METHOD 1: Point Method
This is the most widely-used method, and the most in depth approach to job evaluation. It is a system that assesses the factors of each job that are considered vital by the organisation to the degree that it is prepared to pay for them, also labeled as compensable factors’. Rather than using wage rates, like the factor comparison method, it makes use of points. The theory behind the point method is easy and entails different steps. It is commonly executed by a job evaluation committee or an individual analyst. The first step is to determine which jobs are to be evaluated. Once this has been decided, job information through job analysis is collected. By questioning the organisation about what they are prepared to pay for and what makes the job valued in the organizational structure, the choice of factors can be made more easily. The quantity of compensable factors chosen must cover all the jobs. Too few factors will decrease the biased influences of the method, while too many will present the problem of intersecting factors. There are a lot of advantages to the point method of job evaluation. The descriptive scale is considered as more effective and consistent than any other method, because of common bargain and steadiness among raters concerning exactly what is to be rated, and the significance of factors and sub-factors. The method is elastic, too, since it permits a wide-ranging mixture of practical factors that can be calculated to suit specific organizational needs. It is simple to put jobs in classes, and the method is simply understood by employees and supervisors. However, it also has its own disadvantages. It is a problematic method as well, because of the density of the system itself. A lot of time and administrative detail work is involved, and a high amount of ability is required to choose the right factors.
METHOD 2: Paterson’s Decisions Band Method
According to Paterson, this factor has universality: to a slighter or larger extent, it is existent in all jobs. He claims that the most significant component of a job is not the ability or the work spent on it, but its decision-making-content. Jobs are ranked by a committee. First, the decision band of the job in question is determined. Then the job is allocated a job grade. Third, a sub-grade is allocated to each job, showing its real worth. This sub-grade is determined by bearing in mind such factors as the extent of the work cycle, assortment of tasks, tolerance, and work stress in diverse jobs. Some of the advantages of this method comprise of the fact that it is simple to apply and disregards the need for dispersed pay plans. Like the point method, it also has disadvantages such as the fact that it overlooks not only the abilities necessary for a job but also that, in addition to decision-making, problem solving, planning, organisation, and directing are also important aspects of jobs at higher levels.
METHOD 3: Promnes Job Evaluation Scale
The Peromnes is one of the mostly used South African systems. It is a system that is available in manual and computerised formats. As a points factor system it is available in a six and eight factor format. It differs from Paterson’s method in that it takes account of factors other than decision making in job evaluation. Every job content factor is divided into nine progressive definitions. Definitions are numbered from 1 to 9 and cover a point range of 0 to 36 across the entire scale. When a job is evaluated, the committee members starts with the first definition in respect of each factor and continue reading until they arrive at one that they feel is too high for the job in question. In this way they establish which definitions are appropriate. They then refer to the last appropriate definition, and the score below is taken as the point for that factor. The two-job requirement factor are not classified into nine definitions but merely cover a point range of 36. Once all factors have been evaluated, the scores are added up to obtain the total for the job concerned. This score is then used to classify the job in a pay grade. The various factors include, for instance, problem solving, work pressure, and job impact.
The Peromnes job evaluation scale has advantages which are the descriptive scale is regarded as more valid and reliable than any other method, because of general agreement and consistency among raters regarding exactly what is to be rated, and the meaning of factors and sub factors. It is easy to place jobs in classes, and the method is easily understood by employees and supervisors.
Its disadvantages are that it is a difficult method to develop, because of the complexity of the system its self. Professional help may be needed to tailor a point plan for an organisation, and it is difficult to allocate the weights of the factors and points to the degrees.
METHOD 4: The Hay Guide Chart-profile Method
This method is the mostly used single processes for evaluating jobs. The Hay method makes three very important observations which are as follows:
1. There are many factors one could consider when looking at a job, the most important are grouped as representing the knowledge required to do a job, the kind of thinking needed to solve the problems commonly faced, and responsibility assigned.
2. Jobs can be ranked not only in order of importance within the organisation’s structure, but also in distances between the ranks.
3. The focus of job evaluation must be on the nature and requirements of the job itself, not on the skills, background, or characterized of the job holder.
The Hay method consists of three factor codification with a total of eight elements. These factors are know-how, problem solving and accountability. So there for a fourth factor corking conditions is applied when appropriate for those jobs where hazards, an unpleasant environment, or particular physical demands are significant elements. The objective of the Hay method is to place all jobs in a sequence which represents the order and extent of their difficulty and importance within the organisation. To achieve these objectives a few steps should be followed which are:
1. A benchmark sample of positions is selected to cover all organizational levels, functions, and units, where jobs are to be evaluated.
2. Job descriptions are prepared and accepted for evaluation after having been seen by the job holder and approved by one higher level of authority.
3. A job evaluation committee is selected to evaluate benchmark sample.
4. The committee is led by a Hay consultant, who acts as a combination teacher and coach.
5. The committee evaluate each job for which its accepts each job for which it accepts the job description as fair.
The job evaluation methods are very important in organisations because it compares the content of one job to another within an organisation without looking at individual characteristics, personality or performance. Theses job evaluation methods assist in finding money values for jobs. It provides incentives for employees to strive for higher level jobs and provides an agreed upon device as well as all the information needed to reduce and resolve disputes and grievances, in other words job evaluation methods are really helpful in organisations as stated above.