Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Assignment 2
1. Evaluate the jobs and prepare a job structure (include an
org.chart) based on the evaluation. Assign titles to each
job, and show your structure and title and job letter. (This
organization places a major emphasis on the important
role of teams.)
After examining the job descriptions, I was able to assign each job to
the title I feel most appropriate. The titles were selected mostly using the
wording from the descriptions themselves, or the typical titles that I feel
most suitable to the kind of work each job has. The job structure and
organization chart are included as below:

Job Structure
Management Store support
Associate Store Team Leader (Job Grocery Clerk (Job B)
H) Grocery Team Member (Job I)
Prepared Foods Team Leader (Job Prepared Foods Team Member
C) (Job A)
Grocery Team Leader (Job F) Dishwasher/Kitchen Assistant
Prepared Foods Associate Team (Job E)
Leader (Job G)
Prepared Foods Supervisor (Job D)

1
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Associate
Store Team
Leader
Job H

Prepared Grocery
Foods Team
Management

Leader Team Leader


Job C Job F

Prepared
Foods
Associate
Team Leader
Job G

Prepared
Foods
Supervisor
Job D
Store support

Prepared Dishwasher/ Grocery


Foods Team Kitchen Grocery Clerk Team
Member Assistant Member
Job A Job E Job B Job I

2. Describe the process you went through to arrive at the job


structure. You should discuss the job evaluation
technique(s) and compensable factors used and the
reasons for selecting them.
For this case, I used the point method to evaluate the jobs based on
their descriptions. The reason I chose this method is that it assigns numerical
points to each position, which gives me a frame of reference to see their
measurable importance in correlation with one another. There are 3
characteristics of this method, including compensable factors, factor degrees
numerically scaled, and weights reflecting the relative importance of each
factor (Milkovich, Newman and Gerhart, 2011, p. 139). The compensation
factors I used are skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions. These
are the typical factors that are used to evaluate most jobs, and based on the
information provided in the case. First of all, I divided the positions into 2
classifications, including Management and Support, based on whether their

2
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

duties include have supervisory and managerial responsibilities. Depending


on the work and requirements of each position, I was able to calculate their
points as shown in the table below:

Evaluation
Classifica
Job Title Compensable Degree x Weight =
tion
Factors Total
Skill 40%
Qualifications 2 20% 40
Experience 1 20% 20
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 1 12.5% 12.5
Prepare Service 3 12.5% 37.5
d Foods Store Effort 25%
A
Team support Physical 4 12.5% 50
Member Mental 1 12.5% 12.5
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
4 5% 20
Hazards
100% 207.5
Skill 40%
Qualifications 3 20% 60
Experience 1 20% 20
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 1 12.5% 12.5
Service 3 12.5% 37.5
Grocery Store Effort 25%
B
Clerk support Physical 3 12.5% 37.5
Mental 2 12.5% 25
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
2 5% 10
Hazards
100% 217.5
C Prepare Managem Skill 40%
d Foods ent Qualifications 4 20% 80
Team Experience 4 20% 80
Leader Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 4 12.5% 50
Service 4 12.5% 50
Effort 25%
Physical 3 12.5% 37.5

3
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Mental 4 12.5% 50
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
2 5% 10
Hazards
100% 372.5

Evaluation
Classifica
Job Title Compensable Degree x Weight =
tion
Factors Total
Skill 40%
Qualifications 3 20% 60
Experience 3 20% 60
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 3 12.5% 37.5
Prepared Service 3 12.5% 37.5
Foods Managem Effort 25%
D
Supervis ent Physical 4 12.5% 50
or Mental 3 12.5% 37.5
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
4 5% 20
Hazards
100% 317.5
Skill 40%
Qualifications 1 20% 20
Experience 1 20% 20
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 1 12.5% 12.5
Dishwas Service 3 12.5% 37.5
her/ Store Effort 25%
E
Kitchen support Physical 4 12.5% 50
Assistant Mental 1 12.5% 12.5
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
4 5% 20
Hazards
100% 187.5
F Grocery Managem Skill 40%
Team ent Qualifications 4 20% 80
Leader Experience 4 20% 80
Responsibility 25%

4
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Supervisor 4 12.5% 50
Service 4 12.5% 50
Effort 25%
Physical 3 12.5% 37.5
Mental 4 12.5% 50
Working
10%
Conditions
2 5% 10
Environment
2 5% 10
Hazards
100% 367.5

Evaluation
Classifica
Job Title Compensable Degree x Weight =
tion
Factors Total
Skill 40%
Qualifications 3 20% 60
Experience 4 20% 80
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 4 12.5% 50
Prepare
Service 3 12.5% 37.5
d Foods
Managem Effort 25%
G Associat
ent Physical 3 12.5% 37.5
e Team
Mental 4 12.5% 50
Leader
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
2 5% 10
Hazards
100% 350
Skill 40%
Qualifications 5 20% 100
Experience 4 20% 80
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 5 12.5% 62.5
Associat Service 4 12.5% 50
e Store Managem Effort 25%
H
Team ent Physical 3 12.5% 37.5
Leader Mental 5 12.5% 62.5
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
2 5% 10
Hazards
100% 427.5

5
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Skill 40%
Qualifications 2 20% 40
Experience 1 20% 20
Responsibility 25%
Supervisor 1 12.5% 12.5
Service 3 12.5% 37.5
Grocery
Store Effort 25%
I Team
support Physical 4 12.5% 50
Member
Mental 2 12.5% 25
Working
10%
Conditions
3 5% 15
Environment
3 5% 15
Hazards
100% 215

The reason I selected the factors and their assigned weights is based
on the characteristics of each position. Skills include qualifications, which are
the desired abilities, and experience required for the job. Responsibilities are
divided into supervisory and service. The higher up the position in the
hierarchy of the organization chart, the higher degree to which their
supervisory responsibilities are practiced, and thus, allotted more points.
Effort, which includes mental and physical, is the time, labor, and the amount
of high level thinking that the positions require. Working conditions refer to
the safety of the work location and the work itself. For example, the prepared
foods team member (job A) position requires an employee to regularly work
with equipment such as knives, slicer, baler; hence, it is given a higher
degree for hazards compared to others.

3. Evaluate the job descriptions. What parts of them were


most useful? How could they be improved?
The job descriptions provide a lot of informative and relevant data for
the evaluation. Based on them, I was able to determine what compensable
factors to use and how to scale them. The most useful part is definitely the
requirements of each position, based on which the ranking of the jobs could
be indicated. For instance, the requirements for the associate store team
leader (job H) position include not only experience and a thorough
understanding of retail operations, but also competencies such as
leadership, vision, and motivation skills, ect. These competencies signify that
this position will have to do a lot of managing other employees, critical
thinking, or high-level analysis. On the other hand, the descriptions could
have been better worded to minimize confusion, and let key information
surface. The phrase kind of work could be changed to responsibilities or

6
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

duties, for the purpose of professionalism; and, instead of having readers


extract data from long paragraphs, the descriptions could list the tasks of
each job using bullet points and more straightforward short sentences. In
addition, the requirements could have been organized better based on the
order of their significance to the work, or grouped together in different
categories, such as knowledge, skills, and experience, for example.

4. Questions: does the job evaluation method used appear to


affect the results? Do the compensable factors chosen
affect the results? Does the process affect the results?
The point method used, although may not produce a particularly
distant outcome from the ranking or classification methods, creates a clear-
cut and perceptible database that helps show the differences one position
has in comparison with others. The compensable factors definitely play a
large role in determining the results, since depending on which factors are
selected and how they are weighed against one another, the points for each
position may vary accordingly. Since I took a more general approach in
deciding what compensable factors to use, it might not reflect the true scale
of those more preferred in the industry. In this case, for example, the retail
business might consider its customer service and supply chain management
positions more valuable than others; thus, it might base on these strategies
to select a more appropriate set of compensable factors and their
proportions. After all, according to Milkovich, et al. (2011), a structure is
aligned if it supports the organization strategy, fits the work flow, is fair to
employees, and motivates their behavior towards organization objectives
(p. 132). Furthermore, the design process also has an impact on not only
what the outcome might be, but also the employees perception towards the
organization. One of the ultimate purposes of job evaluation is to achieve
fairness and motivate workers. A pay structure is always more effective if it is
not only in line with the organizations strategy, but is discerned by the
employees that it accurately reflects and appropriately compensates for the
work they do. Attending to the fairness of the design process and the
approach chosen [], rather than focusing solely on the results [], is likely
to achieve employee and management commitment, trust, and acceptance
of the results (Milkovich, et al., 2011, p. 150). These benefits lets the
organization create a healthy workplace and a more sustainable workforce,
which gives it competitive advantages compared to others in the industry.
References
Milkovich, George T., Newman, Jerry M. & Gerhart, Barry (2011).
Compensation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin

7
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Written Assignment Grading Form

Content and Organization Percent Comments:


70 Percent Earned:

All assignment questions are addressed and covered in


a substantive way.

The content is comprehensive, accurate, and/or


persuasive.

The paper links theory to relevant examples of current


experience and industry practice and uses the
vocabulary of the theory correctly.

Major points are stated clearly; are supported by


specific details, examples, or analysis; and are
organized logically.

The information presented is logical, flows from the


body of the paper, and reviews the major points.

Readability and Style Percent Comments:


15 percent Earned

Paragraph transitions are present and logical and

8
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

maintain the flow throughout the paper.

The tone is appropriate to the content and assignment.

Sentences are complete, clear, and concise.

Sentences are well-constructed, with consistently


strong, varied sentences.

Sentence transitions are present and maintain the flow


of thought.

Mechanics Percent Comments:


15 Percent Earned

The paper, including the title page, reference page,


tables, and appendices, follow APA guidelines for
format.

Citations of original works within the body of the


paper follow APA guidelines.

The paper is laid out with effective use of headings,


font styles, and white space.

Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are


followed.

9
Tam Nguyen NUID 001216924 HRM 6010: Total Compensation

Spelling is correct.

Word count is within specified instructions.

Total 100 Percent Comments:


Percent Earned

Points Possible 20 Percent Points earned:


Earned x
Points
Possible

10