Search results
It answers the question of Hay’s thinking behind his purpose to develop an alternative (and in his view) more effective system for measuring and assessing jobs (particularly the more senior management and executive posts).
- Purpose
- What is job evaluation?
- Overview of the method
- PROBLEM SOLVING.
- Guide ChartsSM
- The step difference principle
- Profiles
- Process guidelines
- Checks and balances
- Equality matters
- Grading choices
- Know How
- Problem Solving
- Accountability
- Arriving at a total score
- Quality checks
This note has been compiled specifically to provide an overview of the Hay Group Guide Chart-Profile method of job evaluation.
Job evaluation is a means of establishing differentials through ranking jobs. It originates in two concepts: more complex or more responsible work should receive greater compensation than less complex or responsible work, otherwise there will be no incentive to acquire deep skills or assume responsibility; and (b) there should be like pay for like...
Developed by Edward N Hay (known as Ned), the Hay Group method was among the first analytical approaches to job evaluation. It built on the strengths of factor comparison, points rating and job ranking methods and is established on the principle that all jobs exist to make a contribution to an organisation's output/end result. The aim of the Hay G...
So, in evaluating jobs using the Hay Group method we are aiming to understand: ‘The Know-How required to Solve the Problem and deliver the output for which the job is
These three common factors are typically judged using a separate Guide Chart for each. The three main factors are further sub-divided into a number of dimensions and are designed as grids on which there is a numerical scale. The core grids are designed to cover the range of jobs that may be found throughout the economy. Jobs are located on the gr...
Our aim in using a geometric numbering pattern for the reasons stated above was supported by empirical evidence – Weber’s Law. Ernst Weber said, “in comparing objects we perceive not the actual difference between them, but the ratio of this difference to the magnitude of the two objects compared.” That is to say that the observed difference betwe...
Every job consists of the elements Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. Different jobs, however, draw more heavily from one or another. The Hay Group method has a further unique facility for checking the soundness of an evaluation by considering the shape or profile of the job. This is done by testing the distribution of the three elemen...
It is not possible to measure scientifically the importance of the contribution of one job relative to another. Any job evaluation process involves an attempt to determine the relative importance, complexity and worth of a job to the organisation. Trained evaluators are therefore asked to apply judgement to identify and measure differences betwee...
Both the recommended process and the method have a number of checks and balances built in to support the evaluation team. The method provides a framework for systematic judgement – it does not impose judgement. Ultimately, evaluation results cannot be said to be ‘right’, but they should be acceptable. If the evaluator understands and applies the ...
One of the main reasons for having a systematic process of job evaluation has been to enable pay to be managed fairly. In recent years, there has been growing attention to equal pay – particularly as research evidence has shown that there is still a large pay gap between men and women – and this has reinforced both the case for and scrutiny of job...
In determining appropriate breaks for a grade or banding structure it is important to ensure that as far as possible there are clear, and easy to articulate differences between levels and that there is limited opportunity for ‘boundary disputes’ to arise. Using the notion of just noticeable difference or step difference, there are in principle at l...
The sum of every kind of knowledge, skill and experience – however acquired – necessary for standard acceptable performance in the role. The framework for judging Know How includes three dimensions, each of which has several defined levels: Depth and range of Know-How. The requirement for Know-How in practical procedures, specialised techniques, p...
The thinking required for analysing, evaluating, reasoning, arriving at and drawing conclusions. The framework for judging Problem Solving has two dimensions, each of which has several defined levels: Thinking environment, which assesses the extent to which thinking is determined by its context (sector environment, organisation policies, guideline...
The extent to which a job is answerable for actions and their consequences. The framework for judging Accountability has three dimensions, each of which has several defined levels. They are shown in the order of importance: Freedom to act, which assesses the absence or presence of discretion in making decisions or taking action. It combines this w...
The evaluator adds the scores for the three factors to produce a total job size. There are also consistency checks to be done, to ensure the evaluation line describes the type or shape of the role in a coherent way, and relativity checks, to ensure that the conclusion makes sense in comparison to evaluations of other roles. Either of these sets of...
Having arrived at a total score, the panel will then engage in a series of quality and sense checks to ensure that the evaluation is an appropriate reflection of the nature and content of the role and its position relative to other roles in the structure. The first of these checks is to calculate the short profile. Other checks include inspecting ...
This paper provides an overall insight of the Hay System of job evaluation (Guide Chart -Profile Method). It answers the question of Hay's thinking behind his purpose to develop an alternative (and in his view) more effective system for measuring and assessing jobs (particularly the more senior management and executive posts).
This paper provides an overall insight of the Hay System of job evaluation (Guide Chart – Profile Method). It answers the question of Hay’s thinking behind his purpose to develop an alternative (and in his view) more effective system for measuring and assessing jobs (particularly the more senior management and executive posts).
Jul 5, 2016 · The Hay Group Guide Chart Profile method of job evaluation was developed in the early 1950s by Edward N. Hay and Dale Purves. It is based on the notion that jobs can be measured on the basis of their relative contribution to the overall objectives of the organization.
Oct 5, 2023 · The Hay System, developed by Edward N. Hay in the mid-20th century, is a job performance evaluation method widely used globally. It provides a structured and data-driven approach to performance evaluation by determining the relative worth of different jobs within an organization.
People also ask
What is the Hay system of Job Evaluation (Guide Chart – Profile Method)?
What was Hay's contribution to the domain of job evaluation?
What is the hay method of job grading?
What is the Hay Group Guide Chart Profile Method?
In Revisiting systemic (in)justices, we have widened our lens to address some of the gaps and constraints in our first report. Here, we build on our previous findings by: extending our analysis of groups working on climate justice, access to justice, anti-racism, policing, social protection, and freedom of
