Читать книгу Misplaced Talent - Ungemah Joe - Страница 7

To conduct a job analysis, practitioners are tasked with defining the essence of a job, accomplished through interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, observation, or existing knowledge. This information is bundled together into a snapshot of a job that represents what employees are doing at that particular moment in time. As a job adapts and changes to new ways of working or different end products, the onus is on the practitioner to revise the job description. The reality is far from ideal, and I will talk more about this in a few minutes.

Below, I will present eight popular ways of conducting a job analysis. Each employs a slightly different way at gaining relevant information and, as a result, yields different information about tasks, behaviors, or personal attributes. No matter which combination of techniques is chosen, a successful job analysis is systematic (having a predefined objective and structure), comprehensive (gaining multiple, relevant viewpoints that represent the job), and timely (before any major staffing decisions are made). When done right, job analysis forms the basis for selection, appraisal, compensation, and development activities, as well as compliance with fairness legislation. Here are the main techniques trained practitioners utilize.

WORK LOGS

Job incumbents are asked to keep a written record of the work they accomplish, either after a specified period of time (e.g., hourly or daily) or when they switch between tasks. Individual accounts of the workday are compiled across job incumbents to discover the key activities that make up a particular job.

STRUCTURED OBSERVATION

A trained observer watches job incumbents fulfill their work throughout the day, using a checklist of tasks as a reference. The observer keeps track of the frequency of tasks, duration, and accuracy of the items included in the checklist. The observer will often ask questions of the job incumbent about what he or she is doing, how he or she is doing it, and why it has to be done in order to fully capture key activities and necessary behaviors.

JOB SAMPLE

Trained observers take on the job for a set period of time. Through their experience, they take note of how they use their time, the tasks they are asked to accomplish, the approach they take in fulfilling tasks, and the required skills they should have to effectively accomplish their work. This technique is more appropriate for jobs that can be learned quickly or that take advantage of transferrable skills.

HIERARCHICAL TASK ANALYSIS

This technique involves breaking a job down into the typical tasks performed and then breaking these down into subtasks, usually through an interview with job incumbents or a line manager. The technique elicits information around the key objectives of a job and the skills and abilities that employees should have to fulfill them.

REPERTORY GRID

In this technique, a line manager is interviewed and presented with a series of staff comparisons. With each comparison, the manager is asked to differentiate how two staff members are different from a third staff member in their effectiveness in performing the job. The technique can elicit a broad range of content, from how someone treats colleagues or customers to the skills he or she brings to the workplace. In my experience, coordinating the range of comparisons (to ensure a range of unique combinations) and explaining the task to the manager makes this technique impractical.

CRITICAL INCIDENT

Job incumbents or managers are interviewed and asked for examples of critical situations that involved the target job. An example could involve the winning of a key account, prevention of a major catastrophe, or major change in a business process. The interviewer explores the incident from multiple vantage points, asking how the job incumbent solved the situation, the skills or experiences that enabled her and what could have been done differently.

CARD SORT

Using a predefined competency framework (either generic or specific to the organization), job incumbents or managers are asked to select the core competencies required for a job. I typically ask for four essential competencies and two desired competencies. Once these are selected, follow-up questions are used to reveal the rationale for each selection. By compiling results from multiple card sorts, trends in competencies can be discovered.

VISIONARY INTERVIEW

Unlike the other interview types described above, this technique focuses on the future of a job. Senior leaders or others who have deep insight on the organization are asked about how the target job is likely to change in the medium to long term, with the aim of eliciting a list of behaviors, skills, experience, and motivations that should be prioritized now to future-proof any talent management strategy. These techniques are summarized in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3 Summary of Job Analysis Techniques by Source of Information

When bundling job descriptions, practitioners should establish and maintain a model that will work well within their organization. Having a common job template drives consistency and allows for comparison or links across jobs. One such model could be the categories used in O*Net. Although this is a fine model to employ, I have found that the majority of clients prefer a simpler model that focuses squarely on the individual tasked with doing the job (not so much the organizational context). In my client interactions, I commonly refer to the five key ingredients of any job, which are not so different from the categories used by other consultants:

● Key Activities: What the individual is typically tasked to do.

● Behavioral Competencies: How effective job incumbents go about the job.

● Skills: The education and training that enable job performance.

● Experience: Knowledge gained in a given context that can be applied to the job.

● Motivation: Employee needs and preferences that require fulfillment.

The best job descriptions are focused and concise. Practitioners and line managers have a tendency to create a laundry list of characteristics across these five key ingredients. They want a little of everything, and by the time they are done, they have described a superhuman and written a document that is totally useless for selection and development decisions.

When writing a job description, I challenge my clients to hone in on no more than six absolutely essential points to include for each key ingredient. Next, I have them describe with as much precision as possible what is meant by that characteristic, to give direction to those responsible for talent management decisions. For example, if I were creating a job description for my favorite coffee shop barista, I might include the following for one of the key activities:

Key Activity of Pulling Shots

Prepares to pull shots of espresso by using the portioned amount of coffee from the grinder, tamping the grounds flat, and inserting the filter handle into the group head. Pulls each espresso shot for approximately twenty to twenty-six seconds, watching to see that a rust colored Crema has been produced. Empties the filter handle of the used grinds, wipes clean with a towel, and purges the machine.

What you’ll notice is that this description captures the essence of the activity from beginning to end, using the actual names of the equipment being used. This level of description would be absolutely the same if I went on to describe the behaviors, skills, experience, and motivation characteristics included in the job description.

The reality is that most job descriptions I come across suffer from three fatal flaws. I have already mentioned the first, that job descriptions must be focused. Including too many characteristics waters down the effectiveness of the document for identifying candidates who have the greatest fit, as well as which skills and experiences should be nurtured by on-the-job development. Moreover, a lack of focus could interfere with the legal defensibility of decisions, by pulling attention away from critical characteristics onto those with anecdotal attachment to the job.

Second, the language of many job descriptions is so vague that it renders the document useless. It is no longer surprising to me just how many job descriptions still use phrases like talented, team player, or self-starter. It goes without saying that employers want a candidate who can do the job, get along with other people, and strive to achieve goals. To me, generic phrases like these are a warning that the person who wrote the job description has limited knowledge about the job or has not taken the time to commit his or her thoughts to paper.