Hay Manual

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 1

Table of Contents

HayGroup .......................................................................................... 2 Hay Guide Chart Profile Method ................................................. 4 CHAPTER 1: Know-How ................................................................... 12 The Three Elements Comprising Know How .................................... 14 Job-Specific Knowledge ................................................................... 14 Integrating Know-How ...................................................................... 21 Human Relations Skills .................................................................... 24

CHAPTER 2: Problem Solving ......................................................... 27 The Two Elements of Problem Solving ............................................. 28 Context ............................................................................................. 28 Thinking Challenge ........................................................................... 31

CHAPTER 3: Accountability ............................................................ 34 The Three Elements of Accountability .............................................. 35 Freedom To Act/Empowerment ........................................................ 35 Magnitude ......................................................................................... 38 Job Impact ......................................................................................... 40

CHAPTER 4: Special Conditions ..................................................... 42 CHAPTER 5: FINE TUNING .............................................................. 43 Job Profiles ....................................................................................... 43 Sore-Thumbing ................................................................................. 48 Hay Rating At-A-Glance .................................................................... 49

CHAPTER 6: Preparing the Presentation ....................................... 50 HAY PRESENTATION OUTLINE ........................................................... 50 HAY Presentation Outline Worksheet ............................................... 51 HAY Presenter Check List ................................................................ 53 HAY EVALUATION WORKSHEET FOR RATERS .................................... 54

CHAPTER 7: Quality Assurance ..................................................... 55 Indicators of a Good Hay Rater ........................................................ 59 Hay Rater Training and Development Standards ............................. 61

CHAPTER 8: Hay Ratings and Compensation ............................... 62 CHAPTER 9: Trend Lines and Conversion Charts ........................ 64

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Hay Advisory Team offers special thanks to Cindy Lukas for her dedication and her thoughtful work that has been the foundation for this manual. The Hay Advisory Team also offers special thanks to Wayne Veum (Chief Classification Analyst-retired); John Kuderka (Hay rater and Hay historian emeritus); Sue Wickham (Admin); and others who have reviewed past editions of this manual to ensure its accuracy and usability. 2010 Hay Advisory Team: Darlene Hueser (MMB) co-chair Faith Zwemke (MMB) co-chair Gwen Aubineau (MnSCU) Wanda Barrett (MnSCU) Brent Boyd (Merit System) Janice Cano (DEED) Cathy Fah (DOC) Russ Havir (Agriculture) Loretta Mattson (Lottery) Richard Morey (MnDOT) Laura Sengil (DHS) Diane Rademacher (DEED)


HayGroup

Hay is not an acronym. HayGroup is an international organizational and human resources consulting firm with more than 2,000 employees that was founded in 1943 by Edward N. Ned Hay. Hay is considered to be a pioneer in the human resources community, particularly with regard to the compensation issue of measuring jobs. He started E.N. Hay and Associates while he was the head of personnel for the First Pennsylvania Bank of Philadelphia while in his early fifties and at the height of World War II. During the war, Ned Hay also served as Deputy Administrator of the Office of Price Administration. At that time, the War Labor Board imposed pay controls that could be lifted only if a company could show through a sound job evaluation method that a particular jobs content put it into a higher control range. This, combined with a major contract with General Foods in 1945 to study 450 management jobs planted the seed for what would become the Hay Guide Chart Profile Method of job evaluation.

Ned Hay died unexpectedly in 1958 at the age of 67, but his company continued to evolve both geographically and with respect to its offerings. HayGroup now emphasizes three broad areas:

Organizational Clarity Employee surveys, strategy alignment, accountability assessment, organization analysis and design, role clarity

Employee Capability Assessment and selection, executive coaching, leadership development, team development, talent management

People Commitment Compensation information, employee benefits, executive pay, job evaluation, performance management, reward programs, total remuneration

Still headquartered in its birthplace Philadelphia, Pennsylvania HayGroup has offices in 43 countries around the world: Argentina Finland Malaysia South Africa Australia France Mexico South Korea

Austria Germany New Zealand Spain

Belgium Greece Netherlands Sweden Brazil Hungary Norway Switzerland Canada India Peru Thailand Chile Indonesia Poland Turkey

China Ireland Portugal United Arab Emirates

Columbia Israel Russia United Kingdom

Costa Rica Italy Singapore United States Czech Republic Japan

Slovak Republic Venezuela


The State of Minnesota has had a long-term relationship with HayGroup related to job evaluation. Consistent with the belief that jobs with comparable levels of work should be compensated similarly, the State needed an organized, standardized system for comparing the complexity levels of very different types of jobs. HayGroup provided such a system. Their website at www.haygroup.com states: It might be a merger or acquisition, new organization design, changing roles, or simply an outdated job measurement plan. Regardless of the reason, organizations need a sound and straightforward method to measure and value work on an ongoing basis, one that effectively reflects their specific organizational culture and values. HayGroup is the worlds leading authority on job evaluation and work measurement and has helped thousands of organizations around the world. In addition to in-depth consulting expertise, Hay offers an array of work measurement and analysis tools to help meet a broad range of organization needs. These include our:

Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method the most widely-used and recognized method of job evaluation in the world

Comparison/Questionnaire Methods streamlined alternatives to our more in-depth Guide Chart approach

Integrated Models customized approaches to suit a clients unique human resources management needs.

WHY HAY? Organized, systematic job ranking systemAssigns point values to job componentsWidely used - both public and private sectorUseful for large classification studies.Helps determine appropriate level of a position

within a class series.Used when necessary to create new classes.


Hay Guide Chart Profile Method What is the Hay Guide Chart Profile Method and where did it come from?

The Hay Guide Chart Profile Method of job evaluation was developed in the early 1950s by HayGroup and is used by more than 7,000 profit and nonprofit organizations in many different countries. It is the most widely used job evaluation method in the United States, in companies such as Honeywell, Pillsbury and General Mills and in state governments such as Arizona, Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon and New Mexico. The State of Minnesota has used the Hay system of job evaluation since the 1970s, when HayGroup consultants evaluated managerial positions for the State of Minnesota. In the mid 1970s, $400,000 was allocated to the Department of Finance for a Public Employment Study. Part of the study involved evaluating the States classification (and secondarily, compensation) system. At that point, classification and compensation decisions primarily relied on the job audit and salary survey processes we use today by comparing positions to each other and to class specifications, with consideration given to how similar jobs were paid outside of state government. The Department of Personnels Classification and Compensation Division provided leadership for the resulting broad class clarification project, which involved reviewing position descriptions and class specifications, interviewing about 1000 State employees across the state, and establishing class clarification files. John Kuderka was the Classification and Compensation Divisions lead for this project.

After much of the initial class clarification work was completed, the Departments of Finance and Personnel agreed to use some of the funding to contract with HayGroup to train State employees to become Hay raters. State agencies nominated employees to attend Hay training and to serve on three seven member committees to evaluate many of the States multiple-person classes under the guidance of HayGroup consultants. Some of the initial Hay raters were Human Resources professionals, but many were not. Bettie Lee and Al Bunnett were facilitators for two of the committees. Each committee emphasized a specialty area and used the class clarification information to understand the jobs in order to evaluate them. Presenters werent part of the process as they are today. This was a very time-consuming, labor-intensive effort.

When this large group of Hay ratings was completed, the three committees disbanded and the pool of trained State Hay raters began to expand. Later, when pay equity was raised as an issue in the 1980s during the Perpich administration, the State of Minnesota was already using the Hay Guide Chart Profile Method to compare very different types of jobs. The States customized Hay Guide Profile Charts were revised in 1995, to ensure that they remained up-to-date as the States needs changed. One aspect, Magnitude, is reviewed annually and revised according to the Accountability Magnitude Index (AMI) provided by HayGroup. The Consumer Price Index, as interpreted by HayGroup, is the primary source for calculating adjustments to the Accountability Magnitude Index. For example, the current 7.0 AMI (as of Oct 2009) is a multiplier applied to the baseline of 1967 dollars; therefore, $100 1967 dollars are now equal to $700 2009 dollars. 1967 dollars were used as the baseline because HayGroup did a major update of the 1950s Hay Guide Charts that year.


The Hay job evaluation system has been used by the State of Minnesota to evaluate most state job classes, including the Governors and positions in the Supreme Court. Although the Guide Charts have been updated over the years, there havent been major changes; its been more a matter of fine-tuning than full-scale revisions.

The Hay Method of Job Evaluation Adds Value by:

1. Low Administrative Costs. The most expensive investment, the initial installation, training and quality assurance, have been paid. The Hay Advisory Team and other experienced raters now provide training and quality assurance.

2. A Strong Future Orientation. The Hay Method is used to measure new jobs or redesigned jobs within new organizational structures and serves as a useful consulting tool to guide state managers as they continue to strive to do more with less. During Fiscal Years 2000 thru 2010 a total of 677 jobs were evaluated by 335 rating committees resulting in 212 new classes, and the conformation of ratings and levels for exiting classes.

3. A Large Data Base of Evaluations to Guide Current and Future Class and Compensation Decisions. Since Fiscal Year 2001, State of Minnesota Hay ratings have been listed on MMBs web site. Current rosters of evaluations, with complete ratings, are available on the MMB extranet. As of the end of Fiscal Year 2010 the roster contains Hay ratings for 92% of the active classes.

4. A Solid Track Record of Successful Application of the Hay Method of Evaluation Statewide. The State of Minnesotas application of the Hay Method has received statewide recognition and use. At the local level, Minnesota State job evaluations have provided representative job evaluations for benchmark job classes to guide local units of government and school districts as they conduct their review of jobs for pay equity. State of Minnesota Hay ratings are the foundation/basis for the State Job Match System available on the internet to over 1500 local units of government.


How does Hay Guide Chart Profile Method work

People: Manager, supervisor and employee and/or personnel representative. Hay Facilitator

Hay Raters

Process: Manager, supervisor and employee and/or personnel representative verbally explain the position description and other written documentation to the Hay Committee. The Hay Raters use their understanding of the position and their knowledge of the Hay guide chart to assign a Hay rating to the position.

Product: The Hay Facilitator interprets the Hay rating by assigning the position to a current class or by recommending a new classification, including salary range, to the State's Compensation Manager, Labor Relations Representative and Chief Classification Analyst.

A committee rating process is used to help ensure a broad perspective and statewide consistency. Committees are made up of three or five professionals from State of Minnesota agencies and Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). All Hay raters meet training standards established by MMB consistent with HayGroup expectations and participate in advanced training seminars. Written materials about each position being rated are provided to Hay committee members so they can prepare before a scheduled Hay rating session. Documentation typically includes a memo outlining the need for the Hay rating, an organizational chart, a position description, and anything else that might help the raters understand each position. Subject matter experts provide an overview of each positions role and responsibilities to the Hay raters at a scheduled Hay rating session, along with information about the positions requirements related to Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. Examples are usually helpful. After the presenters leave the Hay committee begins the rating process. [See Chapter 6 for information on preparing a presentation.]

When are positions Hay-rated? Positions are Hay-rated when one or more situations occur: A new position is established for which there is no readily discernable existing class comparison. The appropriate level of a position within a class series cannot be determined or there is significant dispute about

the level of a position.

The class hasnt been reviewed for many years and the concept of the class has changed significantly over time.

A position has been identified as a benchmark position to which others are compared for use in a class study or class clarification project.


Good Hay Rating Requires... Skilled (trained and experienced) raters and an accurate understanding of the position, through

current, complete position description background memo organizational chart presentation

Hay raters look at three major aspects when evaluating a job: Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. They consider a positions role and responsibilities, and the KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities), problem solving and accountability required to satisfactorily perform the work involved. Hay ratings are typically based on when the position is considered to be fully functioning, rather than what employees know at hire. The raters look at each of these three basic factors separately, and assign points from the Hay Guide Charts that represent their weight in the job. Every job that is evaluated receives the same treatment. This makes it possible to compare jobs that are very different and place them where they appropriately fit within the States classification and compensation systems.

The Hay system is designed to rank positions within the context of all statewide positions, from the Governor and the Supreme Court on down, not just within the context of one State agency. A single number is assigned to each factor consistent with the positions role and responsibilities. Available options are listed on the charts. The numbers increase at a rounded 15% rate, which is based on the scientific concept of just noticeable difference. [see Guide Chart Tip] After the Hay committee members use their Hay Guide Charts to independently evaluate a position, they must reach a group consensus. Hay committee members are asked to share their individual ratings with the group, which are put on a white board or flip chart. The raters discuss their ratings, including any differences among them, and arrive at a group Hay rating with which everyone can agree. Sometimes additional information is needed before committee members can agree; the group discussion may be the first indication that raters are making different assumptions about the position that need to be clarified. The points are totaled for each factor. The committee facilitator documents the final Hay rating and submits it to MMB


What are the possible outcomes of Hay rating?

Typical reasons for rating a job

Level determination within existing classes (e.g. affirmation ratings, reallocations)

New class Salary range review/re-assignment (often occurs jointly

with Level) Other (e.g. previously unrated class, new benchmark for

a current class.) Even though the intent was to rate the position because of one of four reasons listed in the chart above the rating may not support the action that prompted the rating. For example. The supervisor believed that the job in question had changed over time and should be at a higher level of Hay points and compensation. After a rating session the raters determined that the current class rating was appropriate. In this case the outcome was: No Change (see Decision Codes below).

HAY Quality Assurance Summary Decision Codes NC = No Change REC = Reallocation to an existing class ENC = Establish new class list proposed class title RCR = Revised class rating for salary range reassignment TC = Title Change TBD = Final outcome to be determined

However there may be other factors, e.g. turnover, ability to hire qualified candidates, internal equity, that may impact an agencys decision to pursue a salary range reassignment based on the recent Hay rating. If this is a single incumbent class the rating could also represent the class rating and a revised class rating date. [see CHAPTER 8: Hay Ratings and Compensation] The following chart provides samples of possible rating outcomes.


Rea

son

Sample outcomes:

New

ratin

g

No

chan

ge in

ratin

g

Assi

gn to

ex

istin

g cl

ass*

Cre

ate

new

cl

ass

Sala

ry ra

nge

Re-

assi

gnm

ent

Hay

Qua

lity

Assu

ranc

e Su

mm

ary

Cla

ss ra

ting?

If

yes

Leve

l

Is level of position(s) unclear or in dispute? If yes, confer with MMB before proceeding.

X X * Movement to a new class generally requires a one step or more change in Know How points. X Chg

X X Chg date Is this a class that the agency has determined to use Hay evaluation for reallocation? If yes, proceed with rating.

X X * Movement to a new class generally requires a one step or more change in Know How points. X NA

X X NA

New

No existing class was identified as a fit . Confer with MMB before proceeding.

X X Request a new class and recommend comp level X new

X X Use an existing class lieu of creating a new class. X No Chg

Sala

ry Salary range review/re-assignment

(often occurs jointly with Level) Confer with MMB before proceeding.

X X Recommend and request a new comp level. X Chg

X X X No Chg

Oth

er Previously unrated class, X Usually no change in comp level X new

New benchmark for a current class.) X X X May or may not request a new comp X Chg


How does the Hay rating relate to classification and compensation decisions?

The Hay method evaluates all positions against the same factors. This makes it possible to compare jobs that are very different and place them where they appropriately fit within the States classification and compensation systems. A positions Know-How points and overall Hay rating are used as guides in determining where the job fits in the States classification structure and provide a framework for determining the appropriate compensation range. This relationship is discussed further in the Hay Ratings and Compensation and Trend Lines and Conversion Charts sections at the end of the manual. Can anyone have a copy of the Hay Guide Profile Charts?

Copies of the Hay Guide Profile Charts are typically only given to trained Hay raters or Hay raters in training. The customized charts used by the State of Minnesota are the copyrighted property of HayGroup. The State of Minnesotas Hay Guide Profile Charts cannot be sold or in any other way distributed to other private or public organizations because this violates copyright laws and other contractual agreements between the State of Minnesota and HayGroup.

GUIDE CHART TIP Step Differences

The Hay Guide Charts use the concept of Just Noticeable Differences to reflect that people perceive relative, not absolute, differences. This is incorporated into the unique Hay numbering patterns used in the three Hay Guide Charts. This concept provides a systematic guideline to assess the relationships among jobs the relative distances between jobs, span of control, size of accountability, career progression opportunity and chains of command, etc Source: 2005 HayGroup Working Paper, Hay Job Evaluation Foundations and Applications

.

On the Hay Scale, 15% changes are steps to identify just-noticeable differences

. This conforms to a general principle of psychometric scaling derived from Webers Law: In comparing objects, we perceive not the absolute difference between them, but the ratio of this difference to the magnitude of the two objects compared. The extent of difference required in order to be noticeable tends to be a specific constant percentage. A job evaluation committee, when comparing two similar jobs on any single factor, has to perceive at least a 15% difference in order to come to a group agreement that Job A is larger than Job B.


Know-How is the body of knowledge, skills and abilities an employee needs to be successful in a particular job. The most important factor in Hay evaluation is Know how. It defines the boundaries within which the action will take place. It is made up of three parts: Depth and Breadth of Job-

Specific Knowledge (aka Technical and Specialized Know-How and Job-Specific Knowledge).

Integrating Know-How (aka Managerial Breadth or Know-How).

Human Relations Skills (aka Human Relations Know-How).

Hay raters assign a number to the total Know-How for a job, which involves separate choices for each of these three elements and an overall assessment. As an example, Know-How is expressed in a report as EI2 200 (depth and breath level E, integrating know-how level I, human relations skills level 2 at 200 Know-How points).

I. Activity.

E. Basic

Specialized.

200

Human Relations 2

I. Activity.

E. Basic

Specialized.

200

Human Relations 2

CH

APT

ER 1

: Kno

w-H

ow


According to the Know-How Guide Chart, Know-How is the total of every kind of skill and knowledge, however acquired, needed to conduct, and to be prepared for, functions that are reasonably expected within the role. Know-How considers both the scope and depth of a position. A job may require some knowledge about a lot of things, or a lot of knowledge of fewer things. The overall Know-How rating reflects a combination of scope and depth. This allows for the comparison and weighing of the total Know-How content of different jobs in terms of How much knowledge about how many things? Know-How is the most heavily weighted portion of the overall job evaluation. [SEE FIGURE 1] In fact, the levels in a classification structure are primarily determined by the progression of Know-How levels. In the continuum established by the Hay system, jobs that are more easily learned are ranked near the lower end of the scale. As jobs require more involved and diverse practices and principles, abstract knowledge, mastery of scientific techniques, greater human relations skills and/or significant managerial skills, they are given progressively higher scores.

F igure 1 : Job Factors (Hay System)

Approx imate % o f Tota l Po ints

20%

20%

10%

50%

ProblemSolvingAccountabilty

Spec Cond

Know How

Know-How: 50% - 60% Depth and breadth of skill and knowledge required to do the job

Problem Solving: 20%

Original thinking required. Analyzing, reasoning, creating

Accountability: 20% Supervisory and monetary responsibilities, consequences of

actions

Special Conditions: 0% - 10% Unpleasant circumstances, physical effort, environment,

hazards, sensory stimulation


The Three Elements Comprising Know How:

Job-Specific Knowledge Job-Specific Knowledge includes the depth and breadth of knowledge required to be successful in a job. It includes the positions requirements for knowledge and skills related to practices, procedures, specialized techniques, and professional or scientific disciplines. It also includes basic and job-specific supervisory and managerial KSAs, when appropriate. This aspect of Know-How does NOT make distinctions among differently-sized managerial jobs or include human relations skills. However, because all three parts of a KH rating combine to reflect a jobs total KH requirement, the number of total points vary a lot within each technical/specialized KH level (that is, L and A H). It is important to remember that this element measures the requirements of the position, not the qualifications of an incumbent. .

The levels of Job Specific Knowledge on the Hay Charts are:

Practical Procedures Group # of Job Classes as of Jan 2011

L Limited Job-Specific Knowledge 1 A Primary 6 B Elementary Vocational 42

Specialized Techniques Group # of Job Classes as of Jan 2011

C Vocational 160 D Advanced Vocational 351 E Basic Specialized 545

Learned Disciplines Group # of Job Classes as of Jan 2011

F Seasoned Professional 496 G Specialized Mastery 40 H Professional Mastery 2


Practical Procedures Group NOTE: Examples in blue italics differentiate among levels expected roles re: knowing what to do

Complexity levels

Indicators

Characteristics of work Examples Fine-tuning

L.

Limited

(added in 1995)

Education likely needed

1st to 6th grade Does the simple tasks s/he is

told to do with ongoing work direction

Basic instructions/very simple routines

Work is very simple, short cycle in nature, and typically involves manual effort

Supported Employment Worker is the only job class in this category.

Employees in this job class are expected to have an ongoing job coach employed by a rehabilitation organization as a condition of employment.

TOTAL time to learn

Hours to days

Skill level Unskilled

A.

Primary


Literacy; simple arithmetic; 6th to 9th

grade

Does simple tasks s/he is told to do without an ongoing job coach

Ability to understand simple oral and written instructions and perform simple tasks is required

May apply basic skills in arithmetic, reading and writing

Typically same daily routine

Leaning back AI1 50 AI2 57

TOTAL time to learn

Several days to 1 month NR Nursery Field Worker

Solid in the box

AI1 57 AI2 66

Skill level Unskilled

Student Worker Clerical Student Wkr -Custodial/ Maintenance

Leaning forward

AI1 66 AI2 66

B.

Elementary Vocational


9th to 12th grade Does more involved, but still

standardized, work s/he is instructed to do after basic on-the-job training

Learns on the job Slightly more complex

standardized routines Production and service jobs at

this level require skills in operating uncomplicated machinery and may include apprentice levels of craft positions.

Food Service Worker Leaning back BI1 66 BI2 76

TOTAL time to learn

2 to 6 months

General Maint Worker Office Specialist Security Guard Human Services Tech

Solid in the box

BI1 76 BI2 87

Skill level

Unskilled to semi- skilled; apprentice

Building Services Lead Work Therapy Technician

Leaning forward

BI1 87 BI2 100

.


Specialized Techniques Group Complexity

levels

Indicators


C. Vocational

The median and mode Know-How

points at this level are

115.

Education

likely needed

9th to 12th grade

Knows there are practical, job-related instructions about what to do and applies them

Brings knowledge from some other

training or experience Guided by somewhat diversified

procedures and precedents Although tasks are proceduralized

or involve following precedents, employee decides on appropriate procedure or precedent to follow based on the situation

Typically require knowledge of multiple procedures.

Office & Admin Spec Leaning back

CI1 87

Customer Svcs Spec Int CI2 100

Building Services Supv CI3 115

TOTAL time to learn

6 months to 2 years - technical positions may require one two years of post high school education in areas such as nursing, civil engineering, or office and business procedures.

General Repair Worker

Solid in the box

CI1 100

Office & Admin Spec Sr Personnel Aide CI2 115

EDP Oper Technical Supv Office Servs Supv 1 Security Supervisor

CI3 132

Skill level

Semi-skilled to journey-level

Account Clerk Senior Transportation Generalist

Leaning forward

CI1 115

LPN 2 CI2 132

Building Svcs Manager CI3 152


Complexity levels

Indicators


D.

Advanced Vocational

The median and mode Know-How points at

this level are 152.

Education likely

needed

9th to 12th grade PLUS additional

specialized training, on or off the job Reads, understands and

applies significantly diversified practices from books recom-mended by others about what to do

Employee is likely to have

specialized training (which may include a bachelors degree) but experience can usually substitute

Upper level college coursework that emphasizes theory is usually not needed to do the work

Work focuses on using substantially diversified procedures and specialized standards, rather than theory

Benefit Recovery Tech

Leaning back

DI1 115

Buyer 1 Personnel Aide Senior Transportation Gen Sr

DI2 132

Office Services Supv 2 DI3 152

TOTAL time to learn

2 to 4 years

Accounting Technician Carpenter

Solid in the box

DI1 132

Accounting Supv Buyer 2 Information Tech Spec 1 Personnel Officer State Programs Admin

DI2 152

Skill level

Skilled technical to highly skilled trades; paraprofessionals; 1st level professionals; some 2nd level professionals; Administrative support supervisors; skilled trade supervisors; supervisory positions equal to 1st and 2nd level professionals; and technical supervisors.

Offices Services Supv 3 DI3 175

Accntg Officer Planner

Leaning forward

DI1 152

Management Analyst 2 DI2 175

Building Maint Supv EDP Oper Ctl/Shift Supv DI3 200


Complexity levels

Indicators


E.

Basic Specialized


this level are 200.

Education likely

needed

Minimum of bachelors or masters degree plus

professional experience; or

equivalent exp is required at hire

Understands the underlying

theory well enough to research and recommend books that are most likely to help meet the organizations more complex needs

Job requires and uses

Work typically involves a specialized field of knowledge, such as accounting, biology, chemistry, engineering, epidemiology, information technology, management, nursing (RN), organization development, psychology, etc.

higher-level college coursework or equivalent theoretical or scientific preparation

Jobs need to know more about why, i.e., the underlying principles involved

Advanced professionals are mid-E to F

Local Govt Audit

Leaning back

EI1 152 Information Tech Spec 2 Planner Intermediate State Prog Admin Inter

EI2 175

Accounting Supv Senior Business Manager 1 EI3 200

Chemist 2 Research Analyst Inter

Solid in the box

EI1 1 75

TOTAL time to learn

Accounting Officer Sr Mgt Analyst 3 Pers Officer Principal Planner Sr State

EI2 200

Personnel Director 1 Registered Nurse Admin-Supv

EI3 230

Skill level

Some 2nd level and many advanced professionals, supervisors &

managers

Pharmacist

Leaning forward

EI1 200

Accounting Officer Principal Engineer Senior Information Tech Spec 4 Personnel Representative

EI2 230

Personnel Director 2 EI3 264 As of Jan 2010 the median and mode Know-How value for all 1640 rated state classifications is 200 points and there were 234 classes at 200 Know-How points. Ratings with 200 Know-How points occur in the Know-How levels of D Advanced Vocational and E Basic Specialized.


LEARNED DISCIPLINES GROUPComplexity

levels

Indicators

Characteristics of work

Examples Fine-tuning

F. Seasoned

Professional


this level are 350 (median)

and 304 (mode.)

Education likely

needed

Evaluates, critiques, edits and improves books about what to do based on advanced professional expertise Professional positions with an F rating are recognized experts within their specialized field. Many supervisory and managerial positions are also within F. Responsible authority in a learned discipline

I in

managerial breadth

Financial Reporting Analy Supv Research Scientist 2

Leaning back

FI2 230

FI3 264 Architect 2 Personnel Services Supv 1 State Prog Admin Coordinator

Solid in the box

FI2 264 TOTAL time to learn

Requires wide exposure, experience and proficiency in specialized fields

Accounting Manager Personnel Services Supv 2

FI3 304

Skill level

Licensed positions within professions such as law or medicine are found here and many multi-functional managers

Construction Project Coord Princ Medical Specialist 1 Leaning

forward

FI2 304

State Prog Admin Manager Sr FI3 350

II in

managerial breadth

Leaning back

FII2 304 Personnel Services Manager FII3 350

Solid in the box

FII2 350 State Prog Admin Manager Prin FII3 400

Dir Governmental Relations Unc Leaning

forward

FII2 400

Finance Services Director FII3 460


Complexity

levels

Indicators



G


this level are 700 (median)

and 608 (mode.)

Education likely

needed Senior specialists in scientific or learned disciplines who are authoritative in their field and senior managers with substantial knowledge about the organization, its mission and objectives Mastery of an abstract discipline, for example, at a university

Respected author of scientific or theory-based books about what to do in difficult situations, based on deep and broad knowledge of the field

II in

managerial breadth

Leaning back

GII2 400

Exec Dir PERA GII3 460

Solid in the box

GII2 460

TOTAL time to learn

Functional experts (aka gurus), whose substantial experience and depth of knowledge enable them to write the book, and determine functional policy and practice

Commissioner-Mediation Service GII3 528

Skill level

Leaning forward

GII2 528

GII3 608

III in

managerial breadth

Leaning back

GIII2 528 Commissioners of large agencies are found here: Commr-Admin GIV3 920 Commr- Educ GIV3 1056 Commr-MMB GV3 1216 Commr-Transp GV3 1400

Asst Commr Revenue Deputy Commr Labor & Industry GIII3 608 Solid in

the box GIII2 608

Commr-Commerce GIII3 700

Leaning forward

GIII2 700 Commr-Agriculture Commr-DEED GIII3 800

Complexity levels



H

Authoritative books are written about him or her National leadership role and authoritative knowledge that is

recognized beyond the state of Minnesota Likely to be selected for national panels and/or be quoted because

of their acknowledged leadership in complex scientific and/or professional activities

VI in

managerial breadth

Governor HVI3 1840

Solid in the box HVI3 2112

Leaning forward HVI3 2432


Integrating Know-How (aka Managerial Breadth)

Integrating Know-How is one of the easiest parts of the total Know-How rating and the 2nd element of a jobs Know-How rating. It considers the need to integrate and manage progressively more diverse functions and is used to rank managerial breadth and scope, from similar to very different functions. When required, basic and job-specific supervisory and managerial KSAs are included in the Job-Specific part of a Know-How rating. This Know-How may be exercised

consultatively as well as executively, and involves the areas of organizing, planning, executing, controlling, and evaluating. The overall size of an organization (that is, the State of Minnesota) directly influences the number of managerial breadth categories, because organizational size often reflects requirements for increased managerial complexity and diversity. Columns II VI are used to reflect additional scale, complexity, diversity, and size.

T. Task

I. Activity

II. Related

III. Diverse IV. Compre-

hensive V. Very large agency mgmt

VI. Total mgmt of state

# of job classes 1 (


T Jobs usually focus on completing very simple, routine,

repetitive tasks rather than integrating those tasks into the units workflow.

Task

Theres little need for the employee to coordinate work efforts with others.

Work is structured in such a way that the tasks to be completed are presented to the employee in the order in which they are to be done.

I The vast majority of positions throughout State

service are placed here.

Activity

Most individual contributors and most supervisors are here; some managers are, too.

Professional, supervisory and managerial positions are responsible for a singular function, e.g. Transit planning, budget and accounting.

II

This rating is typically used for managerial positions; its very rare for supervisors to have this rating.

Related

Positions typically manage functional activities and tasks through subordinate supervisors.

Incumbents are expected to integrate or coordinate fairly homogeneous activities and functions with similar purposes, but which have competing needs and interests.

The number and diversity of functions are increasingly important; however, functions are still fairly similar in nature.

The emphasis is on organizational planning and diverse programs integration, rather than doing.

III Positions are responsible for integrating several

unrelated functions

Diverse

Managers characteristically face diverse objectives and goals and competing needs for resources.

There are few supervisory classes with this rating (see next chart)

Broad-scale organizational planning and control assume greater importance.

Examples o Assistant Commissioners in medium to large-sized

agencies o Deputy Commissioners in medium to large-sized

agencies o Commissioners of small to medium-sized agencies

IV

Positions typically have overall management for a large state agency or a broad array of functions in a very large agency.

Comprehensive

Examples: o Deputy Commissioners of large agencies o Commissioners of medium-sized agencies

with broad impact

V Positions typically have overall leadership of one of

the largest and most complex state agencies.

Very Large Agency Management

Examples: Commissioners of large agencies and medium-sized agencies with broad impact (e.g., Corrections, Finance, Health, Human Services, Natural Resources, Public Safety, Transportation)

VI

Total Management of the State

Examples: Governor, Chancellor of MnSCU


Integrating Know-How T. Task

I. Activity

II. Related

III. Diverse

Depth and Breath of Job Specific Knowledge 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 L. Limited A. Primary B/ Elementary Vocational

C. Vocational D. Advanced Vocational

E. Basic Specialized

F. Seasoned Professional

TIP: Why are there shaded areas on the Hay Guide Charts? Shaded areas serve as a boundary or guide for raters. For example, a position with a C Vocational Job Specific Knowledge rating would not have a II Related Integrating rating.

Distribution of State Classes by Know-How Points [technical, integrating and human relations]


Human Relations Skills This is the 3rd element of a jobs Know-How rating: the active, practicing interpersonal skills typically required for productive working relationships and to work with, or through, others inside and/or outside of the organization to get work accomplished. It assumes that EVERY State job requires a foundation of (1) Basic Human Relations Skills and some jobs require additional skills on a regular basis. To be effective, an employee must typically be proficient at the highest level of Human Relations Skill regularly required for the job.

1. Basic 2. Important 3. Critical # classes 193 (12%) 715 (43%) 745 (45%) Description

General effectiveness that is ordinary for everyday life is a basic work consideration. Tact and courtesy are required, including conduct of relationships in which information is requested and provided.

Alternative or combined skills in understanding, teaming with, collaborating with, and/or influencing other people are important and specific considerations to cause action or understanding by others.

Alternative and combined skills in developing, collaborating with, persuading, motivating and leading other people are essential and overriding considerations.

Indicators

Tactful, with common courtesy Factual exchange of information Failure to exercise this level of skill will make waves, cause problems, and eventually interfere with effective job performance Job-Specific Know-How is relatively MORE important than Human Relations Know-How

Regularly interact with others and interactions often require understanding of and sensitivity to others points of view and assertiveness to influence outcomes May involve collaboration Employees who assign, monitor and review others work usually need at least this level of human relations skill Job-Specific Know-How is relatively EQUAL in importance to Human Relations Know-How

Able to persuade, motivate, lead and accomplish work goals through others Negotiate, sell, supervise, and manage outcomes Strong interpersonal skills are the key to success in these jobs usually supervisory or managerial Characterized by constant, daily interaction with others Job-Specific Know-How is relatively LESS important than Human Relations Know-How

Examples

Automotive Mechanic Baker Carpenter Customer Services Specialist Delivery Van Driver Food Service Worker General Maintenance Worker Office and Admin Spec and Int Parks Worker Zoo Life Support Operator

Most professional level positions Community Liaison Rep Food Inspector 1 Labor Investigator Employee Development Spec Personnel Officer Recreation Therapist

Most supervisors and managers Labor Relations Rep Sr and Principal Lottery Sales Manager Management Analyst Supv 3 Mediator State Program Admin Mgr


Human Relations Know-How Q&A Lessons learned from Hay Group consultant, Al Bunnett, as part of the 2008 Quality Assurance review. The 2008 QA review included several established non-supervisory classes with a 3 in Human Relations Know-How. Q Is the following an accurate description of the standards the State should be using to determine a "3" in Human Relations? A "3" in Human Relations is appropriate for supervisory classes using the Public Employees Labor Relations Act (PELRA) as a guide for decision making?

A Mostly yes if the job exists for the purpose of supervising its staff. (see next question)

Q What are typical supervisory situations that would argue for a "2" rather than a "3" in Human Relations?

A But when the staff size is small and well-educated (we often use bench scientific subordinates as an example), consider using "2. In this example the supervision element of the job is usually subordinate to some personal technical/professional contribution. So as a supervisor the job might be kind of ordinary, but the incumbent might be judged a superior performer based on her super technical contribution. HR skills are "2" in such a case.

Q A "3" is also appropriate for positions/classifications in State government responsible for changing behavior, e.g. selling products, services or ideas. In this context, changing behavior has a very narrow definition and relies on understanding how an employer measures successful performance. Changing behavior is so essential to the classification/position that there's a direct correlation between performance and salary and/or continued employment. Typically, a percent of total salary is awarded as a sales

commission based on successful sales/changes in behavior. In some positions, program/salary dollars increase or decrease based directly on an incumbent's performance which ultimately effects employment or layoff.

A This describes sales-type situations well and the use of "3" would be typical in most situations for individual contributors.

Q What are the guidelines for using a "3" vs a "2" in Human Relations when subordinate staff are unclassified or non-state employees, e.g. Student Workers, inmates, contractors?

A For Inmates and student workers "2" should be sufficient for the supervisor. In this situation, the State does not expect to invest much in changing behavior. A German incentive plan is in place. (Do as instructed or you will be fired. You are easily replaced.) Supervising contractors might be more troublesome since they are sometimes more difficult to replace. But in general, I lean toward "2" since the contractor usually want to please the employer, their behavioral vector is to conform to the supervisor's wishes. Good references and perhaps a follow-on contract create incentives for the contractor not to stress the motivational skills of the supervisor.

In general, where the job must maintain longer term relationships (years, not weeks) with the subordinate, "3" is a better choice.


COMBINING THE THREE PARTS OF KNOW-HOW

NOTE: This table is laid out similarly to the Know-How chart used by Hay raters, for ease in use. (2) Integrating/managerial breadth

(1) Technical/ specialized

T. Task

I. Activity

II. Related

III.

Diverse

IV.

Compre-hensive

V. Very large

agency mgmt

VI. Total mgmt of the state

(3) Human relations 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Practical procedures

L. Limited


Problem Solving is the original self-starting thinking required by the job for analyzing, evaluating, creating, reasoning, arriving at and making conclusions. Problem Solving measures the intensity of the mental process that uses Know-How to: (1) identify, (2) define, and (3) resolve problems. It is a percentage of Know-How, reflecting the fact that you think with what you know. This is true of even the most creative work. Ideas are put together from something already there. The raw material of any thinking is knowledge of facts, principles and means. Problem Solving includes two dimensions:

Context (aka Thinking Environment)

Thinking Challenge In the example on the right, Problem Solving is expressed as E3 (33%) (Context level E, Thinking Challenge level 3 at 33% of the Know-How points).

ContextE. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge3. Interpretive

33%Context

E. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge3. Interpretive

33%

CH

APT

ER 2

: Pro

blem

Sol

ving


The Two Elements of Problem Solving: Context Context includes the influences or environment that limit or guide decision-making such as rules, instructions, procedures, standards, policies, principles from fields of science and academic disciplines. Positions are guided by organizational, departmental or functional goals, policies, objectives, practices or circumscribed by procedures and instructions. In general, policies describe the what of a subject matter, procedures detail the steps needed to follow through on a policy (i.e., how, where, when, by whom) and instructions outline the specific aspects of how to perform the tasks, such as the operation of a machine or how to select the appropriate letters to use in particular situations. HayGroup cautions against the mechanical application of organization echelons to determine levels. However, each job is expected to resolve problems to meet its specific accountabilities within an organizational framework or context.

TIP: Since Problem Solving is always a percentage of the Know-How rating, the letter chosen for Context will generally be at the same level or one letter lower than the Job-Specific Know-How letter chosen for a position. For example, if the Hay raters choose E for Job-Specific Know-How, the Context for the position would typically be E or D; the Context rating would never be F or G.

A

Strict Routine

As of 7/10, there were 7 active job classes with this rating.

Positions are guided by simple rules and detailed instructions.

Instructions or orders, usually given orally, usually specify in detail the sequence and timing of the tasks to be undertaken with little or no latitude for the employee to consider alternative procedures.

B

Routine

As of 7/10, there were approx. 80 active job classes with this rating.

Positions are guided by established routines and standing instructions.

Instructions usually provide the latitude to consider variations in the sequence of procedures based on situations encountered within the work setting.

C

Semi-routine

As of 7/10, there were approx. 270 active job classes with this rating. Examples include Aides, skilled administrative support positions, skilled trades, technicians and some first level supervisors.

Positions are guided by somewhat diversified procedures and precedents.

While assigned tasks follow procedures, latitude is permitted because of changing work circumstances. Incumbents determine the most appropriate procedure or precedent to follow.


D

Standardized

As of 7/10, there were approx. 480 active job classes with this rating. The Problem Solving point mode at this level is 50 points, the median is 57 points. Examples include:

o Entry level professionals o Most secondary professionals o Some third level professionals o Some first level supervisors

Positions are guided by substantially diversified business or academic procedures and specialized standards.

Changing priorities or differing situations encountered in the work environment allow the employee latitude to consider which among many procedures should be followed in what sequence to achieve the required job results.

E

Clearly Defined

As of 7/10, there were approx. 710 active job classes with this rating. Examples include:

o Some third level professionals o Advanced professionals o Professional supervisors o Some managers, directors and executive

directors Positions are guided by policies and principles rather

than procedures. Incumbents determine how best to accomplish goals or

resolve work challenges Many higher level professional, supervisory and lower

and mid level managerial classes are rated at this level.

PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES

D - Standardized Information Tech Spec 1 and 2

Forensic Scientist 1 Personnel Officer Pers Officer Sr and Princ Pollution Control Spec and Int Psychologist Registered Nurse/Sr/Princ Registered Nurse Supervisor State Patrol Trooper State Programs Admin and Int Warehouse Examiner Supv

E Clearly Defined Dentist Engineer Admin and Princ Finance Specialist 1, 2 and 3 Forensic Scientist 2 and 3 Hydrologist 4 Hydrologist 5

Information Tech Spec 3, 4, 5 Personnel Director 1 and 2 Personnel Representative Planner Principal State Psychologist 2 and 3 RN Advanced Practitioner Safety Investigator 3 and 4

State Prog Admin Supv Sr and Princ Systems Analysis Unit Supv


F

Broadly Defined


Positions are guided by broadly defined policies and specific objectives.

Incumbents determine what needs to be done in applying broad policies, in establishing a plan of action, and in determining the priorities and processes needed to achieve the objective.

G

Generally Defined


Positions are guided by general policies and goals based on broad public policies.

These positions determine the organizations (i.e., the State of Minnesotas) functional direction; the goal is specified in only very general terms, such as increase in international operations or enter new markets.

H

Abstractly Defined

Positions are guided by the general laws of nature and/or science, within a framework of business philosophy and cultural standards.

The Governor is the only position in State government with this rating. The Governor determines the strategic direction of State government, consistent with its charter, and the requirements for the organizations survival and continuity.

PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES

F Broadly Defined Assistant Commissioner DOC Assistant State Negotiator Commissioner Human Rights Demographer State Deputy Commissioner Health Exec Dir Animal Health Bd

Exec Dir PERA Health Care Program Mgr Sr Personnel Director 3 and 4 State Patrol Chief

G Generally Defined Commissioner Administration Commissioner Agriculture

Commissioner DHS Exec Dir Investment Board

H Abstractly Defined Governor


Hay Guide Chart Profile Method:

a 3-level Thinking Challenge process

Like the process that

turns loose vegetation into rolls

of hay, the Hay method of job

evaluation takes relevant pieces of

information about a job; subjects them to

an organized, standardized

process; and results in consistent ratings

that can be used for a variety of purposes.

Thinking Challenge

Thinking Challenge includes the nature of the problems encountered and the mental processes used to resolve the problems. The scale ranges from simple problems to very complex issues, with the premise that simple issues recur regularly in the same form and after awhile are resolved by rote or instinct, but very difficult issues require substantial thinking and deliberation. The types of situations encountered and the processes involved in identifying, defining or resolving related problems are considered. Thinking Challenge reflects the degree of difficulty in finding improvements and adapting to changes.

1

Repetitive


This level has been compared to a true/false test situation, with very limited options from which to choose.

Employees are expected to resolve identical situations by making simple choices among a limited number of learned things.

KSAs are applied directly to the job, with little need to exercise independent judgment.

Each situation is nearly the same as the prior one and employees make correct decisions through simple choices, e.g., sorting operations.

2

Patterned

As of 7/10, there were approx. 200 active job classes with this rating, many of them AFSCME positions.

This level has been compared to a multiple-choice test situation with a finite number of choices, but more varied than true/false.

Employees resolve similar situations by discriminating between choices of learned things that generally follow a well-defined pattern.

These jobs are confronted with multiple-choice situations, but have learned which choice is most appropriate for each situation through prior exposure or experience.


3

Interpretive

As of 7/10, there were approx. 1040 active job classes (about 60%) with this rating. Examples include:

o More complex AFSCME positions o Most professionals and supervisors o Some managers o Some directors and executive directors

This level has been compared to an essay test situation, where more independent thought and creativity is involved.

Employees resolve differing situations requiring a search for solutions or new applications within the area of learned things.

Experience is needed to know the options and make sound judgments.

Employees need to be aware of and interpret choices; theyre expected to have dealt with similar, but not always identical, situations before.

These jobs are confronted with problems that fall in the cracks and resolve them by reading between the lines.

Solutions result from comparing problem elements to reference points within ones own experience and then using ones judgment to match the appropriate prior decision.

4

Adaptive


o Some advanced professionals o Higher level supervisors o Most managers o Some assistant directors o Most directors o Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners,

Assistant Commissioners Positions are expected to resolve variable situations

requiring analytical, interpretive, evaluative and/or constructive thinking.

Situations are often more hypothetical, with the need to develop alternatives.

Positions deal with situations that are largely new. Employees adapt trends or programs that are known in

the U.S. to specific circumstances The situation to be resolved includes circumstances,

facts and issues that are different than those that have been encountered in the past.

The employee has to consider various possible courses of action and ponder their consequences before taking or recommending further steps.


5

Uncharted

As of 7/10, there was 1 active job class with this rating: Chancellor MnSCU.

Positions are expected to resolve novel or nonrecurring path finding situations requiring the development of new concepts and imaginative approaches.

These positions are confronted with the unknown, in situations with little or no precedents.

The employee must originate new concepts or approaches without guidance from others.

Deliberations are often necessarily time-consuming.

Job analysts choose between two percentages for each combination of Context and Thinking Challenge (low and high) to fine-tune the rating. For example, a D3 combination could be assigned D3 (29%) for 50 points or D3 (33%) for 57 points. Once the Know-How rating and the Problem Solving percentage for a position are agreed upon, Hay raters use the Point Conversion Table included with the Hay Guide Charts to determine the positions total number of Problem Solving points. To use this table, choose the column that matches the positions total number of Know-How points, look along the left side of the table for the % youve chosen, then find the number where these two intersect for the total Problem Solving points. For example, a 33% Problem Solving for 200 Know-How points results in 66 total Problem Solving points.

JOB COMPONENT PATTERNS

Know-How points to Problem Solving percentages KH Problem Solving Percentages PTS 66% 57% 50% 43% 38% 33% 29% 25% 22% 920 x 800 x x 700 x x 608 x x 528 x x 460 s x x 400 x x 350 x x x 304 x x 264 x x x 230 s x x 200 x x 175 x x s 152 s x x s 132 s x x 115 s x

X= Typical/Probable S = Selectively

In any decision situation, the amount of relevant information available is inversely proportional to the importance of the decision. (Cooke's Law)--Paul Dickson, comp. (The Official Rules)


Accountability does not mean being responsible for getting ones own work done. Rather, it reflects responsibility for actions and their consequences and the measured effect of the job on end results for the organization. It includes three factors:

Freedom to Act/Empowerment (i.e., freedom to act on decisions);

Magnitude (i.e., size of budget and magnitude of influence); and

Job Impact (i.e., the way in which actions affect end results in the agency).

You will see Accountability expressed as D2C 76 (D level Freedom to Act, 2 level magnitude, and C level Job Impact for a total of 76 Accountability points). These three factors measure the actual effects of Know-How and Problem Solving, and are considered together in the way that makes the most sense overall for each position.

D. Generally Regulated

2 Small Magnitud

Contributory

76

D. Generally Regulated

2 Small Magnitud

Contributory

76

CH

APT

ER 3

: Acc

ount

abili

ty


The Three Elements of Accountability:

Freedom to Act/Empowerment

This aspect is officially titled Empowerment, but it is more commonly known by its previous title, Freedom to Act. It involves the degree of personal or procedural control or guidance exercised over the position. For example, what constraints are put on an employee in this job? Are there set procedures to follow or does the employee have broad authority to carry out managements or the Governors direction? How closely supervised is the position? What kinds of decisions are made higher up in the organization?

L

Limited

As of 7/10, there were 2 active job classes with this rating: Service Worker and Supported Employment Worker.

These jobs are subject to explicit instructions covering simple tasks.

The nature of the tasks are totally confining; instructions are exact and supervision is continuous.

A

Prescribed


These jobs are subject to prescribed instructions covering assigned tasks and/or immediate supervision.

These jobs are given explicit instructions, orally or in writing, that state the step-by-step sequence of tasks to be completed to achieve a specific end result. No deviation is permitted without first seeking permission.

TIP: A positions Freedom to Act rating is typically the same letter or one lower than the Context choice for Problem Solving (i.e., a D in Context would result in a D or C for Freedom to Act). However, in some of the largest jobs, Accountability is one letter higher (i.e., a G in Thinking Context with an H in Freedom to Act).

B

Controlled


These positions are subject to instructions and established work routines and/or close supervision.

Employees have minor latitude to rearrange the sequence of completing various tasks or duties based on changed work situations, workflow, etc.

C Standardized


These jobs are subject, wholly or in part, to standardized practices and procedures, general work instructions and/or supervision of progress and results.

These employees usually perform a greater variety of tasks and duties and clearly understand, on a daily basis, what results are expected by the supervisor.

Employees are not permitted to deviate from standard practices and procedures, but may be permitted to set their own priorities, subject to the supervisors approval.


D

Generally Regulated


o Some entry level professionals o Most second level professionals o Some third level professionals o Some first level supervisors

These jobs are subject, wholly or in part, to practices and procedures covered by precedents or well-defined policy and/or supervisory review.

These employees are permitted to determine their own priorities and may deviate from established procedures and practices as long as the end results meet standards of acceptability (e.g., quality, volume, timeliness, etc.).

Supervision over work activities is usually indirect and review of work results usually occurs after the fact.

E

Directed


o High level professionals o Many supervisors o Managers and directors

This option was previously called Reviewed. These positions, by their nature or size, are subject to

broad practice and procedures covered by functional precedents and policies and/or achievement of a circumscribed operational activity and/or managerial direction.

These positions, most often managers of functional areas or very senior individual contributors, generally have the independence needed to achieve operational goals, provided that activities are consistent with

approved operating plans and objectives and functional policies and precedents.

The management direction given these employees establishes expected results.

These positions determine how and when the results will be achieved.

F

Oriented Direction

As of 7/10, there were 58 active job classes with this rating (e.g. Assistant Commissioners, Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Executive Directors).

These positions, by their nature or size, are broadly subject to functional policies and goals and/or general managerial direction.

Employees usually report to the managers of major operating areas in the agency or are the organizations top management and are permitted wide discretion, provided that activities are consistent with operating policies and precedents within that function.

Actions that will impact other functional or operating areas usually require approval before they may be implemented.

Commissioners are subject only to guidance from the Governors Office.

G

Guided


These positions are subject only to broad policy and general management guidance.

Employees establish functional policy as the Commissioners and some Deputy Commissioners of State agencies.


This is a major decision-making level in a State agency, which determines the results to be achieved within that agency.

Commissioners are subject only to guidance from the Governors office.

H

Strategic Guidance

As of 7/10, there were 3 active job classes with this rating: Commissioner of DHS, Commissioner of DOT and Chancellor MnSCU.

These positions are characterized by a comprehensive and controlling effect on the largest State of Minnesota agencies and on the people of the state.

Positions are subject only to guidance from the Governors office.

I

Governor/Chief Justice


Magnitude This is the portion of the total organization encompassed by the positions primary purpose. Its most typically indicated by the general dollar size of the area(s) most directly affected by the job, i.e., the resources over which the position has control or influence. Hay raters consider a variety of issues. For example, what sort of budget does the employee in this position control? Does this figure include mostly salaries? How are others involved in deciding how the money is spent? If there isnt any budget, what kind of influence does the employee have over what goes on in the agency?

TIP: The operational budget numbers change as the Accountability Magnitude Index (AMI) changes. The current AMI is 7.0 (Oct 2009). This means that each of the dollar amounts on the Magnitude portion of the Accountability Guide Chart is adjusted in accordance with the current AMI by multiplying each number by 7.0

1. Very small or indeterminate (under $700,000) 2. Small ($700,000 - $14 million) 3. Medium ($14 million - $140 million) 4. Large ($140 million - $1.4 billion) 5. Very Large ($1.4 billion - $14 billion) 6. (Over $14 billion)

1

Very Small or Indeterminate

As of 7/10, there were approx. 990 (about 56%) active job classes with this rating.

The magnitude is a very small or indeterminate portion of the Agency mission.

Operational budget influenced is under $700,000. Most State jobs are 1 limited or indeterminate

because either the $ amount controlled is under $700,000 OR others have a significant effect on the decisions made.

2

Small


The magnitude is a small portion of the State or Agency mission.

Operational budget influenced is $700,000 to $14,000,000 ($14 million).

Most State jobs that arent placed in 1 above are found here, either because the $ amount clearly controlled falls in this area OR a positions role is very broad and contributes to a much larger amount, although others also have a significant effect on the decisions made.

3

Medium


The magnitude is a medium portion of the State or Agency mission.

Operational budget influenced is $14,000,000 ($14 million) to $140,000,000 ($140 million).


4

Large


The magnitude is a large portion of the State or major Agency mission.

Operational budget influenced is $140,000,000 ($140 million) to $1,400,000,000 ($1.4 billion).

5

Very Large


The magnitude is a very large portion of the States mission.

Operational budget influenced is $1,400,000,000 ($1.4 billion) to $14,000,000,000 ($14 billion).

6

Whole State

As of 7/10, there were 3 active job classes with this rating: Commissioner of Education, Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, and Executive Director Investment Board.

Operational budget influenced is more than $14,000,000,000 ($14 billion).


Job Impact A positions Job Impact is considered to be indirect (indirect or contributory) or direct and measurable (shared or primary). It involves the way in which the positions actions affect end results in the agency. For example, how does the employee influence the business of the agency directly or indirectly? Does the employee provide advisory or interpretive services for others to use in making decisions? Is the job an information-recording one? Does it provide a necessary service with a relatively small effect on the business of the agency? Contributory and primary are, by far, the most frequently used options. The Hay raters often must determine whether the position is primary over a smaller or indeterminate amount or contributory over a larger amount. To make this decision, they consider the positions primary function in the organization and reflect that organizational role through the rating.

I

Indirect


This option was previously called Remote. Positions provide informational, recording or incidental

services for use by others related to some important end result.

Job activity may be complex, but the effect on the overall organization is relatively minor.

Employees typically collect or process information or data for other positions with more direct impact on the organization.

Employees perform tasks with little recognition of the use to which the end results will be put or what they influence.

This Job Impact option is the least direct of the four available options.

C

Contributory

As of 7/10, there were approx. 1025 active job classes (About 58%) with this rating.

Positions provide interpretive, advisory or facilitating services for use by others in taking action.

This type of Job Impact is appropriate where jobs are accountable for providing significant advice and counsel in addition to information and/or analysis, and when decisions are likely to be made by virtue of that counsel.

Such impacts are commonly found in staff or support functions that significantly influence decisions.

For example, a product manager may provide recommendations that, when acted upon, materially influence sales revenues; a labor relations specialist makes recommendations that contribute to union settlements of a given magnitude.

Positions are generally supportive in nature. Positions role is to provide advice, counsel or

recommendations to assist decision-makers and/or action takers.

This Job Impact option is more direct than the Indirect option.


S

Shared

As of 7/10, there were 10 active job classes with this rating, including the Governors position.

Positions participate with peers within or outside the organizational unit to make decisions and take actions jointly; a basic rule is that sharing cannot exist vertically in an organization it can only exist among peers.

Shared impacts can exist between peer jobs and/or functions, and suggest a degree of partnership in or joint accountability for the results.

This option is rarely used; its for equal partnership situations such as the Governors shared decision-making with the Legislature or in self-directed work teams.

Responsibility and accountability are shared equally with others.

For example, there may be shared accountability between engineering and manufacturing functions for a successful product.

A committee where each member has an equal vote is an example of shared accountability.

This Job Impact option is more direct than Contributory because these positions share direct accountability fairly equally. However, since it is shared, these positions have lower Job Impact than a position that is considered to be Primary.

P

Primary


Positions are directly accountable for making decisions and taking actions, directly or through subordinate positions, which determine and control the results.

Line management positions are generally considered to be controlling their own operating areas.

These positions control the Job Impact on end results, where any shared accountability with others is secondary.

Such impacts are commonly found in operations and managerial positions that have line accountability for key end result areas, whether theyre large or small.

For example, a supervisor may be primarily accountable for the production or output (value added) of a unit within the context of available resources (e.g., human resources and controllable expenses); whereas the Minncor Vice-President of Operations may have a primary impact upon the total value added in the manufacture of products or upon costs of goods manufactured.

The key is that the job exists to have the controlling influence on certain end results of a given magnitude, and that accountability is not shared with others, i.e., the buck stops here.

This is the most direct Job Impact option. There are also fine-tuning decisions to be made in Accountability, with several options available for each rating combination. For example, C1P can be assigned 57 points, 66 points or 76 points.


A fourth factor, special conditions, is used when appropriate for certain jobs where physical effort, noxious physical conditions, physical hazards and/or sensory attention demands are significant elements. Prior to 1995, when the sensory attention demands aspect was added, this section was called Working Conditions. These points are typically not applied to professional level positions for two reasons: Professional positions are less

likely to spend as much of their time in conditions that emphasize physical effort, noxious physical conditions, physical hazards, or sustained sensory attention demands.

Even if the professional positions

do experience some of these conditions, the effect of Special Conditions points on the overall Hay rating becomes increasingly negligible as the Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability point values become higher.

Special Conditions points have much more of an effect on AFSCME-type positions, where the overall number of points are typically lower than those of professionals, supervisors and managers. To read existing Hay ratings that include Special Conditions points, it helps to know the following codes. Each of the four elements is assigned 0 10 points for relevant situations.

P = Physical Effort E = Environment H = Hazards S = Sensory Attention (added in 1995)

CH

APT

ER 4

: Spe

cial

Con

ditio

ns


JOB PROFILES The jobs size and profile serve as starting points for many job evaluation applications. Job size is determined by the total of the factor point values for Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability, and reflects the jobs relative value to the organization. The relative proportions of Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability that make up the job determine its profile (see Figure 2). The job profile concept provides a better understanding of how jobs fit into organizations. The balance between Accountability and Problem Solving reflects the extent to which the job is primarily concerned with achieving results or is focused on research and analysis. The balance among Accountability, Know-How, and Problem Solving reflects the level and type of work in an organization. For example, entry-level positions typically focus on Know-How. Accountability focus grows through career development into jobs that impact the organization more broadly through application of acquired experience and problem-solving capability.

Figure 2: Proportions of Accountability, Know-How, and Problem Solving Commissioner: Profile: KH-PS-AC Large Agency 37-25-38

KH37%

PS 25%

AC38%

Commissioner: Profile: KH-PS-AC Small Agency 43-25-32

KH43%

PS 25%

AC32%

Office and Admin Spec Profile: KH-PS-AC 74-12-14

KH74%

PS 12%

AC14%

S In entry-level jobs, Know-How may account for 70% of job content, while at the CEO level Know-How may only be 30% of job content (even though, of course, it is significantly more important than Know-How for an entry-level position).

CH

APT

ER 5

: Fin

e Tu

ning


Short Profiles There are Short Profiles that describe the relationship of the point factor values for a single position or classification. In some positions, Accountability is higher than Problem Solving. These positions have an Up profile. This means that deadlines and end results are more important to successful job performance than analysis and research. As the gap between Problem Solving and Accountability increases (greater Accountability), deadlines and end results take on greater significance. Usually, jobs of this nature are supervisors and managers. Up profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as +1, +2, +3, etc. (EI2 230 E3(38) 87 E2C 100 = 417 + 1) In some positions, Problem Solving and Accountability are equal. In these positions, analysis and the search for answers to difficult work issues is as important as deadlines. These jobs are called Level. Level profiles include positions such as Research Analyst, Planner, and Auditor. Level profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as =. (EI2 200 E3(33) 66 D1C 66 = 332 =) In some positions, Problem Solving is greater than Accountability. In these positions, analysis and the search for answers is greater than deadlines and end results. These positions are called Down jobs. Down profiles are often found among positions responsible for scientific research. The States Research Scientist classification illustrates this concept. Down profiles are written at the end of a Hay rating as -1, -2, -3, etc. (FI2 264 E4(43) 115 E2C 100 =479 -1)

Written Verbal Interpretation

+ 4 Up 4 Accountability is four steps higher than Problem Solving

+ 3 Up 3 Accountability is three steps higher than Problem Solving

+ 2 Up 2 Accountability is two steps higher than Problem Solving

+ 1 Up 1 Accountability is one step higher than Problem Solving

= Level Accountability and Problem Solving are equal

- 1 Down 1 Accountability is one step lower than Problem Solving

- 2 Down 2 Accountability is two steps lower than Problem Solving

- 3 Down 3 Accountability is three steps lower than Problem Solving

- 4 Down 4 Accountability is three steps lower than Problem Solving


Guide to Hay Evaluation Profiles Based on Problem Solving %, Know-How Points and total points.

PS Short Know-How Points % Profile 115 132 152 175 200 230 264 304 350 400 460 528 608 700 25 = 173 198 228 261 25 +1 177 203 233 268 29 -1 177 203 233 268 307 353 29 = 181 208 238 275 314 362 29 +1 186 213 245 282 323 372 33 -1 186 213 245 282 323 372 33 = 191 218 252 289 332 382 438 29 +2 191 220 252 291 333 383 440 33 +1 298 342 393 451 38 -1 298 342 393 451 519 597 38 = 307 352 404 464 534 614 33 +2 308 353 406 466 536 617 43 -2 353 406 466 536 617 707 812 38 +1 363 417 479 551 634 727 835 43 -1 417 479 551 634 727 835 43 = 430 494 568 654 750 860 38 +2 432 496 571 657 752 865 50 -2 432 496 571 657 752 865 992 1142 43 +1 511 588 677 775 890 1022 1176 50 -1 511 588 677 775 890 1022 1176 50 = 528 608 700 800 920 1056 1216 43 +2 531 611 702 805 924 162 1222 57 -2 611 702 805 924 1062 1222 50 +1 725 830 954 1096 1262 1450 57 -1 725 830 954 1096 1262 1450 57 = 750 860 988 1136 1308 1500 50 +2 755 864 994 1142 1312 1510 66 -2 864 994 1142 1312 1510 57 +1 89

Hay Manual

Documents

Transcript of Hay Manual