Job Analysis Models and Job Classification

Abstract

Recent research in job classification has focused on the appropriate data analysis model for analyzing the similarities and differences among jobs. In the present research, the data analysis model is held constant, and the type of job analysis data is varied to examine the effect on the resulting job classification decisions. Seven foremen jobs in a chemical processing plant were analyzed using three different levels of job analysis data: task-oriented, worker-oriented, and abilities-oriented. All three sets of data were analyzed using the same hierarchical clustering procedure. Results indicated that the number and type of resulting job clusters was clearly dictated by the type of job analysis data that was used to compare the foremen jobs. Practical implications of these findings are presented. THERE are many purposes for which industrial psychologists must determine the extent of similarities and differences among jobs. In designing selection or promotion systems, for example, the researcher must decide which job groups or job families can be combined for use with a single selection system. In wage and salary administration it is important to know which jobs are similar enough to be administered in the same range. In developing performance appraisal systems the personnel specialist is interested in knowing which jobs are similar enough to be combined and evaluated on the same performance evaluation form.There are two distinct decisions for any job classification problem.

Narrative Job Descriptions as Potential Sources of Job Analysis Ratings

“…ius, Carron, & Collins, 1979;McCormick, 1976;Pearlman, 1980 (Cornelius & Lyness, 1980). This inherent element of judgment has led to a number of concerns about who is beat qualified to perform such ratings.…”

“…A ;" \ =-_ comparability or for establishing the ganeralisability 3f selection and training progsams (cf. Cornelius et al,, 1979), such information appears quite useful in developing comparable performance evaluation instruments for jobs that possess different titl.s but which make similar demands on their incumbents. Suci scores may also provide useful randards to evaluate measures of other organizational conditions such as subunit atruc ure or workgroup climate.…”

A perspective on work system analysis: classification and evaluation of methods

“…Shoaf et al methods have lim ited their scope of assessment to one or two component areas (Hackman and Oldham 1975, Ram sey et al 1986, Hart and Staveland 1988, Keyserling et al 1992. Cornelius et al (1979) cautioned that use of techniques employing diOE erent types of data (task-oriented, worker-oriented and abilitiesoriented) can yield inconsistent results. H ow ever, others who have attem pted to address several work system components in their methodology (M cCormick et al 1969, Rohmert and Landau 1983, W agner 1985, Kemmlert 1995, Guo et al 1996 have failed to give su cient consideration to the inclusive model in terms of either scope or depth of analysis.…”

Assessing Interrater Agreement in Job Analysis Ratings

“…The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient () lias also been used by a number co authors as an index of interrater agreement (Bernardin, Alvares, & Cranny, 1976* Cornelius, et al, 1979Jenkins, et al, 1975;Taylor & Colbert, 1978). However, Ebel (1951) noted that only pairwire comparisons can be made, the table of ratings must be complete, and the between-rater variance is always remove 9 in calculating the product-moment formula.…”

“…Research interest in job analysis and job classification is, once again, on the rise (Cornelius, Carron, & Collins, 1979;Tornow & Pinto, 1976 The utility of such a method requires at a minimum that trained raters agree on the ratings to be assigned to each position (i.e., one must address interrater reliability). However, a critical issue in determining agreement is the selection of a statistical method appropriate to the data collected (Jones & James, 1979).…”