September 27, 2023

Briefly review the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process. Describe how the four components of the strategic workforce planning process work together with a focus on explaining where the job analysis would fit into the SWP.

HRM professionals will be required by their organizations to assist in analyzing individual job roles as part of the overall workforce planning process. Analyzing job roles within the organization ensures HR professionals have the right information to base recruitment, selection, and training decisions on.

In completing this assignment, focus on these three main points:

Reference Figure 9.5 in Chapter 9, in the textbook. Using a job of your choice, complete an in-depth job analysis using all 15 points provided on the Job Analysis Worksheet. Please see the attached chapter.

After completing the job analysis, in a 500-750-word essay, briefly review the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process. Describe how the four components of the strategic workforce planning process work together with a focus on explaining where the job analysis would fit into the SWP. This part of the assignment should reflect academic formatting throughout. The job analysis data should be presented as an appendix to this essay.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide and Template, located in the Student Success Center.

This essay should be supported by a minimum of 2 current scholarly articles. When searching for current scholarly articles in the library database, make sure the peer review box is checked as part of the search criteria and the publication dates are within the last 5-7 years.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Couple things to note about the major assignment this week that I find students tend to overlook.

These are great assignments moving forward because they give you the chance to practice what a person working in HR would do and explain why they would do it. It’s a combination of knowledge and applied skill.

1. Completing a job analysis is a practical work-based assignment task, an HR practitioner would do this task in the workplace. Feel free to do the job analysis on your own job (or one you have had in the past), no one knows your job better than you do. Make sure you ‘do’ the job analysis, do not tell me how you would go about doing one. Pretend I just hired you into an HR position and the first task I have given you is to write a job analysis. Use your knowledge to apply the skill.

2. Make sure you follow the assignment instructions (content rubric 1) and carefully read/use Figure 9.5 in Chapter 9, in the textbook to format your job analysis; make sure your number and address all 15 points. Make it detailed (especially the list of tasks) and professional, this is going to be a workplace document, and you are going to come back to this document (as would other people in your workplace) as the foundation for several upcoming assignments. The presentation of this document in your workplace is an extension of your work ethic/professionalism.

3. The steps to strategic workforce planning (SWP) are also in the textbook, and include: talent inventory, predicting the future workforce, planning for talent provision (action plan), control and evaluation (p. 237). There are obviously other models out there, if you choose to use a different one, make sure these 4 steps are included as a minimum.

4. The SWP makes up the essay part of the assignment (500-750 words). To meet the writing rubric requirements, the SWP essay portion of the assignment will need a clear introduction/purpose, body and conclusion, reference list and the job analysis is its appendix.

5. You are required to present the job analysis you prepared in an appendix. Appendices are not part of our overall word count. Since there are probably a few of us who have little or no experience with using appendices, the proper APA 7 formatting/use for appendices is:

Appendices:

should be positioned at the end of the paper, after the reference list

Each appendix should begin on a separate page

Each appendix should have a label (ie: Appendix A); Put the appendix label centered at the top of the page. If a paper has one appendix, label it Appendix. If a paper has more than one appendix (or appendices), label them in order using the letters of the alphabet: Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix C, etc.

On the next line under the appendix label, place the centered title of the appendix; the appendix title should describe the contents of the appendix (i.e.: Job Analysis – Painter; CIT Interview Participant 1)

Use title case for your title and labels (the first letter of each word should be capitalized, while remaining letters should be lowercase).

USE OF APPENDICIES: Refer to the appendix (or appendices) using their appropriate label at least once within the body of the paper. The appendix contains supplemental material that links directly to your paper’s discussion that would be distracting or inappropriate in the text of the paper; usually due to length and word count parameters of an assignment. Use your job analysis to support and exemplify your workforce planning discussion.

Appendices are going to be your best friend when you start doing and presenting your own primary research.

Requirements: 900-1100

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©9 Analyzing Jobs and WorkWayne F. Cascio, Herman AguinisLearning GoalsBy the end of this chapter, you will be able to do the following:9.1 Explain what job or work analysis is and the many purposes for which it is used9.2 Distinguish the terms task, duty, position, job, and job family from each other9.3 Distinguish work-oriented from worker-oriented descriptors9.4 Identify seven key choices that exist in the analysis of work9.5 Establish legally defensible minimum qualiﬁcations9.6 Construct appropriate interview questions for analyzing work9.7 Know when to use personality-based job analysis9.8 Compare and contrast job or work analysis to competency modelingMore than two decades ago, Bridges (1994a, 1994b) proclaimed “The End of the Job.” Heargued that the use of jobs as a way of organizing work “is a social artifact that hasoutlived its usefulness.” If organizations expect to be successful, they need to “get rid ofjobs” and “redesign to get the best out of the de-jobbed worker.” One might ask, if we canno longer expect to hold jobs, can we at least expect to hold a position? Unfortunately, no,because positions may be “too ﬁxed.” Roles? Sorry, too unitary, single purposed. Skills andcompetencies? They will become too obsolete. According to this rationale, post-jobworkers will likely be self-employed contract workers, hired to work on projects or teams.Just look at Intel or Microsoft, ﬁrms that organize work around projects. People will workon 6 to 10 projects, perhaps for different employers at the same time. Some of that ishappening now (see Chapter 1), but not on a massive scale just yet.A funny thing happened along the way—the Internet revolution. Go to any company’swebsite and discover that it invites applications—for jobs! True, some employees maywork on 6 to 10 projects at once but for only one employer. This is not to imply that theconcept of work is static. Sometimes changes occur at a dizzying pace as ﬂuidorganizations ﬁghting to stay competitive require their people to adapt constantly. Theyneed to adapt to strategic initiatives like empowerment, reengineering, automation,intranet-based self-service HR, the use of high-performance work practices that pushauthority and responsibility down to lower levels, and alternative work arrangements suchas virtual teams and telework (Cascio & Aguinis, 2008a, 2008b; Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017).Technologies that enhance communications and information management, such aswireless communications, e-mail, and teleconferencing, have made the “anytime,anywhere” workplace a reality (Gilson, Maynard, Young, Vartiainen, & Hakonen, 2015).To be sure, advances in machine learning, automation, and the Internet are changing theways that work is done, as more activities are performed by intelligent systems rather thanby humans (Arthur, 2017). Yet, for all the changes, the job as a way to organize and grouptasks and responsibilities has not yet disappeared, especially in large organizations(Newman, Gerhart, & Milkovich, 2016). In the age of intelligent automation, manyorganizations are reexamining what a “job” actually is: how it is structured and how itshould be reconﬁgured, and perhaps redeﬁned. They are actively incorporating multilevelfactors into the design of jobs (Parker, Morgeson, & Johns, 2017; Parker, Van Den Broeck,& Holman, 2017). At the same time, they are also asking probing questions, such as thefollowing: How should companies rethink the value of a job, in terms of increasedperformance through machine intelligence? What sets of skills should they invest in?Which jobs should remain within the company and which should be accessed via talentplatforms, or perhaps shared with peers, even competitors (Jesuthasan, Malcolm, &Zarkadakis, 2016)? Answers to many of these questions lie in a process known as workanalysis.Deﬁnition, Professional StandardsWork analysis is a broad term that refers to any systematic process for gathering,documenting, and analyzing three features of work: (1) its content (tasks, responsibilities,or outputs); (2) worker attributes related to its performance (knowledge, skills, abilities, orother personal characteristics, or KSAOs); and (3) the context in which work is performed(e.g., physical and psychological conditions) (Brannick, Pearlman, & Sanchez, 2017).

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©It is diﬃcult to overstate the importance of job or work analysis (Brannick, Cadle, & Levine,2012; Brannick, Levine, & Morgeson, 2007; Morgeson & Dierdorff, 2011) to employmentresearch and practice. Like other authors, we see the tools and techniques developedunder “job or work analysis” as applicable to changing structures of work, and the use ofeither term is not meant to convey a focus on rigidly prescribed jobs. If conductedthoroughly and competently, job or work analysis provides a deeper understanding ofindividual jobs and their behavioral requirements and, therefore, creates a ﬁrm basis onwhich to make employment decisions. As the APA Standards (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014)note,[W]hen empirical evidence of predictor-criterion relationships is part of the pattern ofevidence used to support test use … systematic collection of information about thejob should inform the development of the criterion measures. However, there is noclear choice among the many available job analysis methods …. Job analysis is notlimited to direct observation of the job or direct sampling of subject matter experts;large-scale job-analytic databases often provide useful information. (Standard 11.7,p. 180)The SIOP Principles provide additional guidance (SIOP, 2018):The term “analysis of work” subsumes information that traditionally has beencollected through work and job analysis methods, and more recently, competencymodeling efforts, as well as other information about the work, worker, organization,and work environment …. There is no single approach that is the preferred method forthe analysis of work. The analyses used in a speciﬁc study of work are a function ofthe nature of the work, current information about the work, the organizational setting,the workers themselves, and the purpose of the study. Understanding theorganization’s requirements or objectives is important when selecting an appropriatemethod for conducting an analysis of work …. The central point … is the need toobtain reliable and relevant job information that addresses anticipated behaviors,activities, and/or KSAOs or competencies. (pp. 11, 12)Although some courts insist on extensive job or work analysis (e.g., as a basis forproviding content-related evidence of validity), certain purposes, such as validitygeneralization, may not require such detail (Landy, 2003; Malos, 2005; Schmitt, Cortina,Ingerick, & Wiechmann, 2003). As Figure 9.1 illustrates, the analysis of work informationmight be collected for many uses and purposes.Figure 9.1 Uses of Job Analysis Information

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Work analysis can underpin an organization’s structure and design by clarifying roles(patterns of expected behavior based on organizational position). Employeeresponsibilities at all hierarchical levels—from mail clerk to chairperson of the board—canbe speciﬁed, thereby avoiding overlap and duplication of effort and promoting eﬃciencyand harmony among individuals and departments. Work analysis is a fundamental toolthat can be used in every phase of employment research and administration; in fact, workanalysis is to the I/O psychologist or HR professional what the wrench is to the plumber.TerminologyTalent management, like any other specialty area, has its own peculiar jargon, and,although some of the terms are used interchangeably in everyday conversation,technically there are distinct differences among them. These differences will becomeapparent as we examine work analysis methods more closely. The deﬁnitions that followgenerally are consistent with the terminology used by Brannick et al. (2007), Gael (1988),McCormick (1979), the U.S. Department of Labor (1972, 1982), and Wills (1993):An element is the smallest unit into which work can be divided without analyzing theseparate motions, movements, and mental processes involved. Removing a sawfrom a tool chest prior to sawing wood for a project is an example of a job element.A task is a distinct work activity carried out for a distinct purpose. Running acomputer program, cleaning cooking utensils, and unloading a truckload of freightare examples of tasks.A duty includes a large segment of the work performed by an individual and mayinclude any number of tasks. Examples of duties include conducting interviews,counseling employees, and providing information to the public.A position consists of one or more duties performed by a given individual in a givenﬁrm at a given time, such as clerk typist–level three. There are as many positions asthere are workers.A job is a group of positions that are similar in their signiﬁcant duties, such as two ormore mechanics–level two. A job, however, may involve only one position,depending on the size of the organization. For example, the local garage mayemploy only one mechanic–level two.A job family is a group of two or more jobs that either call for similar workercharacteristics or contain parallel work tasks as determined by job analysis.An occupation is a group of similar jobs found in different organizations at differenttimes—for example, electricians and machinists. A vocation is similar to anoccupation, but the term vocation is more likely to be used by a worker than by anemployer.

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©A career covers a sequence of positions, jobs, or occupations that one personengages in during his or her working life.Aligning Method With PurposeA wide variety of methods and techniques are available for collecting information aboutjobs and work. They vary on a number of dimensions, and such variation creates choices.Methods for analyzing work must align with the purpose for which such information wascollected. It simply is not true that a single type of work analysis data can support anytalent management activity. For example, the kind of information necessary to develop ahierarchy of jobs in a pay structure (job evaluation) is usually not detailed enough toprovide useful inputs to a human-factors engineer seeking to redesign a person–machineinterface. First, deﬁne the purpose of the work analysis (see Figure 9.1); then choose amethod that ﬁts that purpose.ChoicesSeveral choices confront the work analyst (Brannick et al., 2017; Morgeson & Dierdorff,2011; Sackett & Laczo, 2003), although the range of choices can be narrowed once theanalyst identiﬁes the speciﬁc purpose for collecting work-related information. In brief,some of these choices include the following:Activities or attributes? Some techniques focus solely on activities or what gets done(tasks), whereas others focus on how the work gets done (worker attributes, such asKSAOs, which might include, for example, personality characteristics, values, andattitudes). The former are termed work oriented; the latter are worker oriented.Competency modeling, which we consider in more detail later in the chapter,incorporates the full range of KSAOs.General or speciﬁc? These choices concern the level of detail needed in the analysis.A brief description of work for purposes of pay-survey comparisons includesconsiderably less detail than that needed to develop preemployment assessmentprocedures based on critical KSAOs.Qualitative or quantitative? The same type of work can be described in narrativeform—that is, qualitatively—or by means of numerical evaluations on a ﬁxed set ofscales (time, frequency, importance, or criticality)—that is, quantitatively. Qualitativemethods are ﬁne for applications like career planning, but comparisons of differenttypes of work require quantitative data.Taxonomy based or blank slate? The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) and theFleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS), both of which are described later in thischapter, are taxonomy-based approaches in which relatively general work activitiesapply to a broad range of work. Alternatively, trained observers or job incumbentsmay develop lists of activities or attributes that apply to speciﬁc jobs or job families.Subsequently, the activities or attributes are rated on speciﬁc scales, as describedearlier. Such blank-slate approaches have the potential for a greater degree of detailthan do taxonomy approaches.Observers or incumbents and supervisors? Trained analysts sometimes observework directly and then distill their observations into qualitative descriptions orquantitative evaluations of work activities or attributes. Alternatively, informationmay come from job incumbents and their direct supervisors, who may be asked toidentify activities or attributes and then rate them on numerical scales. When a largenumber of incumbents and supervisors provide such ratings, it becomes possible toassess the consistency of the ratings and to identify clusters of respondents withdiffering patterns of work activities.Single-job or multiple-job comparison? Sometimes the focus is on a speciﬁc job, aswhen developing an entry-level test for bank tellers. In other cases, the focus is ondocumenting similarities and differences across jobs (e.g., to justify using the sameselection system with different types of work, to justify using a selection system forthe same job in different organizations, or to develop job families and career paths).Descriptive or prescriptive? Work analysis typically describes a job as it currentlyexists. Suppose, however, that a job does not yet exist? Under these circumstances, itis necessary to prescribe activities or attributes for the soon-to-be-created job. Suchan approach is termed strategic work analysis, which we discuss later in thischapter.Deﬁning the JobWork analysis, as we have pointed out, consists of deﬁning work (e.g., in terms of itscomponent tasks), specifying what employee behaviors are necessary to perform the worktasks, and then developing hypotheses about the personal characteristics necessary toperform those work behaviors. Two elements stand out in this deﬁnition: task

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©requirements and people requirements. In this section, we consider task requirements, and,in the next section, we consider behavioral requirements.In many cases, the characteristics of work are “givens” to employees. They include, forexample, the equipment used; the arrangement of the work space; the division of labor;and the procedures, methods, and standards of performance. From these data, the analystproduces a job description or written statement of what a worker actually does, how he orshe does it, and why. This information can then be used to determine what KSAOs arerequired to perform the work. Job descriptions are useful communication tools to tellemployees about the tasks they are expected to perform, they aid in the interactive processthat some laws require regarding reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities,they describe minimum qualiﬁcations (discussed in the next section), and they help justifyexempt versus nonexempt status under applicable wage and hour laws (Brannen, 2016).Elements of a job description may include the following:Job title: For bookkeeping purposes within the ﬁrm, as well as to facilitate reportingto government agenciesActivities and procedures: Descriptions of the tasks performed, the materials used,the machinery operated, the formal interactions with other workers, and the natureand extent of supervision given or receivedWorking conditions and physical environment: Heat, lighting, noise level,indoor/outdoor setting, physical location, hazardous conditions, etc.Social environment: For example, information on the number of individuals in thework group and the amount of interpersonal interaction required in order to performthe workConditions of employment: Including, for example, a description of the hours of work,wage structure, method of payment, beneﬁts, place of the job in the formalorganization, and opportunities for promotion and transfer (see Figure 9.2 for anexample)Figure 9.2 A Typical Job Description

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©What we have just described is a traditional, task-based job description. However, someorganizations are beginning to develop behavioral job descriptions. These comprisebroader abilities that are easier to alter as technologies and customer needs change(Joinson, 2001). For example, instead of focusing on communication skills, such aswriting, speaking, and making presentations, behavioral job descriptions incorporatebroader behavioral statements, such as “actively listens, builds trust, and adapts his or herstyle and tactics to ﬁt the audience.” These behaviors will not change, even as the meansof executing them evolve with technology. Instead of being responsible for simpleprocedures and predictable tasks, workers are now expected to draw inferences and renderdiagnoses, judgments, and decisions, often under severe time constraints (Brannick et al.,2017; Morgeson & Dierdorff, 2011).Job SpeciﬁcationsJob speciﬁcations represent the KSAOs deemed necessary to perform a type of work. Forexample, keen vision (usually 20/20 uncorrected) is required of astronauts and test pilots.In many cases, however, job speciﬁcations are not rigid and inﬂexible; they serve only asguidelines for recruitment, selection, and placement. Job speciﬁcations depend on thelevel of performance deemed acceptable and the degree to which some abilities can besubstituted for others. For example, in one investigation of power sewing machineoperators, it was thought that keen eyesight was necessary to sew sheets until researchdemonstrated that manual dexterity was far more important. The operators could sewsheets just as well with their eyes closed! This illustrates an important point: Someindividuals may be restricted from certain jobs because the job speciﬁcations areinﬂexible, artiﬁcially high, or invalid. For this reason, job speciﬁcations should indicateminimally acceptable standards for selection and later performance.Job speciﬁcations identify the personal characteristics (e.g., educational background,experience, training) that are valid for screening, selection, and placement. How are thesespeciﬁcations set, and how does one deﬁne “minimal qualiﬁcations (MQs)”?Levine, May, Ulm, and Gordon (1997) developed a methodology for determining MQs inthe context of a court case that challenged the use of MQs of unknown validity, but highadverse impact. Their methodology is worth describing, since ultimately a court approvedit, and it is consistent with sound professional practice.Working independently with a draft list of tasks and KSAs for a target job, separate groupsof subject matter experts (SMEs) rate tasks and KSAs on a set of four scales, as shown inFigure 9.3.Figure 9.3 Scales Applied to Tasks and KSAs and Criteria for Deﬁning the Domains forMQs

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Source: Republished with permission of John Wiley and Sons Inc., from Levine, E. L.,May, D. M., Ulum, R. A., & Gordon, T. R. (1997). A methodology for developing andvalidating minimum qualiﬁcations (MQs). Personnel Psychology, 50, 1013;permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center.Proﬁles meeting the criteria on the level and clarity scales are then linked back to the tasksand KSAs (in the domains established earlier) by means of two additional scales, one fortasks and one for KSAs, using the criteria also shown in Figure 9.4. Each proﬁle must meetthe linkage criterion in order to demonstrate content-oriented evidence of validity (seeChapter 7). Six of the nine MQ proﬁles in Levine et al.’s (1997) study did so.Subsequently, Buster, Roth, and Bobko (2005) presented a related method for developingcontent-oriented evidence of validity for education and experience-based MQs that alsowas approved by a federal court. They offered the following eight recommendations forpractice:1. Begin with a structured analysis of work that identiﬁes critical tasks and KSAs,noting which KSAs are needed on day 1 of the work (entry-level KSAs).2. Distribute a list of tasks and KSAs associated with the work at the ﬁrst MQ-development meeting.3. Emphasize that the point of reference for the MQs is an individual who is newlyappointed to the work.4. Instruct individuals who are generating potential MQs to think about alternative MQs(e.g., a professional certiﬁcation).5. Use straightforward, targeted MQs because they can be rated more easily andreliably.. SMEs should rate the list of MQs independently.7. Have SMEs link all potential MQs back to KSAs or tasks.. Bracket potential MQs with both easier and more diﬃcult statements.Reliability and Validity of Work Analysis InformationA meta-analysis of 46 studies and 299 estimates of reliability identiﬁed average levels ofinter- and intrarater reliability of job analysis ratings. Interrater reliability refers to the

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©degree to which different raters agree on the components of a target work role or job, orthe extent to which their ratings covary. Intrarater reliability is a measure of stability(repeated item and rate–rerate the same work at different times). Data were categorizedby speciﬁcity (generalized work activity or task data), source (incumbents, analysts, ortechnical experts), and descriptive scale (frequency, importance, diﬃculty, or time spent).Across 119 studies, task data demonstrated higher inter- and intrarater reliabilities thandid generalized work activity data (.77 versus .60, and .72 versus .58, respectively).Analysts showed the highest interrater reliability and incumbents the lowest, regardless ofthe speciﬁcity of the data. Within task data, descriptive scales dealing with perceptions ofrelative value (importance and diﬃculty scales) tended to have similar and relatively highinterrater reliability levels, whereas descriptive scales involving temporal judgments(frequency and time-spent scales) displayed similar and relatively low interrater reliabilitylevels (Dierdorff & Wilson, 2003).Job descriptions are valid to the extent that they accurately represent job content,environment, and conditions of employment. Job speciﬁcations are valid to the extent thatpersons possessing the personal characteristics believed necessary for successful jobperformance in fact do perform more effectively on their jobs than persons lacking thosepersonal characteristics.As Morgeson and Campion (1997) have noted, however, many job analysis processes arebased on human judgment, and such judgment is often fallible. Potential sources ofinaccuracy in work analysis may be due to two primary sources: social and cognitive.Social sources of inaccuracy apply principally in settings where groups, rather thanindividuals, make judgments about the analysis of work. For example, pressures toconform could be a source of inaccuracy if group consensus is required. Cognitivesources, by contrast, reﬂect problems that result primarily from our limited ability toprocess information. For example, demand for large numbers of ratings or for very ﬁnedistinctions among characteristics of work can cause information overload. In all,Morgeson and Campion (1997) identiﬁed 16 potential sources of inaccuracy. Suchsources are more likely to affect ratings of subjective and diffuse attributes, such as manyKSAOs, than they are ratings of discrete and observable tasks. Thus, questions such as,“Do you do this at work?” require considerably less subjectivity and judgment than doratings of “criticality.”In a later study, Morgeson, Delaney-Klinger, Mayﬁeld, Ferrara, and Campion (2004)investigated the effect of one particular source of bias: self-presentation—an attempt bysome individuals to control the impressions others form of them. Their research showedthat self-presentation may be responsible for inﬂation in ratings, particularly in the case ofability statements.We also know that the amount of descriptive information about work that is available toraters signiﬁcantly affects the accuracy of work analysis. Student raters with moredetailed work information were consistently more accurate, relative to the averaged ratingsof incumbents, than were those given only a job title. Moreover, data provided by raterswho were relatively naive about the work in question showed little agreement with dataprovided by work-content experts (Harvey & Lozada-Larsen, 1988).In actual organizational settings, however, there is not a readily available standard toassess the accuracy of a work analysis. As Guion (1998) pointed out, work analysis is notscience. It always reﬂects subjective judgment and is best viewed as an information-gathering tool to aid researchers in deciding what to do next. Careful choices anddocumented decisions about what information to collect and how to collect it are the bestassurances of reliable and useful information (Brannick et al., 2017; Sackett & Laczo,2003). In the next section, we consider how such information may be obtained.Obtaining Information About Jobs and WorkNumerous methods exist for describing jobs and work, although they differ widely in theassumptions they make, in breadth of coverage, and in precision. Some are work orientedand some are worker oriented, but each method has its own particular set of advantagesand disadvantages. For purposes of exposition, we present the various methodsseparately, but, in practice, several methods should be used to complement each other sothat the end product represents a valid and comprehensive picture of job duties,responsibilities, and behaviors.Direct Observation and Job PerformanceObservation of incumbents and actual performance of the work by the analyst are twomethods of gathering job information. Data then may be recorded in a narrative format oron some type of checklist or worksheet such as that shown in Figure 9.5. Both methods

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©assume that jobs are relatively static—that is, that they remain constant over time and arenot changed appreciably by different job incumbents or different situations. Jobobservation is appropriate for jobs that require a great deal of manual, standardized, short-cycle activities, and job performance is appropriate for jobs that the job analyst can learnreadily.Figure 9.5 Job/Work Analysis Worksheet

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Observations should include a representative sample of work behaviors. For example, theactivity “copes with emergencies” may be crucial to effective nursing performance; yet acontinuous eight-hour observation of the activities of a group of staff nurses tending tothe needs of a dozen sleepy postoperative patients may reveal little in the way of a validpicture of work requirements.

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Furthermore, the analyst must take care to be unobtrusive in his or her observations, lestthe measuring process per se distort what is being measured (Webb, Campbell, Schwartz,& Sechrest, 2000). This does not imply that the analyst should hide from the worker andremain out of sight, but it does imply that the analyst should not get in the way. Considerthe following incident, which actually happened: While riding along in a police patrol caras part of a job/work analysis of police oﬃcers, an analyst and an oﬃcer were chattingaway when a call came over the radio regarding a robbery in progress. Upon arriving at thescene, the analyst and the oﬃcer both jumped out of the patrol car, but in the process, theoverzealous analyst managed to position himself between the robbers and the police.Although the robbers were apprehended later, they used the analyst as a shield to maketheir getaway from the scene of the crime.Observation and job performance are inappropriate for work that requires a great deal ofmental activity and concentration, such as lawyer, computer programmer, or architect, butthese methods are perfectly appropriate for many types of work. A technique known asfunctional job analysis (FJA) often is used to record observed tasks (Fine, 1989). FJAattempts to identify exactly what the worker does, as well as the results of the worker’sbehavior—that is, what gets done. Figure 9.6 provides an example of an FJA worksheetsummarizing an analyst’s observations of a ﬁreﬁghter performing salvage and overhauloperations in response to an emergency call. Let’s consider the various sections of theworksheet.Figure 9.6 Behavior Observation Worksheet in Functional Job Analysis Terms

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Duties are general areas of responsibility. Tasks describe what gets done. Under the“WHAT?” heading, two pieces of information are required: “Performs What Action?” (i.e.,describe what the worker did, using an action verb) and “To Whom or to What?” (i.e.,describe the object of the verb). “WHY?” forces the analyst to consider the purpose of theworker’s action (“To Produce or Achieve What?”). “HOW?” requires the analyst to describethe tools, equipment, or work aids used to accomplish the task and, in addition, to specifythe nature and source of instructions. This section also indicates whether the task isprescribed (e.g., by a superior or departmental procedures) or left to the worker’s discretion.Under “WORKER FUNCTIONS,” the analyst describes the orientation and level of workeractivity with data, people, and things. All jobs involve workers to some extent withinformation or ideas (data); with clients, coworkers, superiors, and so on (people); and withmachines or equipment (things). The percentages listed under “Data,” “People,” and“Things” indicate the relative amount of involvement (orientation) with each of thesefunctions. Numbers indicate the level of complexity according to the following scales,developed by the U.S. Department of Labor:

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©Of course, each of these terms is deﬁned more fully for the analyst, but the important thingto note is that since the level and orientation measures can be applied to all tasks, andtherefore to all jobs and types of work, the worker function scales provide a way ofcomparing all tasks and all types of work on a common basis.We noted earlier that analysts should be unobtrusive. One possible solution is to use high-resolution digital cameras to obtain comprehensive views of work activity. The videoinformation can then be reviewed and coded oﬄine. One can then follow particularemployees as they wander through a facility, such as a department store or a warehouse,as if the observer were walking behind them (Saad, 2009). Video information is just onesource of information about work, however, and it suffers from the followingdisadvantages: (a) One cannot hear what employees are saying; (b) it is not possible totrack interactions among employees; (c) ceiling-mounted video cameras cannot tell what aperson is actually looking at; and (d) if an employee steps out of the frame of vision of thecamera, there is no adjoining view of his or her actions unless additional cameras covermultiple visual ﬁelds (Banks, 2017).InterviewThe interview is probably the most commonly used technique for establishing the tasks,duties, and behaviors necessary both for standardized or nonstandardized activities andfor physical as well as mental work. Because the worker acts as his or her own observer inthe interview, he or she can report activities and behaviors that would not often beobserved, as well as those activities that occur over long time spans. Moreover, because ofhis or her thorough knowledge of the job, the worker can report information that might notbe available to the analyst from any other source. Viewing the interview as a “conversationwith a purpose,” however, makes it obvious that the success of this technique dependspartly on the skill of the interviewer.Thorough advance planning and training of the analyst in interview techniques shouldprecede the actual interviewing, and, for reasons of reliability and eﬃciency, the analystshould follow a structured interview form that covers systematically the material to begathered during the interview. As a guide, questions used by interviewers may be checkedfor their appropriateness against the following criteria (McCormick, 1979):The question should be related to the purpose of the analysis.The wording should be clear and unambiguous.The question should not “lead” the respondent; that is, it should not imply that aspeciﬁc answer is desired.

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©The question should not be “loaded” in the sense that one form of response mightbe considered to be more socially desirable than another.The question should not ask for knowledge or information the interviewee doesn’thave.There should be no personal or intimate material that the interviewee might resent.(p. 36)Workers often look on interviewers with some suspicion, and they are understandablywary of divulging information about their jobs. For this reason, the analyst should providea comfortable atmosphere where the worker or team feels free to discuss job duties andresponsibilities.The major stumbling block with the interviewing technique is distortion of information,whether this is due to outright falsiﬁcation or to honest misunderstanding. For example, ifthe worker knows (or thinks) that the results of the work analysis may inﬂuence wages, heor she may exaggerate certain responsibilities and minimize others. Hence, interviews mayrequire time and a good deal of adroit questioning in order to elicit valid information.As a check on the information provided by a single incumbent, it is wise to interviewseveral incumbents, as well as immediate supervisors who know the work well. Both high-and low-performing incumbents and supervisors tend to provide similar information(Conley & Sackett, 1987), as do members of different demographic subgroups (Schmitt &Cohen, 1989). However, this may be true only for simple, as opposed to complex, jobs(Mullins & Kimbrough, 1988). Multiple interviews allow analysts to take into accountfeatures of work made dynamic by time, people, and situations. This is only a partialsolution to the problem, however, for often it is diﬃcult to piece together results fromseveral dissimilar interviews into a comprehensive picture. For this reason, additionalinformation-gathering techniques might well be used to supplement and reﬁneinterviewing results.SME PanelsPanels of 6 to 10 SMEs are often convened for different purposes in work analysis: (a) todevelop information on tasks or KSAOs to be used in constructing work analysisquestionnaires and (b) in test development, to establish linkages between tasks andKSAOs, KSAOs and test items, and tasks and test items. The total group of SMEs usuallyrepresents about a 10–20% sample of incumbents and supervisors, representative of therace, gender, location, shift, and assignment composition of the entire group ofincumbents. Evidence indicates, however, that a key attribute of SME groups is experience(Landy & Vasey, 1991; Morgeson & Dierdorff, 2011). Failure to include a broad cross-section of experience in a sample of SMEs could lead to distorted ratings. However,representative panels of SMEs provide results very similar to those obtained from broadsurveys of respondents in the ﬁeld (Tannenbaum & Wesley, 1993).SMEs are encouraged to discuss issues and to resolve disagreements openly. Forexample, to promote discussion of KSAOs, panel members might be asked questions suchas the following:Think of workers you know who are better than anyone else at (a particular task).Why do they do so well?If you were going to assign a worker to perform (a particular task), what kinds ofKSAOs would you want this person to have?What do you expect workers to learn in training that would make them effective atthe tasks?Think of good workers and poor workers. What KSAOs distinguish one from theother?If the task for SMEs is to establish linkages for test-development purposes, quality-controlstatistics should be computed to ensure that the judgments or work products of the SMEsare meaningful (Hughes & Prien, 1989; Morgeson & Dierdorff, 2011). For example,questionnaires might include repeat items and “carelessness” items (those that areinappropriate for the job under study). High levels of interrater agreement and, forindividual SMEs, a near-zero endorsement of “carelessness” items are important checkson the meaningfulness of the data.QuestionnairesQuestionnaires usually are standardized and require respondents either to check itemsthat apply to a job or to rate items in terms of their relevance to the job in question. Ingeneral, they are cheaper and quicker to administer than other job analysis methods, andsometimes they can be completed at the respondent’s leisure, online or via hard copy,thereby avoiding lost production time. In addition, when there are many workers in each

1725970 – SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©job, questionnaires provide a breadth of coverage that would be exorbitantly expensiveand time consuming to obtain by any other method.There are problems with this method, however. Questionnaires are often time consumingand expensive to develop, and ambiguities or misunderstandings that might have beenclariﬁed in an interview are likely to go uncorrected. Similarly, it may be diﬃcult to followup and augment information obtained in the questionnaires. In addition, the rapport thatmight have been obtained in the course of face-to-face contact is impossible to achievewith an impersonal instrument. This may have adverse effects on respondent cooperationand motivation. At the same time, the structured-questionnaire approach allows workanalysis information to be quantiﬁed and then analyzed statistically.Task inventories and checklists are questionnaires used to collect information about aparticular type of work. An analyst completes a list of tasks or job activities, by checkingor rating each item as it relates to the work in question, in terms of the importance of theitem, frequency with which the task is performed, judged diﬃculty, time to learn, orrelationship to overall performance. Although these data are adaptable for computeranalysis, checklists tend to ignore the sequencing of tasks or their relationships to otherjobs. Thus, an overall perspective is extremely diﬃcult to obtain with checklist informationalone.However, if one purpose of a task inventory is to assess the relative importance of eachtask, then a unit-weighted, additive composite of ratings of task criticality, diﬃculty oflearning the task, and relative time spent may provide the best prediction of average taskimportance across SMEs (Sanchez & Fraser, 1992).The Position Analysis QuestionnaireSince task inventories basically are work oriented and make static assumptions aboutjobs, behavioral implications are diﬃcult to establish. In contrast to this, worker-orientedinformation describes how a job gets done and is more concerned with generalized workerbehaviors. The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ), an instrument based on statisticalanalyses of primarily worker-oriented job elements, lends itself to quantitative statisticalanalysis (McCo

Job Analysis and Workforce Planning – RubricJob Analysis42 pointsCriteria DescriptionComplete an in-depth job analysis on a chosen job. Include an in-depth overview usingall 15 points outlined in Figure 9.5 in the textbook.5. Target42 pointsThe job analysis expertly analyzes the 15 required points for the job chosen. The jobanalysis demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.4. Acceptable36.54 pointsThe job analysis clearly analyzes the 15 required points for the job chosen. The jobanalysis demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of thetopic.3. Approaching33.18 pointsThe job analysis adequately analyzes the 15 required points for the job chosen. Thejob analysis demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.2. Insufficient31.08 pointsThe job analysis inadequately analyzes the 15 required points for the job chosen.The job analysis demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe job analysis omits or incompletely analyzes the 15 points for the job chosen.The job analysis does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.Strategic Workforce Planning Process42 pointsCriteria DescriptionBriefly review the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process, explainingwhere the job analysis would fit into the SWP.5. Target42 pointsEssay expertly reviews the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process,and expertly explains where the job analysis fits into the SWP. Essay demonstratesan exceptional understanding of the topic.Collapse All

4. Acceptable36.54 pointsEssay clearly reviews the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process,and clearly explains where the job analysis fits into the SWP. Essay demonstrates anunderstanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.3. Approaching33.18 pointsEssay adequately reviews the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP)process, and adequately explains where the job analysis fits into the SWP. Essaydemonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.2. Insufficient31.08 pointsEssay inadequately reviews the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP)process, and does not explain where the job analysis fits into the SWP. Essaydemonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.Thesis, Position, or Purpose8.4 pointsCriteria DescriptionCommunicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.5. Target8.4 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfullydirected to a specific audience.4. Acceptable7.31 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearlydirected to a specific audience.3. Approaching6.64 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of theappropriate audience is demonstrated.2. Insufficient6.22 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionallyweak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.1. Unsatisfactory0 points

Development, Structure, and Conclusion9.6 pointsCriteria DescriptionAdvances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolvesfrom development.5. Target9.6 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout.The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguousconclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.4. Acceptable8.35 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progressionof ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to thedevelopment of the purpose.3. Approaching7.58 pointsThe thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build oneach other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.2. Insufficient7.1 pointsLimited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There areinconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplisticand not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsEvidence6 pointsCriteria DescriptionSelects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considersother perspectives.5. Target6 pointsComprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectivesare integrated effectively.4. Acceptable5.22 pointsSpecific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

3. Approaching4.74 pointsRelevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.2. Insufficient4.44 pointsEvidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation orintegration of other perspectives is present.1.Unsatisfactory0pointsMechanics of Writing6 pointsCriteria DescriptionIncludes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentencestructure, etc.5. Target6 pointsNo mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentencestructure are used throughout.4. Acceptable5.22 pointsFew mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentencestructure are used.3. Approaching4.74 pointsOccasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generallyappropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.2. Insufficient4.44 pointsFrequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in languagechoice or sentence structure are recurrent.Format/Documentation6 pointsCriteria DescriptionUses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,appropriate to assignment and discipline.5. Target6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use ofdirect quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.4. Acceptable5.22 pointsAppropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.3. Approaching4.74 pointsAppropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obviouserrors.2. Insufficient4.44 pointsAppropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errorsin documentation of sources are evident.1Unsatisfactory0pointsTotal120points

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.

Briefly review the steps in the strategic workforce planning (SWP) process. Describe how the four components of the strategic workforce planning process work together with a focus on explaining where the job analysis would fit into the SWP.

Related Posts

PUBH 3001: Fundamentals of Public Health

PUBH 3001: Fundamentals of Public Health

PUBH 3001: Fundamentals of Public Health