Job Evaluation

Guidelines

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.

3, place Jean-Marteau, CH-1201 Geneva (Switzerland)

ISBN:

978-92-95094-16-1

Printing:

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

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

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.

Forty years after the

Equal Pay Act men still earn, on average, 22 percent an hour more than women in the

UK.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau female physicians’ wages average 63 cents

for every dollar earned by their male colleagues.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Those in charge of an organisation often consider an analysis of the job evaluation

process for the following reasons:

• 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

worker’s 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.

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.

• 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.

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.

• 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:

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.

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).

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)

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

Sweden

United Kingdom

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

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.

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.

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.

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

level/generally well trained workers in

jobs that normally require a university or advanced-level degree).

322: Nursing and midwifery associate professionals (2

level/generally requiring skills

at a tertiary non-university educational qualification level).

532: Personal care workers in health services (support worker).

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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?



Yes



2. Is this position to be advertised? If so, please attach all relevant documentation.



Yes



3. Is this Position Description being submitted for re-evaluation? If so, please attach

current report/documentation.



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?



Yes



Name of occupant:

Staff Number:

CONTACT NAME FOR ENQUIRIES:

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

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.

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

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

Yes How many?

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:

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

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)

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

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)

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

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.