Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Guiding

Download Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Guiding

Preview text

Section 3 Appendix C
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the copyright holder.
This publication may not be sold, lent, hired out or otherwise dealt with in the course of trade or supply in any form binding or cover than that in which it is
published without the prior permission of the publisher.
 London Councils 2016





The guidelines to the GLPC Job Evaluation Scheme provide supplementary

advice on good practice in applying the scheme.


The guidelines are not prescriptive, but offer advice on best practice. Where

organisations currently operate joint facilities on appeals or where good

practice is evident, it is not necessary to adopt the measures and principles

contained in these guidelines. Their purpose is to assist organisations who

currently do not operate, or who wish to improve their approach to and

operation of job evaluation.


The guidelines also aim to respond to the requirements of the equality

legislation, which specifies that where a job evaluation scheme is in

operation, its content and application should be free from discriminatory bias,

for example, stereotypical assumptions regarding the value of “women’s



The guidelines outline good practice in

 The preparation of job descriptions  Job assessment  Local level appeals  Personal protection arrangements  Maintenance and review of the scheme



All users of the GLPC Job Evaluation Scheme should ensure that:

 Job analysts and panellists are trained in the scheme prior to involvement in grading appeal hearings and understand equal value issues and implications
 They take equal opportunity considerations and equal opportunity representational issues into account at every phase of the process; and
 Clear guidance notes, procedural processes and time limits are drawn up locally on the composition and maintenance of job descriptions, job evaluation processes and appeal arrangements. These should be circulated to job evaluators, panellists, trade union representatives, employees and line managers.

3. 3.1 3.1.1
3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4
3.1.5 3.1.6 3.2 3.2.1

Good practice requires that a current up-to-date job description, i.e. properly reflective of the post at the time, should exist for all posts within the purview of the GLPC Job Evaluation Scheme in the organisation. Often decentralisation or delegation of the composition of the job descriptions may result in job descriptions becoming outdated and lead to variations in format, content, style and terminology, which may make job evaluation more difficult and impact upon how jobs are assessed. It is recognised that Organisations will have a local style for job profiles. Consistent application of the Organisation template is essential to ensuring reliable job evaluations. The suggested content in this Code is provided as advice only.
The purpose of this guidance note is to promote consistency of approach and the benefits of a common ‘house-style’ throughout the organisation, and to draw to the attention of those concerned to the general objectives and requirements of job descriptions.
Users are encouraged to incorporate these principles within local guidance notes for managers and employees on the composition of job descriptions.
Organisations use job descriptions as part of the management process and function for a number of reasons in addition to grade assessment. Uses include:  encouraging objectivity in advertising posts and the selection process  informing potholder’s of the purpose, major duties and responsibilities
within the job  assessment of performance within the job  grievance and disciplinary issues; and  organisational reviews by assisting skills audits and allocation of
Some authorities have introduced competency frameworks to inform a range of HR processes, including those above. The GLPC Scheme recognises this and encourages the analysis of posts against the requirements of the job and the criteria of the scheme.
Given the wide-ranging application of job descriptions it is in the interests of management to ensure regular and accurate maintenance of job descriptions.
 Completion of job description pro-forma by the manager and postholder  Composition of the job description by management in agreement with the
postholder  Signature and dating of job description by those involved in its preparation
to identify job content at a given point in time.
Who should compose the job description?

3.3 3.3.1
3.3.2 3.3.3 3.4 3.4.1

It is sensible to start with the duties listed by the postholder (unless the post is vacant or is a new post) and have these verified or ‘fine-tuned’ by management. The job description should be agreed between management and the postholder. This process will involve the line manager, the job evaluator and the postholder, and where appropriate the trade union representatives.
In order to encourage consistency of approach and ‘style’ it would seem appropriate to provide a pro-forma for the postholder/manager to complete prior to writing the actual job description to enable both parties to consider and identify:  areas of work  key functions and responsibilities; and  how these areas could be grouped and described.
A job description should be clear, precise and uncomplicated. Lengthy job descriptions should be avoided. It is not necessary to list every job activity that might possibly occur in the job. It is important to identify the range of work involved and to ensure that no activity is omitted which would illustrate the full scope of the post.
The job description should therefore:  follow a consistent style and format  focus on the significant or key features of the job; and  be written in clear, concise language.
Each job description should contain:
Post details  the job description  department/division  post number  who and what responsible to/for (people/resources/functional and line
responsibilities); and  when evaluated, the grade (or proposed grade).
Purpose of job
Three or four lines should suffice. The purpose should briefly identify:  the scope and objectives of the post  the nature of the job  the service provided, and to whom  management or line supervision of any area of work  any deputising role; and  location of the post.
In any event the paragraph should provide sufficient information to give an understanding of the nature and purpose of the job and its position within the

3.4.4 3.4.5
3.4.6 3.4.7 3.4.8

Major duties and responsibilities of the post
It is important that this section consists of a logical presentation and has consistency of style. It should provide a factual summary of the job and list the main job areas and any pertinent aspects of the work. Avoid the ‘shopping list’ syndrome. Many options are available in terms of how this section is completed but it is useful to list the main duties under specific headings representing key areas of responsibility, each followed by one or more task descriptions. It should not be used to provide detail of how the activities are undertaken as these may be covered by reference to the appropriate office procedure or office manual. It is unlikely that the majority of jobs will have more than ten or twelve key areas of responsibility.
Responsibility for resources
This should include details of any plant, equipment, vehicles, property or cash for which the postholder is personally and identifiably accountable.
Job activities
This section should describe job activities, which should ideally be quite distinct from major duties and responsibilities. They should outline how, when, and where the job activity is done. Job activities should expressly state, for example:
 the extent or limitations of the post’s authority; the availability of guidance and advice, and the effects of systems or other lines of authority
 the range of skills required within the job  the type of decisions/recommendations made by the post  the type, content and degree of creativity in the post; and  the type of supervisory responsibility, including direct, indirect, and any
deputising function, and the number and employment status of those supervised.
When preparing a job description it is helpful to ask “Why is this activity undertaken?” to test the validity of activities carried out. Grouping of related tasks and elimination of detail will help to distil the information into an appropriate form for the job description.
Once the key areas are identified and specific items for inclusion are selected, decide on an appropriate sequence of presentation. This may be according to the frequency of performance, relative importance, chronological order or a logical sequence relating to the main management processes, e.g.. planning, coordinating, etc.
Then describe each key area of responsibility in a succinct heading that will form a natural introduction to the related tasks to follow and will provide clarity in understanding the purpose of the job. Describe each task in a short, precise sentence or two so the reader can understand what is done, how it is done and why it is done. For example “Monitors expenditure (what) by checking monthly summaries of orders placed (how) to ensure adherence to budget provision” (why).

3.4.9 3.4.10 3.4.11

Distinguish between tasks performed by the job occupant e.g. “prepares policy” and the job occupant’s accountability for others carrying out these tasks e.g. “ensures that systems are maintained”.
Avoid imprecise phrases, for example “liaison with”. Include, if appropriate, any other relevant responsibilities for organisational policies, such as health and safety, equal opportunities, confidentiality, etc.
It should be possible to contain the total length of a well-constructed job description within two pages. Employers will wish to include a Person Specification as part of the job profile. Specifications should identify the essential skills, knowledge and experience required to perform the duties of the job. Organisations are advised to avoid relying solely on qualifications as an indicator of ability. Many employers choose to describe job attributes using a competency framework. Such frameworks should be consistently applied where used.



The job description should be agreed between management and the postholder and signed and dated by those involved in its preparation.



Wherever possible, the relevant organisational structure should be attached to the job description.



Appendix A of this Code of Practice provides a Checklist of considerations when drawing up job descriptions.

4. 4.1 4.1.1
4.1.2 4.2 4.2.1
4.2.2 4.2.3 4.3 4.3.1

This may be undertaken by:
 paper evaluation (based on the job description and questionnaire where appropriate); or
 full evaluation (verification of job description by interview).
followed by a panel assessment (to be used in conjunction with either of the methods above)
 expert computerised system evaluation (see section 4.7 below).
All posts must be evaluated by analysts trained in the GLPC Job Evaluation Scheme.
The post is assessed on the basis of the job description and organisational structure. A questionnaire may also be used to supplement this information; this is designed to address specific questions in relation to each factor. The evaluator uses these materials to decide whether there is sufficient information to assess the grade of the post or whether additional information is required.
Evaluators will need to guard against the potential for discrimination that can arise when assessments are limited to paper evaluation. Where there is insufficient information, the evaluator should arrange to seek clarification from the postholder and/or manager.
The assessment should be panelled (Appendix C Annexe 3). Upon the determination of the grade by the panel, the assessment and grading should be notified to the appropriate chief officer/manager and be made available to the employee.
The purpose of the job evaluation interview is to:  check the accuracy of the job description and job content, and qualify or
expand it, if necessary  identify whether the duties have changed  supply any additional information necessary to undertake the evaluation,
which is not evident from the job description and/or questionnaire; and  use the information gained from the job description, organisational
structure, questionnaire and relevant material from the interview to assess the post.

4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5

Basic Principles
Best practice in a job evaluation interview process should aim to reduce potential discriminatory bias and ensure:
 interviews are undertaken by trained evaluators  consistency of arrangements, procedures and structure of the interview  use of a standard format in the interview, without being inflexible, to
ensure all evaluated interviewees are asked similar questions/aspects of work. (Checklist in Appendix C);  use of effective questioning technique; and  sufficient time is allocated so that the relevant information is obtained.
Interviews with both postholders and managers should be conducted in accordance with a standard format. The information obtained should be recorded appropriately.
Any contacts with either postholders or managers outside the formal interview process must also be recorded.
Specific Points
The job evaluator should ensure that employees whose posts are to be evaluated are notified in sufficient time of the arrangements and the purpose of the job evaluation interview.
At that stage the interviewee may be asked to complete a pre-interview job evaluation pro-forma designed to encourage the employee to prepare thoroughly for the interview, focus on specific aspects of their work, increase confidence in the discussions and potentially reduce the length of time spent interviewing.
Ensure a confidential location, free from interruptions; where appropriate, this can be the interviewee’s place of work.
Ensure the interview follows a standard structure and is managed by the interviewer, to:
 provide the introductions  give an explanation of the objective and format of the interview  explain why the interviewer will take notes and assure the interviewee of
the confidential status of these, and of the discussion overall  use effective questioning styles and avoid jargon  aim for a ratio in the discussion of 80:20 (employee/evaluator)  summarise decisively  indicate when and how the results will be forwarded; and  give a ‘contact point’ should any other relevant information arise.
Comprehensive notes should be taken at the interview. If notes need to be “written up” after the interview, this should be done promptly.
Check any areas of uncertainty or verify any information with the manager (whilst maintaining confidentiality on specific details).

Evaluate and panel the job. Where additional information is requested by the panel this should be supplied by the interviewer to maintain ‘confidential status’ etc.
Forward results to the manager and employee. The correspondence should also outline the process for providing access to local appeal.



A checklist of the process is attached at Appendix C which may be adapted for local use.

4.5 4.5.1

In the context of the GLPC Scheme “panelling” refers to the need to ensure that the job description/post is assessed by more than one person. The purpose of panelling is clearly to reduce any potential bias in grade assessments.
Basic Principles
Panelling arrangements may be determined locally and a number of options are available.
Best practice should ensure:
 the establishment of formal or informal panel arrangements  that all panellists are trained in the GLPC Scheme  composition of panel arrangements are cognisant of equal opportunity
representational issues  the post is assessed by more than one trained evaluator; and  where decentralised job evaluation arrangements exist, a central steering
group is established to service and monitor consistency of application across the organisation.


Ideally, each post should be assessed by a formal panel which need have not more than four trained panellists, and which should be reflective of the gender/racial profile of employees wherever possible. However, organisational resources or numbers of posts assessed sometimes do not facilitate such formal arrangements.

4.5.4 Alternatively, a less formal approach may be adopted provided that informality does not permit laxity or inconsistency of procedures when assessing grades.

4.6 4.6.1

It is advised that, where an ‘informal’ procedure is adopted, one analyst collects the necessary information, undertakes the paper evaluation or interview and assesses the job against the GLPC Scheme, in the first

4.7 4.7.1
4.7.2 4.7.3 4.7.4 4.7.5 4.8 4.8.1

instance. The job description, questionnaire where appropriate, and any other relevant information, together with the initial assessment, should be verified by at least one other trained analyst.
Panel evaluators should separately and independently evaluate the job description in accordance with the scheme, indicating their evaluation on a factor analysis pro-forma. They should identify any areas of disagreement, note the reasons for factor level awards for each factor, and aim to reach a consensus on the levels awarded and the grade. The reasons for factor levels awarded should be recorded together with any areas of disagreement in the assessment.
The scheme is supported by two computerised packages:
 The JEM, which is designed to record “traditional” job evaluation results and facilitate comparisons within the organisation; and
 The “Northgate JE system”, which is an expert system designed to produce evaluations automatically based on answers to computergenerated questions on all the factors within the scheme.
Both systems need to be separately purchased under licence, and must be operated by trained evaluators.
The expert system is designed so that information relating to the job can be directly entered onto the system by answering a number of pre-designed questions. The results are automatically generated by the system, although there is scope to modify these where there is agreement that the resulting factors are not appropriate.
The exact method of operating the system within an individual organisation is for local determination, although the main benefit of using such a system is to encourage greater consistency of application, especially in situations where the operation of the scheme has been decentralised to operational units.
However it is important that before such a system is operated, appropriate pilot testing has taken place within the organisation to ensure consistency of results and transparency in the process. It is particularly important to ensure that consistency between manual and computerised results exists before the system is implemented.
The EOC, as was, has indicated that it is particularly important that rigorous arrangements for monitoring of results are in place as an integral part of the scheme. Any anomalies that may indicate unfair bias or disproportionate results in respect of a particular group of employees must be investigated. Appropriate steps should be taken to remove any such adverse impact of the operation of the scheme.
It is also important that an effective formal appeals procedure is in place to deal with individual employees who feel they have been unfairly treated or

Preparing to load PDF file. please wait...

0 of 0
Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Guiding