JOB ANALYSISCHRISTINE FLYNN, NICOLA LARKIN, CLAIRE-SUZANNE BORG, EMMA DUANE

INTRODUCTION

What we already know

Quality and Standards

Manager

Functional Job

Analysis

PURPOSE AND EXPECTED DELIVERABLES

General Deliverables of a work analysis

• The content of the work performed by people in an organisation (tasks, responsibilities, outputs)

• The worker attributes related to its performance (KSAO’s)

• The context in which such work is performed (Pearlman and Sanchez, 2010)

• For the purpose of selection broadly speaking work analysis is to ensure that selection systems are work or job oriented and hence valid, and thereby have value or utility to the organisation, as well as being legally defensible.(Pearlman and Sanchez, 2010)

Quality and Standards

Manager

Job Description

O*NET

Standards Manuals

Training

Organisational Chart

Initial discussion

INFORMATION ALREADY AVAILABLE ABOUT THE JOB

JOB ANALYSIS METHOD USED - FUNCTIONAL JOB ANALYSIS

1) Combination of worker-orientated approach (The Worker functions), the work-oriented approach (Task Inventory) and the qualitative approach (Description of tasks)

2) Highly systematic procedure using qualitative and quantitative data gathering processes3) In depth analysis, well rounded information on task orientation and level of involvement with

people, data, and things, The Worker Scales4) Training time required for a job is operationalised within other scales?

5) Specific attention to what a worker does and the environment they do it in

6) One of the premiere job analysis methods in industrial/organisational Psychology and HR (Cronshaw, Best, Zugec, Warner, Hysong and Pugh, 2007)

BUT

1) Can be costly, time consuming and labour intensive, as well as requiring special training for appropriate application (Pearlman and Sanchez, 2010)

2) Central problem in validation is to link in some way a list of job duties or work behaviours with human attributes (the KSAO’s for certain positions) (Wernimont, 1988)

What is Functional Job Analysis

The definition of functional job analysis

“Functional Job Analysis (FJA) analyzes jobs by studying tasks. The decision to do so was a practical one that developed out of job family research carried out in the late 1930s to establish transferability among jobs. What was found was that job titles were unrealistic, unstable, and ultimately inaccurate and non-descriptive. What was stable were tasks. The same tasks showed up repeatedly in different jobs, and essentially it was task elements that were the basis of job relationships.” (Fine, 1989)

Functional Job Analysis (Fine, 1955) is:

1. a conceptual system which defines

dimensions of work activity, eg, data, people

and things and domains of human

performance, ie, cognitive, affective, and

psychomotor, and interrelates the two;

2. an observational method and thus a way of

looking at and recording people at work; and

3. a method of analysis which relates all work

output to the goals and objectives of the work

organization and to the skills, knowledge and

attitudes of the workers.

FUNCTIONAL JOB ANALYSIS - OVERVIEW

Tasks

Knowledge , skills

Abilities

Task Statements/Task Bank

Validation

FJA Scale Scoring

Functional Job Analysis

➢ 11 years in sector, almost 3 years in current area.

➢ Degree qualified to post graduate level

➢ In-house training completed

➢ Skills acquired in current role:

➢ Collaborative working

Negotiation Skills

Candidate Details

Methods used to collect data

1. Interview as per traditional FJA protocol:

• What do you get paid for? (outputs)• What do you need to know to do what you get paid

for? (knowledge) • What skills/abilities do you need to apply your

knowledge? (skills and abilities)• What do you do to get work done? (tasks) • What standards do you work towards, yours and your

organization’s? (performance standards) (Hysong, Best, Moore, 2007)

2. Reviewing Records - Job Description, O*NET

Output

3. Reviewing Literature - Training manual, Standards

Manual

Data Collection

Summary of findings from work analysis

Tasks Performed on a Day-to-Day Basis- Chair meetings across the

organization to present actions that

need to be carried out in order to

conform to quality standards

- Monitor and make changes to

actions for progress

- Meet and engage with teams on

their current quality standards

- Review all organizational policies and

procedures and initiate internal training

programs where necessary

- Coordinate the annual input plan to gather

feedback from clients which are then used for

future performance improvement activities

- Maintain contact with a resource specialist on

any queries and best implementation

practices regarding standards

- Administer and record all proceedings to be

presented to CARF

Rating scales applied to these allow an analyst to empirically describe a task in relation to

People, Data and things and other characteristics, but using a standard format and language

TASK STATEMENTS AND RATING SCALES

“A task statement is based upon actual observation of the task, so it should be an

accurate description of the actions being performed to achieve the specific outcome or

result. There should be little room misinterpretation about what the worker should be

doing if there is a task-based job description.”

•Example from our analysis:

•Organises a suitable time and location to chair meetings with management

across the organisation and presents changes and actions which need to be

implemented - IN ORDER to conform to quality standards.

Levels based on (Fine & Cronshaw, 1999, p. 38; Fine & Wiley, 1974)

Area Function Level Orientation

Data Coordinating 5B 30%

People Consulting 4A 60%

Things Handling 1A 10%

ADDITIONAL SCALES

Area Level

Worker Instructions 8)

1 Worker Instruction Scale - indicates the level of supervision imposed

Reasoning Development 6

Mathematical Development 1

Language Development 6

3 Scales that measure the general education requirements: reasoning, Mathematics and

language. These are specific to task.

(Gatewood, Field, & Barrick, 2008)

High scores indicate high task

discretion

KSAO’s DERIVED FROM FJA OUTPUT

KNOWLEDGE

- Knowledge in relation to Law and Government

- Knowledge of Administration and Management

- Understanding of the specified standards

- Knowledgeable of the process for pursuing

accreditation (including restrictions and

requirements)

- Knowledge of client background and needs

- Knowledge of the sector, legislative and

regulatory requirements

- Knowledge of the funding environment

- Knowledge of competitors

FROM FJA DATA

- Critical Thinking

- Monitoring

- Judgment and Decision Making

- Communication Skills

- Social Perceptiveness

- Problem Solving Sensitivity

- Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

- Information Ordering

- Leadership

- Team work

SKILLS & ABILITIES

OUTPUTS● Risk Management Plans

● Strategic Planning

● Training and development Plan

● Performance improvement places

PERFORMANCE

STANDARDS● High standards

● Goal Attainment

● Ethical Practice

KSAO’s DERIVED FROM FJA OUTPUT: OTHER

Education

● Bachelors Degree● Work related skill, knowledge and experience● On the job training/vocational training

Work Styles

● Attention to detail Self-Control ● Persistence Self- Tolerance● Dependability Adaptability/Flexibility● Integrity Concern for others● Analytical Thinking Leadership

Work Values

● Achievement , Support, Independence

COMPETENCIES

Competencies -KSAO’s that correlate with successful performance on the job, can be measured against well accepted standards, can be improved through training

COMPETENCIES FOR ROLEInformed by Boyatzis’ 21 competencies for effective managers. Relevant competencies highlighted.

Goal and Action Management Cluster

● Efficiency orientation

● Productivity

● Diagnostic use of concepts

● Concern with Impact

Leadership Cluster

● Self Confidence

● Use of oral presentation

● Logical thought

● Conceptualisation

Human Resource Cluster

● Use of Socialised power

● Positive regard

● Managing group process

● Accurate self assessment

Directing subordinates cluster

● Developing others

● Use of unilateral power

● Spontaneity

Focus on other clusters

● Self Control

● Perceptual Objectivity

● Stamina and Adaptability

● Concern with Close relationship

Specialised knowledge

● Memory

● Specialised knowledge

Comparison from FJA results and predefined job

specificationsFJA Findings

- Chair meetings across the organization to present

actions that need to be carried out in order to conform

to quality standards

- Monitor and make changes to actions for progress

- Meet and engage with teams on their current quality

standards

- Review all organizational policies and procedures and

initiate internal training programs where necessary

- Coordinate the annual input plan to gather feedback

from clients which are then used for future performance

improvement activities

- Maintain contact with a resource specialist on any

queries and best implementation practices regarding

standards

- Administer and record all proceedings to be presented

to CARF

O*Net Findings

• Maintain documentation of compliance activities, such as

complaints received or investigation outcomes.

• File appropriate compliance reports with regulatory agencies.

• Conduct or direct the internal investigation of compliance

issues.

• Identify compliance issues that require follow-up or

investigation.

• Report violations of compliance or regulatory standards to duly

authorized enforcement agencies as appropriate or required.

• Disseminate written policies and procedures related to

compliance activities.

• Conduct periodic internal reviews or audits to ensure that

compliance procedures are followed.

• Serve as a confidential point of contact for employees to

communicate with management, seek clarification on issues or

dilemmas, or report irregularities.

• Provide employee training on compliance related topics,

policies, or procedures.

• Verify that all firm and regulatory policies and procedures have

been documented, implemented, and communicated.

SCOPE OF THE WORK ANALYSIS

• The analysis was sufficient to indicate Tasks, KSAO’s and Competencies

● More modern approach to analysis?

•A job analysis provides the raw material that can be used to develop a job description and a

person specification (Garavan and O’ Shea, 2012).

•Hough and Oswald (2000) - Many researchers now conduct analysis that focus on tasks and

cross functional skills of workers rather than traditional job analysis with its focus on more

stable aspects of the job

What will the information from FJA be used for?

FJA can be use for:

1) Workforce planning to create developed workforce

2) Recruitment and retention

3) Training, educating and directing employees

4) Supervision and performance appraisal

5) ROI

PRACTICAL ISSUES

• Levin, Ash, Hall and Sistrunk (1983) in Gutman and DunLeavy (2012) cite 11 practical issues to consider ranging from standardisation, off the shelf and reliability.

• FJA has high practicality rating for occupational versatility/suitability and quality of outcome second only to Task Inventory

• Most methods differ on 4 of the practicality issues:

• Standardisation – Third highest after PAQ and TI

• Time to completion –Mid range

• Off shelf – Very practical in this regard second only to PAQ

EVALUATION – VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF WORK ANALYSIS

• Accuracy and Bias – Job analysis is potentially subject to various sources of inaccuracy or bias. Morgeson and Campion (1997) in Gutman and Dunleavy (2012) cite 16 distinct potential areas of inaccuracy from social and cognitive sources such as social influence processes and limitations in information processes.

• 6 likely effects on job analysis sources referring to different aspects of validity

- Interater reliability - Dimensionality of factor structures

- Interater agreement - Mean ratings

- Discriminability between jobs - Completeness of job info

• Sanchez and Levin (2000) argue it has consequential validity – but this cannot replace other forms of

validity

• Reliability – Third highest for reliability after PAQ and the Task Inventory (Gutman and DunLeavy,

2012)

• Draws attention to the fact that job analysis data may be affected by factors that are unrelated to what is done on the job of the KSAO’s needed to effectively perform the job ( Gutman and Dunleavy, 2012)

LIMITATIONS

1) Query the degree this analysis is legally defensible - the method and process were clearly

documented but the analyst should have had days of training on the method and additional

experience

2) The worker-oriented scales allow for cross job comparison but the job specific scales do not. O*NET

for example is particularly focused on cross job comparisons.

3) We only interviewed one candidate of this role . Very specific organisation - query if the output is

transferable.

4) Non representative behaviour query - Relationship between when performance is being monitored

versus when one is unmonitored is very weak, may not be representative of the much broader

performance domain and the context in which on the job behaviour occurs (Cascio, 2008)

LIMITATIONS

5) In assuming that the purpose was for selection and recruitment - there are outstanding tasks in terms

of the selection process. A competency model was not developed -When applied to the context of

selection and assessment, this model allows a more complete picture of the individual to be assessed

(Garavan and O’ Shea 2012).

6 )‘The paucity of empirical research on task analysis would imply either that the area is unimportant or

we have reached a satisfactory state of knowledge in the area’(Robertson and Smith, 2001 pp 444)

7) Many contemporary practitioners go straight to the KSAO’s by asking subject matter experts to identify

the competencies required for the job (Robertson and Smith, 2001).

IN CONCLUSION

- Rates well in terms of practicality

- Reliability – Third highest for reliability after PAQ and the Task Inventory (Gutman and DunLeavy, 2012)

- Provides a solid method to contribute to recruitment and selection but as seen from our limitations etc is not an absolute science

- The area of personnel selection that has developed the least and seems increasingly problematic.

- Tries to provide a fixed starting point for all subsequent steps in the process – but jobs are nowhere near as stable as they once were

- This means that in many selection situations the requirement to understand the job is made particularly complex and difficult, because the job in question is likely to be very difficult to predict within as little as 5 -10 years, (Robertson and Smith, 2001, pp 444)- Sanchez and Levine (1999) propagated the use of the term work analysis to indicate that analysis is not limited to a fixed set of tasks- There rarely exists a gold standards or true score in job analysis

ReferencesCascio, W, F. and Aguinis, H. (2008). Staffing Twenty - first- century Organisations. The Academy of

Management Annals, 2, (1), 133-165.

Cronshaw, S. F., Best, R., Zugec, L,, Warner, M.A, Hysong, S., & Pugh, J. A. (2007). A five component validiation model for functional job analysis as used in job redesign. Ergometrika, 4,12-

31.

Frank I. Moore, PhD- Functional Job Analysis.

Fine, S.A., & Cronshaw, S. F. (1999). Functional Job Analysis: A foundation for Human Resource Management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Garavan, T. & O’Shea, D. (2012). Selection and Assessment. In A. Mansi & M. Ashleigh (Eds.), The

Psychology of People in Organizations [Ch. 6]. London: Pearson.

Gatewoood, R. d., Field, H. S. & Barrick, M.R. (2008). Human Resources Selection (6th Edition). Mason, OH:

Thompson High Education.

References

Gutman, A., & Dunleavy, E., M. (2012). Documenting Work Analysis Projects: A review of strategy and

Legal Defensibility for Personnel Selection. In Wilson, M., A., Bennett, W., Gibson, S., G. &

Alliger, G., E. The Handbook of Work Analysis: Methods, Systems, Applications and Science of Work

Measurement in Organisations. London. Routledge.

Hysong, S. J., Best, R. G. & Moore, F. I. (2007). Are we under-utilizing the talents of primary care

personnel? A job analytic examination. Implementation Science, 2(10),

Hough, L. M., & Oswald, F. L. (2000). Personnel selection: Looking toward the future--Remembering the

past. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 631-664.

WHO. (1999). Funtional job analysis: Guidelines for task analysis and job design. San Antonio: World health

organisation.

References

Pearlman, K. and Sanchez, J. I. (2010). Work Analysis in Farr, J.L., & Tippins, N.T. (Eds.). Handbook of employee selection. London. Routledge.

Sons.

Robertson, I. T, & Smith, M. (2001). Personnel Selection. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 74, 441-472.

Roe, R. A. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist?. European Psychologist, 7(3), 192.

Sanchez, J. I., & Levine, E., L. (2000). Accuracy or consequential validity; which is better in standardising forjob analysis data? Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 21, 809 - 818.

Wernimont, P. F. (1988). Recruitment Selection and Placement. In Gael, S. The job analysishandbook for business, industry, and government (Vol. 1). pp 193-204). New

York. John Wiley &

Appendices

TASK STATEMENTS - EXAMPLES• Monitors, guides and provides feedback using effective communication and

leadership skills -IN ORDER to oversee current changes in conformity with quality

standards.

Area Function Level Orientation

Data Synthesising 6 45%

People Leading 8 45%

Things Handling 1A 10%

Levels based on (Fine & Cronshaw, 1999, p. 38; Fine & Wiley,

1974)

TASK STATEMENTS AND RATING SCALES - EXAMPLES

Reads, reviews and researches organisational procedures and policies - IN ORDER

to initiate internal training programs where necessary.

Area Function Level Orientatation

Data Analyzing 4 60%

People Instructing 4B 30%

Things Handling 1A 10%

Levels based on (Fine & Cronshaw, 1999, p. 38; Fine & Wiley, 1974)