Op. cit.
15. Anderson ER & Harriman A (1999). Right pay the right way: A method for assessing
qualifications when setting individual pay levels. Swedish National Institute for Working
Life.
16. International Labour Organization (2008). Elimination of discrimination in respect of
employment and occupation. ILO Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at
Work. www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---
declaration/documents/genericdocument/wcms_100447.pdf
17. Department of Health UK (2004). NHS Job Evaluation Handbook (Second Edition)
www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidan
ce/DH_4090845
18. State Services Commission & Department of Labour (1991). Equity at work: An
approach to gender-neutral job evaluation. Aotearoa, New Zealand
19. The Swedish Association of Health Officers (1997). Op. cit.
20. Department of Health UK (2004). Op. cit.
21. Anderson ER & Harriman A (1999). Op. cit.
22. International Labour Organisation (2008). International Standard Classification of
Occupations ISCO-08. Geneva.
23. International Labour Organisation (2008). Ibid.
24. International Council of Nurses (2007). Describing the nursing profession: Dynamic
language for advocacy. ICN: Geneva.
25
Appendices
Appendix 1: Job Evaluation Questionnaire
Source: James Cook University, Queensland Australia:
cms.jcu.edu.au/hr/forms/index.htm
REQUEST FOR POSITION DESCRIPTION EVALUATION
1. Is this a new position?
No
Yes
2. Is this position to be advertised? If so, please attach all relevant documentation.
No
Yes
3. Is this Position Description being submitted for re-evaluation? If so, please attach
current report/documentation.
No
Yes
4. Please specify the Level, from 1 to 10, of present grading.
5. Position Number
If you do not know this, please contact the person in your Division responsible for staffing
matters or Human Resources Office.
6. Title of the Position
This should arise out of, and be consistent with, the description of the main purposes of the
job below.
7. Where is the Position located?
8. Is the Position currently occupied?
No
Yes
Name of occupant:
Staff Number:
CONTACT NAME FOR ENQUIRIES:
26
HUMAN RESOURCES USE ONLY - JOB EVALUATION PROCESS
Job Evaluation Committee Evaluation:
Date
Committee Members:
Document Scan Number:
Comments:
The information provided in this document should give an accurate description of the
position and its requirements, and be based on the General staff classification criteria.
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE JOB
This section is intended to provide general information about the job, such as where it is
located, what decisions have been made about it and who is currently occupying it.
1 Position Number
If you do not know this, please contact the person in your Division/Office responsible for
staffing matters or Human Resources office.
2 Local Title of the Job
This should arise out of, and be consistent with, the description of the main purposes of
the job below.
3 Where is the Job located?
GENERAL STAFF POSITION DESCRIPTION
Human Resources
27
Office/Division
Main Purpose(s) of the Job (Focus):
This should be a short statement of 1 to 5 sentences explaining why the job exists.
STATEMENT OF DUTIES
List of Tasks or Duties:
List the most important or time-consuming tasks or duties first. The list is assumed
to include the general requirement Any other duties, consistent with the
employee’s classification/qualifications, as directed by the supervisor and this need
not be written in.
% of Position
ORGANISATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
These questions ask about direct and indirect reporting relationships. If another
person is supervised by you, they report direct
to you. Those they supervise report
indirectly to you.
28
Organisational Relationships:
Please complete a diagram below which shows where the position fits in the work
unit, that is the title of the positions directly above, below and next to the position.
Describe the position/s which report directly to the position described in this
document?
Please highlight one
No
Yes How many positions?
Please list them:
Staff Directly
Supervised
Continuing Staff Non-continuing
Staff
Casual Staff
Are there any other jobs which report indirectly to this position?
Please highlight one
No
Yes How many?
29
Please provide a written response in relation to the position’s impact and reporting
relationships with other areas of the University and outside organisations.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED & LEVEL OF INDEPENDENCE
Supervision and Independence Required in the Job:
Supervision and Independence is the extent to which a staff member is able (or
allowed) to work effectively without supervision or direction. Please describe and
provide typical examples.
Financial Delegation:
If this position is responsible for the control of funds, show the level of financial
delegation which is assigned to the position:
30
JUDGEMENT & PROBLEM SOLVING
Judgement and Problem Solving Required in the Job:
Judgement is the ability to make sound decisions, recognising the consequences
of decision taken or actions performed. Please provide typical examples.
Problem solving is the process of defining or selecting the appropriate course of
action where alternative courses of action are available. Please give examples of
the more complicated problem solving required in this job. Please provide typical
examples.
Recourse to Higher Level
Please give examples of the level at which the incumbent is expected/able to refer,
or seek advice/assistance on, problems to another person. Please provide typical
examples.
TRAINING & QUALIFICATIONS NEEDED TO DO THIS JOB
14 Formal Educational Qualifications and Skills and Knowledge required to do
this Job:
Care should be taken to list educational qualifications which are really needed to
do this job – i.e. those without which the job could not be done. Specifying
31
unnecessary qualifications is likely to discriminate against EEO groups who are
less likely to have such qualifications. Desirable qualifications may be listed but
the absence of these will not prevent an applicant from being appointed.
Definitions of formal educational attainments are attached at A. Also include skills
and knowledge genuinely required to do the job.
Essential
Desirable
SIGNATURE PAGE
Prepared By: __________________________ ___/___/___
(Date)
Supervised By: __________________________ ___/___/___
(Date)
Approved By: ___________________________ ___/___/___
(If applicable) Director (Date)
Authorised By: __________________________ ___/___/___
(Mandatory) (Date)
Occupant: __________________________ ___/___/___
(if job currently filled) (Date)
32
Appendix II. Job Description for Nurses
Source: South London and Maudsley NHS Trust
Source
Job Details
Job Title: Primary Nurse
Grade:
Hours:
Department:
Location:
Reports to:
Responsible for:
Prof Accountable To: Director of nursing
Job Purpose:
The post holder collaboratively assesses the needs of service users, plans, implements
and evaluates the care given and maintains records associated with this process. This
may include the co-ordination of care of service users liaising with other members of the
multidisciplinary team where necessary. The post holder will carry out nursing procedures
to a standard that ensures safe and effective care, and complies with the Nursing and
Midwifery Council's Code of Professional Conduct.
Communications and Working Relationships:
COMMUNICATION WITH FREQUENCY
Service users and carers: Daily
Professional colleagues: Daily
Supervisor and supervisees: At least monthly
Facts and Figures:
The Lishman unit is a specialized provision that aims to investigate, and deliver treatment
packages to clients with complex Neurological and psychiatric presentations. It comprises
10 beds for Neuropsychiatry and 7 beds for the acquired brain injury service. There are
two distinct multidisciplinary teams for each service, and the postholder will be required to
function as a primary nurse for clients within each specialty.
Key Responsibilities:
1) To assess needs, plan, implement and monitor care in collaboration with the service
user, carers, and other members of the multidisciplinary team.
2) To implement care that meets the mental, physical, spiritual, psychological and social
needs of the service user, and that is sensitive to age, culture, race, gender, ethnicity,
social class, sexuality and disability.
3) To administer medication and psychological treatments with knowledge of
contraindications and side effects, and relating accurate information to service users in a
format they are able to understand.
4) To demonstrate an understanding of the distress caused by, and social and personal
consequences of mental illness for service users and their carers.
5) To actively encourage service users to work towards self-determination and freedom of
choice within legal, ethical and professional constraints.
6) To work within policy, professional and legal frameworks at all times. This requires
33
knowledge of NMC Code of Professional Conduct, risk assessment and child protection
protocols, Mental Health Act and CPA, and Trust clinical policies.
Person Specification. Verified at interview (I), by application form (A) or by a test (T)
Essential
Education/ Qualifications: RMN. (A/I)
Experience:
Ability to assess, plan, implement & evaluate care.
An ability to develop a therapeutic relationship. (A/I)
Knowledge:
A knowledge and understanding of the needs of people with mental health problems.
Skills and Abilities:
Demonstrates an ability to develop social relationships. (I)
Ability to present information both written and oral and communicate this effectively. (A/I)
An ability to develop ones own practice using the supervision process. (I)
Flexible in one's approach to interventions. (I)
Desirable
Education/ Qualifications:
Mentorship Training. (A/I)
Other professional development. (A/I)
Experience:
Experience of shift co-ordination. (I)
Experience of supervising and mentoring junior staff and students. (A/I)
Knowledge:
Experience of racial awareness/diversity training. (I)
Skills and Abilities:
IT skills. (I)
Clinical skills relevant to the post applied for. (A/I)
Skilled in the communication of sensitive issues. (I)
Skilled in supervision of others, and in providing critical and
constructive feedback. (I)
34
Appendix III. Factors Definition
Source: NHS (2004). Job Evaluation Handbook (Second Edition)
1. Communication & relationship skills: This factor measures the skills required to
communicate, establish and maintain relationships and gain the cooperation of others.
It takes account of the skills required to motivate, negotiate, persuade, make
presentations, train others, empathize, communicate unpleasant news sensitively and
provide counselling and reassurance. It also takes account of difficulties involved in
exercising these skills.
2. Knowledge, training and experience: This factor measures all the forms of
knowledge required to fulfil the job responsibilities satisfactorily. This includes
theoretical and practical knowledge; professional, specialist or technical knowledge;
and knowledge of the policies, practices and procedures associated with the job. It
takes account of the educational level normally expected as well as the equivalent
level of knowledge gained without undertaking a formal course of study; and the
practical experience required to fulfil the job responsibilities satisfactorily.
3. Analytical and judgmental skills: This factor measures the analytical and judgmental
skills required to fulfil the job responsibilities satisfactorily. It takes account of
requirements for analytical skills to diagnose a problem or illness and understand
complex situations or information; and judgmental skills to formulate solutions and
recommend/decide on the best course of action/treatment.
4. Planning and organizational skills: This factor measures the planning and
organizational skills required to fulfil the job responsibilities satisfactorily. It takes
account of the skills required for activities such as planning or organizing clinical or
non-clinical services, departments, rotes, meetings, conferences and for strategic
planning. It also takes account of the complexity and degree of uncertainty involved in
these activities.
5. Physical skills: This factor measures the physical skills required to fulfil the job duties.
It takes into account hand-eye co-ordination, sensory skills (sight, hearing, touch,
taste, and smell), dexterity, manipulation, requirements for speed and accuracy,
keyboard and driving skills.
6. Responsibilities for patient/client care: This factor measures responsibilities for
patient/client care, treatment and therapy. It takes account of the nature of the
responsibility and the level of the jobholder’s involvement in the provision of care or
treatment to patients/clients, including the degree to which the responsibility is shared
with others. It also takes account of the responsibility to maintain records of
care/treatment/advice/tests.
7. Responsibilities for policy and service development Implementation: This factor
measures the responsibilities of the job for development and implementation of policy
and/or services. It takes account of the nature of the responsibility and the extent and
level of the jobholder’s contribution to the relevant decision making process, for
instance, making recommendations to decision makers. It also takes account of
whether the relevant policies or services relate to a function, department, division,
directorate, the whole trust or employing organization, or wider than this; and the
degree to which the responsibility is shared with others.
8. Responsibilities for financial and physical resources: This factor measures the
responsibilities of the job for financial resources (including cash, vouchers, checks,
debits and credits, invoice payment, budgets, revenues, income generation); and
physical assets (including clinical, office and other equipment; tools and instruments;
vehicles, plant and machinery; premises, fittings and fixtures; personal possessions of
patients/clients or others; goods, produce, stocks and supplies). It takes account of the
nature of the responsibility (e.g. careful use, security, maintenance, budgetary and
35
ordering responsibilities); the frequency with which it is exercised; the value of the
resources; and the degree to which the responsibility is shared with others.
9. Responsibilities for human resources (HR): This factor measures the
responsibilities of the job for management, supervision, coordination, teaching, training
and development of employees, students/trainees and others in an equivalent position.
It includes work planning and allocation; checking and evaluating work; undertaking
clinical supervision; identifying training needs; developing and/or implementing training
programs; teaching staff, students or trainees; and continuing professional
development (CPD). It also includes responsibility for such personnel functions as
recruitment, discipline, appraisal and career development; and the long term
development of human resources. The emphasis is on the nature of the responsibility,
rather than the precise numbers of those supervised, coordinated, trained or
developed.
10. Responsibilities for information resources: This factor measures specific
responsibilities of the job for information resources (e.g. computerized; paper based;
microfiche) and information systems (both hardware and software, e.g. medical
records). It takes account of the nature of the responsibility (security; processing and
generating information; creation, updating and maintenance of information databases
or systems); and the degree to which it is shared with others. It assumes that all
information encountered in the NHS is confidential.
11. Responsibilities for research and development: This factor measures the
responsibilities of the job for informal and formal clinical or non-clinical research and
development (R & D) activities underpinned by appropriate methodology and
documentation, including formal testing or evaluation of drugs, or clinical or non-clinical
equipment. It takes into account the nature of the responsibility (initiation,
implementation, oversight of research and development activities), whether it is an
integral part of the work or research for personal development purposes; and the
degree to which it is shared with others.
12. Freedom to act: This factor measures the extent to which the jobholder is required to
be accountable for own actions and those of others, to use own initiative and act
independently; and the discretion allowed to the jobholder to take action. It takes
account of any restrictions on the jobholder’s freedom to act imposed by, for example
supervisory control; instructions, procedures, practices and policies; professional,
technical or occupational codes of practice or other ethical guidelines; the nature or
system in which the job operates; the position of the job within the organization; and
the existence of any statutory responsibility for service provision.
13. Physical effort: This factor measures the nature, level, frequency and duration of the
physical effort (sustained effort at a similar level or sudden explosive effort) required
for the job. It takes account of any circumstances that may affect the degree of effort
required, such as working in an awkward position or confined space.
14. Mental effort: This factor measures the nature, level, frequency and duration of the
mental effort required for the job (e.g. concentration; responding to unpredictable work
patterns, interruptions and the need to meet deadlines).
15. Emotional effort: This factor measures the nature, level, frequency and duration
demands of the emotional effort required to undertake clinical or non-clinical duties that
are generally considered to be distressing and/or emotionally demanding.
16. Working conditions: This factor measures the nature, level, frequency and duration
of demands arising from inevitably adverse environmental conditions (such as
inclement weather, extreme heat/cold, smells, noise, and fumes) and hazards, which
are unavoidable (even with the strictest health and safety controls), such as road traffic
accidents, spills of harmful chemicals, aggressive behaviour of patients, clients,
relatives, and caregivers.