Griffenhagen was the earliest advocate for the documentation of each aspect of a job evaluation process. A Griffenhagen compensation planconsists of three com- ponents: (1) a classification outline through which the positions in an enterprise are grouped into classes; (2) a class specificationwhich identifies qualities of each
JOBANALYSIS, DOCUMENTATION,ANDJOBEVALUATION 97
class of positions that are important for personnel administration; and (3) classifi- cation rulesfor applying and administering the plan.10
Griffenhagen defined a position as a group of duties “calling for the attention of some one individual for their proper performance.”11 (He preferred the word positionin place of job.) He stipulated that, while an employee may influence the nature of the position, the position not the doer defines what things shouldbe done.
That focus on the concept of a position is central to his definition of a classof positions, which definition then becomes the keystone for building his method for achieving equitable compensation. A class is a “group of positions that may to all intents and purposes be considered interchangeable.”12It is possible for a class to include only a single position, a situation common to higher level supervisory positions.
Theclassification outlineaspect of the compensation plan consists of a series of documented studies of the positions in the workplace. Job analysisis the first task in the studies and involves “ascertaining and examining duties and other attrib- utes that go to define a given position.”13Griffenhagen describes the process as the
“taking apart of a thing, its solution into constituent parts, or elements, and their examination.”14There is no prescribed format for documentation of the job analysis, with many format variations evident in use among its practitioners at that time.
Upon completing job analysis, a narrative record of the findings of the analy- sis is prepared as a position description, thus enabling others to acquire a succinct, coherent, yet comprehensive understanding of the position.
Finally, with all position descriptions prepared, each position is sorted into an appropriate class level after which a class specificationis written. That document includes:
1. The title to be applied to the class and all positions assigned thereto 2. A general description of duties common to the positions in the class,
together with some illustrations of actual work performed
3. Identification of the qualifications required, which may include both those necessary and those desirable
4. Information regarding lines of promotion, preferably showing next higher and next lower rank
5. Compensation information for the class, including pay scales
6. Other facts or memoranda relating to the class within the personnel adminis- tration process15
are in a category of professional positionsin contrast with nonprofessional, support positions.
2. The engineering positions are divided into subdivisions, such as civiland mechanical engineering.
3. The mechanical engineering positions, for example, are then grouped in a hierarchy through study of the position descriptions prepared after job analy- sis has been performed. The question being answered in this stage of the process is: considering the position in its entirety, which have (a) the most complex duties and(b) the highest level of responsibilities and(c) the most demanding qualifications requirements?
4. The process is then applied to the civil engineering positions in like manner, and then extended to all remaining categories of positions.
5. Each hierarchy is then examined separately to determine the number of classesinto which the positions in each hierarchy should be placed. This effort usually results in a compromise between groupings that are exception- ally homogeneous and narrow and groupings that are loosely inclusive.
Neither too few nor too many classes are desirable.
6. Classes are then compared acrosseach occupational specialty to determine the number of levelsorgradesof work that exist within the entire block of the positions studied. Figure 8.1 illustrates the configuration of the hierarchy at the completion of this step.
JOBANALYSIS, DOCUMENTATION,ANDJOBEVALUATION 99
Professional Positions Clerical/Technical Support Positions
Grades Mechanical Engineering
Civil Engineering
Accounting Clerical
Electronics Technician
1 C
2 C
3 C C
4 C C
5 C C
6 C C C
7 C C
8 C C
9 C
10 C
C = A class of positions
Grade 1 contains the position classes of "highest value" among the positions covered Prior to assigning specific pay levels to the grades, class specifications are prepared for
each class.
FIGURE 8.1 Representation of the framework of the classification method
While the classification method produces a hierarchy of positions through use of a common sense, nonquantitative approach, compensation analysts who have administered programs based on this method indicate that (1) it is a very complex system, (2) it is very flexible in accommodating an exceptional range of differing types of jobs, and (3) it is prone toward either loose or tight interpretations of lan- guage, creating problems in maintaining appropriate grade levels.
Such matters were long recognized by the U.S. Civil Service Commission which had been using the classification method for its General Schedule compen- sation system since 1924. In 1975 the Commission developed and adopted a point method, named the Factor Evaluation System, for evaluating nonsupervisory posi- tions in Grades 1–15 of the General Schedule.16