Part One.docx

Part One: Job Analysis and Design Job Analysis Human resource management in organizations virtually always requires an in-depth understanding of the work that people do in that organization. The process by which this understanding is developed is a job analysis; a job description is the documentat...

Part One: Job Analysis and Design Job Analysis Human resource management in organizations virtually always requires an in-depth understanding of the work that people do in that organization. The process by which this understanding is developed is a job analysis; a job description is the documentation of the results of that analysis. While these two terms are often used interchangeably, we strongly recommend against such usage, as job analysis is a process and a job description is a product of that process. Simply put, a job analysis is a systematic process for collecting and analyzing information about a job. In a more comprehensive and detailed definition, Scholars defined job analysis as ‘‘the collection of data on (a) job-oriented behavior, such as job tasks and work procedures; (b) more abstract ‘worker-oriented’ behavior, such as decision-making, supervision, and information processing; (c) behaviors involved in interactions with machines, materials, and tools; (d) methods of evaluating performance, such as productivity and error rates; (e) job contexts, such as working conditions and type of compensation systems; and (f) personnel requirements, such as skills, physical ability, and personality traits’’ This definition of job analysis focuses on the systematic collection of data on the observable job behaviors of employees and what is accomplished by these behaviors and what technologies are required to do so. Given the importance that job analyses play in the management of human capital, it is surprising that job analyses are not regarded as a more critical tool in the field of human resources. Over three decades ago, a researcher observed, ‘Although job analysis is an essential feature of every activity engaged in by industrial-organizational psychologists, the subject is treated in most textbooks in a manner which suggests that any fool can do it and thus is a task which can be delegated to the lowest level technician’. Unfortunately, the situation has not much changed, and this important function is not given the proper degree of attention and respect either by psychologists or HR professionals. Applications of Job Analyses A variety of important reasons support conducting job analyses in the workplace. These include recruitment, candidate selection, employee training and development, performance management, organizational management and planning, and litigation protection. Each of these will be briefly reviewed. Recruitment The first external application of job analysis is in recruitment, when the job description becomes the basis for recruiting applicants. In beginning to fill a vacant job, the recruiter needs to know the job responsibilities as well as the skills and other characteristics required of candidates. Not only is it necessary for the recruiter to know these things, but candidates need to know the kind of job for which they are applying. The need for a job description should be obvious to all. Candidate Selection In our experience, candidate selection accounts for most job analyses. Employers need to know in some detail the work activities involved in each job vacancy and, most importantly, the knowledge, skills, and abilities— the competencies— required to fill that job successfully. While most employers maintain files of job descriptions, there is widespread understanding that many, if not most, of these job descriptions are dated and need to be redone, especially for jobs deemed to be critically important. The work activities of a job change over time, as do the requirements for successfully carrying out those activities. As an example, consider the impact that the computer has had on the work activities both in the office and on the shop floor. Administrative positions that once had a heavy dose of taking shorthand and transcription are now given over to a very different set of activities, ones that require a rather different set of requirements. Similarly, the introduction of the computer onto the shop floor and into the warehouse has produced an equally large impact on the work activities. The tightening of bolts on the assembly line is now done by a computer-driven robot, the contents of the warehouse are all bar coded, and most jobs require computer skills for success. Such changes are ongoing and have enormous impact on the competency requirements for hiring. And these changes can be specified only by a careful job analysis. Further, it is important to recognize that many skills are specific to a given occupation and that these occupationally specific skills are only be identified by a job analysis. One use of job analyses is in developing behavioral interviewing protocols for candidate screening. The job description that is the end-product of the job analysis should provide a clear picture of the work and activities and the requirements. These then should provide the basis on which to develop a behavioral interviewing protocol— questions inquiring into a candidate’s experience in such work activities and seeking to establish the degree to which the candidate has the necessary requirements to perform the important work activities. This is a method for developing a behavioral interview much preferred to the more generic approach that lacks a specific job- relevant focus. Another important use of job analyses is as the criteria for validity studies of any pre- employment selection procedure, especially psychological tests. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing specify that the job requirements involved in studies of predictor-criteria relationships should be ‘‘determined by a job analysis’’. In other words, the validity of a psychological test or any procedure for selecting job candidates must be determined by the correlation of that procedure with an important aspect of job performance as identified by a job analysis. Employee Training and Development Once a current job analysis becomes available, the competency of current employees in that job becomes apparent. Employees without a high level of the identified necessary competencies will be less productive than they otherwise should be. For example, if a new applicant tracking system is introduced in the HR function, someone has to be hired to manage that system. But, implicit in that decision, is the question of the competency of the existing HR staff to use that new system. Without knowing the answer to that question, the positive impact of the introduction of this new system will be less than intended. Thus, the job analysis used for the new hire should lead to an analysis of the competencies of the existing staff, and a training and development program should be instituted to produce the necessary competencies. The job analysis can impact on the individual training and development level as well. It is rare that even those candidates who are the best fit developed through the job analysis are a perfect fit. The selection process should have identified both the candidate’s strengths— those that led to the selection—and weaknesses— those that need to be addressed by some training and development process. This might be part of a supervisory or mentoring process or by some actual training, either on the job or somewhere else. In a somewhat dated example, a very experienced travel agent with an established clientele was hired by a large travel agency. The agent, despite her considerable experience, has little experience using the computer booking system that had been identified as an important requirement in the job analysis. Her experience and list of clients were sufficient to outweigh her lack of skill with the system, a lack that could be remedied by taking a week-long training course, which was an acceptable solution to both parties. Clearly in this case, as in all training decisions, the job analysis is the starting point. Performance Management Another important use of job analysis is in performance management. Job analyses play an important role in developing or modifying compensation systems and in performance appraisal. Determining the various levels of performance on a given job is an essential aspect of every job analysis. The knowledge of what constitutes an outstanding level of performance, an average level, and a borderline level is a critical aspect of performance management and should be the basis for setting pay and bonuses, the need for training and development, and for virtually all other aspects of the HR function. Job analyses have been used not only to set pay levels but also to help determine whether different jobs require different requirements or effort, or involve different working conditions. In either case, such differences merit different pay scales. Jobs that involve equivalent factors, however, should lead to equal pay. The pay level a job warrants is also important, and the job characteristics as determined by the job analysis are frequently used to determine the level of pay. Among the factors included in such decisions are Level of education, training, or experience required Degree of creativity involved Strength or stamina necessary Amount of responsibility Degree of independence of action Scope of influence Intellectual demands, including problem solving Risk of death, injury, or sickness Presumably the level of each of these factors can be identified by a job analysis and then combined in some meaningful way to determine the level of the job among the various jobs in that organization. The job description and the combined evaluation of these various factors provide the basis for establishing a compensation system that is then priced according to the data produced by a salary survey of similar jobs in the local job market. Since such comparisons are fraught with uncertainties, they have become the basis of a considerable amount of litigation about the equality of pay for different jobs. As just one example of the ambiguities involved, consider the difficulties inherent in attempting to use job analysis to justify equal pay of elementary school teachers and truck drivers. While there is some evidence that sophisticated statistical analysis of the results of job analyses can be used successfully to predict market compensation rates, this can be done only for blue-collar jobs. Further, it is often argued that such an approach captures only existing discriminatory pay polices and does little to advance the cause of equal pay for equal work. It is safe to conclude that setting compensation systems on the basis of job analysis is a complex and difficult process. Job analyses are also used in the performance appraisal process. For this process, job analyses should highlight the various work activities involved in performing a job and the relative importance of each activity. A rational performance appraisal system would evaluate the quality of the work performed by the individual being appraised according to the various importance ratings. It should be far more critical for that employee being rated to perform the important tasks more competently than for him or her to perform those of lesser importance competently. Unfortunately, this does not always seem to be the case, and often employees feel that they are downgraded for not attending to rather trivial tasks, ones not critical to fulfilling the organization’s mission. This leads to a feeling on the part of employees that the performance appraisal process is an unimportant managerial task, so they often discount the entire process. Organizational Management and Planning As we noted above, the appropriateness of job descriptions tends to decay over time. Changes in the marketplace require new behaviors, technology changes jobs with warp speed, and incumbents begin to do their jobs in idiosyncratic ways. As a result of these and other changes, job descriptions become obsolete. Further, mergers and acquisitions lead to a need to integrate different human resources management systems. And a new CEO comes in and decides to rationalize the HR function, to update the job descriptions, create a new compensation system, one based on equal pay for equal work, none of which can be accomplished without starting with a job analysis. When one of us became the CEO of a large professional association, he quickly learned about employee discontent over what appeared to be favoritism in assigning job titles, compensation, and a variety of other benefits. It appeared that the only way to deal with this unrest was through an organization-wide review and rationalization, beginning with job analyses. To win employee acceptance of the process, the staff was promised that no one would suffer financially or in status. The organization had almost five hundred employees, and the HR function was inadequate to perform the required work. A national HR consulting firm was engaged to create an organization-wide series of job analyses, draft current job descriptions based on these analyses, create a uniform set of job titles, and recommend a compensation system based on the job content involved and a regional salary survey. This was done over a period of several months and was widely accepted by both rank- and-file employees and the organization’s board of directors. Moreover, this work enabled the organization to identify where additional resources were needed and where redundancy would provide some resources to fill those gaps. But all of this depended on the first step— the job analyses. Litigation Protection Still another use of job analyses is to reduce an organization’s exposure to litigation based on allegations of discriminatory hiring practices. In order to ensure that all individuals are treated fairly in the workplace, including in hiring, pay, training, and other conditions of employment, we need to base all of our decisions on job-related qualifications. The only way to be able to do this is through the use of job analyses. For example, if we wish to hire a plumber, we need to ascertain that applicants can run pipe and have a license to do so, requirements based on the job analysis. Simply stated, if we are to hire people based on the qualifications to perform a job, we first must determine what those requirements for doing that job are—and conducting a job analysis is the only legal way to do this. As we noted above, the Uniform Guidelines are quite explicit in requiring ‘‘an analysis of important work behaviors required for successful performance’’ as the basis for any hiring action. Any selection process should begin with such a job analysis that establishes the criteria against which applicants should be compared. Further, the job analysis establishes the criteria for establishing the validity of any assessment measure to be used in the selection process. Scholars provide a more detailed discussion of the use of criteria to establish the validity of psychological tests and a catalogue of commonly used tests. While there is no absolute or certain shield against litigation, basing selection decisions on a careful, thorough, and current job analysis and using only well-validated selection procedures based on those job analyses will go a long way to deter frivolous filings. One additional point is the critical importance of a careful, contemporaneous record documenting what was done and why it was done. In our experience, one of the major problems that our clients experience in defending themselves in HR litigation is the failure to document properly what was done. This catalogue of the uses of job analyses is far from complete, as we have not included the use of job analyses in research on the nature of work and how work is changing, studies of the structure of work, and so on. But the focus of this book is on providing useful tools for the practicing HR professional and such conceptually focused research is of little practical use to this audience. Elements of a Job Analysis Terms and Definition of Job Analysis Various authors use terms such as job, position, and task to men different things. Position: The duties and tasks carried out by one person. A position may exist even where no incumbent fills it; it may be an open position. There are at least as many positions in an organization as there are people. Job: A group of positions with the same major duties or tasks: if the positions are not identical, the similarity is great enough to justify grouping them. A job is a set of tasks within a single organization or organizational unit. Occupation: An occupation is a class of roughly similar jobs found in many organizations and even in different industries. Examples include attorney, computer programmer. Mechanic, and Gardener. Job family: A group of jobs similar in specifiable ways, such as patterns of purposes, behaviors, or worker attributes. An example of a job family might he clerical and technical,” which could include receptionists, accounting clerks, secretaries, and data entry specialists. Element: The smallest feasible part of an activity or broader category of behavior or work done. It might be an elemental motion, a part of a task, or a broader behavioral category; there is little consistency in meanings of this term. Task: A step or component in (lie performance of a duty. A task has a clear beginning and ending; it can usually be described with a brief statement consisting of an action verb and a further phrase. Duty: A relatively large part of the work done in a position or job. It consists of several tasks related in time, sequence, outcome, or objective. A clerical duty might be “sorting correspondence.” One task in correspondence sorting might be ‘identify letters requiring immediate response.’ Job Description (JD): A written report of the results of job analysis. JD is a list or form of a job’s duties, responsibilities, reporting relationships, working conditions, performance criteria, and supervisory responsibilities. JD is the result and one product of a job analysis. Job Specification: A list of a job’s “human requirements”: the requisite education, skills, knowledge, and so on – another product of a job analysis. Job Specification should address what knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) do job holders need to perform these tasks effectively. Traditional job analysis has four typical components: A description of the work activity (WA) or tasks involved in doing the job; The knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) or competencies necessary to perform the job; Data on the range of job performance; and The characteristics of the workplace. The data contained in these four components provide the basis for drafting the job description, which should provide an integrated narrative picture of the job and what is required to fill that job successfully. Work Activity (WA) The process of a job analysis typically begins with a description of the major job functions, the activities in which a job incumbent regularly engages— the reasons why the job exists. One inherent problem in describing work activities is the level at which the activity is described. At the most basic level are the job elements, “the smallest unit into which work can be divided without analyzing separate motions, movement, and mental processes’’. A more useful approach is that of Functional Job Analysis, which specifies an action verb, which describes the action performed in observable terms; (2) the outcomes or results of that action; (3) the tools or other equipment used; and (4) the amount of discretion allowed the worker in that action. Two examples should serve to clarify some of the issues in this approach to WA. In the first, ‘‘The assembler takes one end of the red wire and one end of the green wire and joins them together with a screw nut.’’ In the second, “The surgeon takes the scalpel and makes a long incision into the chest of the comatose patient.’’ In both examples, the action is described clearly, the tools involved are specified, the outcomes are clear, and the level of discretion is implicit and very different. These examples represent both the approach and content of the approach, sometimes referred to as major job requirements, to describing the WA that we advocate. There two aspects to the WA process: one is the importance of the action to the success of performing the job and the other is the frequency with which that action is performed. Obviously, important and frequent actions constitute the bulk of the WA. But important but infrequent actions often need to be included. For example, while most police officers never draw and fire their handguns in the course of their careers, when such action is required it is critical to the success of that job. Thus, descriptions of WA should identify both the importance and frequency of actions, especially when highly important WA occur infrequently. Knowledge, Skills, and Ability (KSA) The second question that every job analysis must address concerns the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) or competencies necessary to perform these WA. Knowledge is defined as an organized body of information, usually of a factual or procedural nature, that, when applied, makes the successful performance of a job action possible. Knowledge is usually not demonstrated in the action itself but rather by prior education, training, or testing. In observing the action, the knowledge base is assumed and inferred rather than directly observed. In the above example of the assembler, he or she would need to have sufficient knowledge of the English language to follow directions, know the difference between red and green, and know how to use a screw nut to join the two ends together. The knowledge needed by a surgeon is far more complex and would include an intimate understanding of the anatomy and physiology of the human body, how to monitor the patient’s vital signs, choosing the correct scalpel for the procedure, and so on. In both cases, however, each set of knowledge forms the basis of the success of executing the job action. Skill, the second necessary component for the successful execution of the job action, is defined as the proficiency in the manual, verbal, or mental manipulation of people, ideas, or things. A skill is always directly observable and a certain level of skill is typically set as a standard or baseline for the successful performance of the action. In our continuing example, the assembler must have sufficient eye-hand coordination to pick up the two ends of the wire and the screw nut and adequate finger dexterity to twist the wires together either by hand or mechanically and insert the twisted ends into the wire nut. The skill set of the surgeon includes a high level of eye-hand coordination, sufficient hand steadiness to manipulate the scalpel without untoward injury to the patient, sufficient finger dexterity to suture major bleeding, and so on. Thus, every job action involves an identification of the required skills and the necessary level of those skills. Ability is defined as the present capacity to execute a job action, to perform a job function by applying an underlying knowledge base and the necessary skills simultaneously. Knowledge, like ability, is not observable directly but rather is an inferred, higher-order construct, such as problem solving, spatial ability, intelligence, and so on. For lower-level jobs, it is relatively easy to describe the KSA required in terms of just K and S. Abilities are typically invoked in describing higher-level technical, professional, and managerial jobs as the WAs become more conceptual, abstract, and complex, despite the fact that they do not meet the requirements of the Uniform Guidelines of being observable. Thus, the assembler job could be described readily in terms of the limited knowledge and skill required, while we might invoke such characteristics as systems-orientation, decisiveness, meticulousness, and awareness of the operating room environment as necessary characteristics of a successful surgeon. While most observers would agree that these characteristics are important to surgical success, a number would question whether these characteristics are best understood as abilities. As a result of such questions, many experts in job analysis add a fourth factor, O for Other, to the KSA paradigm, leading to a KSAO approach to job requirements. We believe that both the KSA and the KSAO labels are rather awkward and difficult to apply. Rather, we have chosen to use the term competencies as a substitute for these other labels. Levels of Job Performance After developing clarity of the WA involved in a job and the necessary competencies, a job analysis must identify the necessary range of adequate job performance. Most job analyses focus on identifying what constitutes a high level of job performance in order to identify the competencies that separate stars from the rest of the pack. When we are trying to understand these factors to meet promotion or training and development requirements, this is an appropriate approach; but what if we intend to use the job analysis for candidate selection? Here, a very different dynamic is in play. When we examine the job performance of incumbents, we typically learn what an experienced job holder can accomplish. But few, if any, new hires are likely to be as productive or as competent as the typical incumbent. Thus, in establishing the job performance requirements, we must set more modest initial levels for new hires, a process that requires a fair degree of judgment. One additional point, in selecting supervisors and managers from an existing workforce, it is often the case that a top performer is chosen without recognizing that supervisory and managerial tasks require different skills than performing the tasks being supervised do, so such selections often do not work out satisfactorily. From this discussion it should be clear that job performance levels need to be set as a function of the use to which they are to be put, and that there is no substitute for common sense in setting those limits. Workplace Characteristics Workplaces vary enormously in their norms, climate, and culture, in the level of discomfort that workers can experience, the inherent risks posed by working there, and other noteworthy factors. A competent and thorough job analysis identifies the important workplace characteristics. Many approaches to job analyses pay scant attention to describing the workplace setting unless it varies significantly from the typical factory, office, or warehouse. We, on the other hand, strongly believe that an in- depth understanding of the characteristics of the workplace should be an integral part of a competent job analysis. Once the four elements of the job analysis— the work activities (WA), the job competencies (previously KSAs), the range of job performance, and the workplace characteristics— have been identified, they can be combined in a thematic fashion into a job description. We now turn our attention to the various methods of actually conducting a job analysis. Job Specification Job specification is a statement of employee characteristics and qualifications required for satisfactory performance of defined duties and tasks comprising a specific job or function. Job specification is derived from job analysis. In other word, Job specification as a statement of minimum qualification that person must possess to perform a given job successfully. While the job description describes activities to be done, it is job specifications that list the knowledge, skills, and abilities an individual needs to perform a job satisfactorily. Knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) include education, experience, work skill requirements, personal abilities, and mental and physical requirements. Job specifications for a data entry operator might include a required educational level, a certain number of months of experience, a typing ability of 60 words per minute, a high degree of visual concentration, and ability to work under time pressure. It is important to note that accurate job specifications identify what KSAs a person needs to do the job, not necessarily what qualifications the current employee possesses. Usually, the information of a job specification includes Experience: Number of years of experience in the job you are seeking to fill. Number of years of work experience required for the selected candidate. Note whether the position requires progressively more complex and responsible experience, and supervisory or managerial experience. Education: State what degrees, training, or certifications are required for the position. Required Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and Characteristics (KSAOs): State the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics of individuals who have successfully performed this job. Or, use the job analysis data to determine the attributes you need from your “ideal” candidate. Your recruiting planning meeting or email participants can also help determine these requirements for the job specification. Job specifications information must be converted into employee specification information in order to know what kind of person is needed to fill a job. Employee specification is a like a brand name which spells that the candidate with a particular employee specification generally possess the qualities specified under job specification. Employee specification is useful to find out the suitability of particular class of candidates to a particular job. Thus, employee specification is useful to find out prospective employees (target group) whereas job specification is useful to select the right candidate for a job. Methods of Job Analysis The end-product of a job analysis is a job description, a written statement that describes: (1) the important tasks that need to be performed to successfully hold this job; (2) the requirements necessary to perform these tasks; (3) the levels of job performance that can be expected at various levels of experience and expertise; and (4) those characteristics of the work setting that impact work performance. The job description in all cases must be data-based, and clearly the creation of such a document is a time-consuming and labor- intensive process. This chapter provides a road map for creating such a data-based job description. Generally speaking, it is possible to collect data on the first three components of the job analysis simultaneously, while data on the characteristics of the work setting requires a separate, independent assessment. Those doing job analyses should always remember the purpose for which the information is to be used, as this purpose provides the context for both collecting the data and for writing the job description. This is especially true, for example, when collecting job performance data to be used for selection of job applicants. These levels obviously would be different for entry-level or trainee positions than it would be for selecting experienced, high-level operators. There are five different methods of collecting job analysis data. They are (1) self-reports; (2) direct observations; (3) interviews; (4) document reviews: and (5) questionnaires and surveys. Each of these is discussed in some detail below. It should be noted that any of these methods can be used either by internal HR staff members or by external consultants with expertise in conducting job analyses who have been engaged for this specific purpose. Self-Reports The most obvious and readily available sources of information about a job are the incumbents currently holding that job. All too often, however, incumbent reports are the only source used to analyze a job, because this approach is subject to attempts to inflate the importance of one’s job and a variety of other contaminating influences. This is especially the case when incumbents are asked to prepare in writing their own job description with few guidelines and little supervision. One variation on the self-report approach is to have the job analyst, typically an HR specialist, attempt to fill the job for a brief period and report on his or her experience in filling the job. Obviously, this approach is only appropriate for rather simple jobs that do not require a set of specific skills or much training, and there is always a question of how useful these self-reports are in understanding the job. Direct Observations Many jobs can be studied by observing an incumbent actually performing the job. In order to reduce the ‘‘audience effect’’ of having an intrusive observer involved, a video camera can be used to record an incumbent doing the job. Using a camera over a period of time both eliminates the observer effect and provides an opportunity to observe the job over a longer period of time and to take time samples of job behavior from the recording as the database. Direct observation, however, is most useful with jobs that involve obvious physical activity, activities that are the core of the job. For jobs that are primarily cognitive in nature, direct observation provides little useful data. Observing a market analyst or a theoretical physicist at work would provide us with little information about the nature of their work. Further, neither self-reports nor direct observations provide much information about the requirements necessary to perform these jobs nor about the level of job performance. Interviews The limitations of self-report and direct observation have led to the use of interviews as the most widely used approach to job analysis. These interviews must be conducted by a skilled, trained interviewer who has both some understanding of the job being analyzed and the nature of work in general, as these provide the necessary background for asking questions and probing answers for more detailed and complete answers from those being interviewed. Individual Interviews. There are several sources of information about a job, all of whom can be interviewed, either singly or in small groups. These include current incumbents of the job, supervisors of the job, and others who are often referred to as subject-matter experts (SMEs). SMEs are those individuals, other than incumbents, who have knowledge about the job being analyzed, such as former incumbents, managers with oversight of the job, academic specialists, and anyone in the organization who has any specialized knowledge of the job in question. One useful way of identifying SMEs about a particular job is to ask incumbents, “If you’re stuck with a job problem that you’re having trouble with, who are you most likely to ask for help?’’ These are the true SMEs, the ones who help those on the job get out of trouble. In the early, exploratory phase of the job analysis, the initial interviews, which usually should be one-on-one, can be rather unstructured and open-ended as the interviewer starts to learn about the job, the tasks involved, the necessary requirements, and the levels of job performance. As the interviewer gains an understanding of the job and its requirements, he or she should develop an interview protocol that provides a structure for the ensuing interviews, one that enables the interviewer to obtain information about specific aspects of the job under scrutiny and compare the data obtained from different sources. Group Interviews. These follow-up interviews, usually using the focus group method, are best conducted in a group setting with a mixed group of five or six individuals, incumbents, supervisors, and SMEs. It is imperative that at least two of the group be incumbents—individuals who know the job best—and more than one to ensure surfacing differing points of view. In conducting a focus group, the facilitator should not attempt to push for unanimity of viewpoints, but rather should understand that jobs, even what appear to be simple jobs, are seen and performed differently and that these differences need to be woven into the final job description. The way these group interviews are introduced to the organization, the manner in which individuals are invited to participate, and the way in which the interviews are initiated and conducted are critical to the quality of the information collected. It must be made clear that the purpose of these group interview(s) is to gain a better understanding of a particular job or class of jobs, that no one will lose his or her job as a result of this process, and that what is said in the interview is confidential in that no statement will be attributed to a particular participant. The interviewer must be non- judgmental, listen carefully, play back what was heard, ask questions to clarify points, and take notes on a flip chart in the front of the room. In conducting these groups, the HR professional should initiate the process with a description of its purpose, together with some discussion about how the results will be used when the process is complete. Next, the group should be prompted to begin discussion of the job or job family to define the tasks involved— the content of the job. It is good practice to have either a flip chart on which this data can be recorded, with the HR professional continuing to probe until the content and structure of the job are adequately addressed. In developing an understanding of the work involved, the interviewer can ask incumbents to describe a typical day, what needs to be done on a regular basis, and what the occasional exceptional requirements are. An alternative approach is to focus attention on either the work flow or organization of individual workers and how their tasks overlap and flow to produce work products. These approaches typically are sufficient to produce a description of the content of the job. The intent here is to generate content while the group has its ideas clearly in mind and then go back and edit that content to conform to acceptable standards. Having developed an in-depth understanding of the various tasks involved in the job, the next step to identify the necessary requirements to perform the work and then to describe the various levels of job performance. To identify the requirements, the interviewer should ask about what people doing this job need to know and when they need to know it; for example, what tools or equipment are ordinarily used on this job and how skillful does the worker need to be in using them. Further, the interview needs to facilitate the group to identify the requirements for success on this job. Similarly, the group needs to establish in fairly concrete terms the various levels of job performance that can be expected in this job. How many widgets should an expert be able to produce in a typical day, and how many should a relative newcomer to the job be expected to produce. At the end of an interview procedure, the interviewers should feel confident that he or she has gained an understanding of the job being analyzed and can now describe the typical tasks involved in the job, the requirements to perform that job, and the various levels of job performance. One useful technique to use in the group interview is the critical incident technique in which the group is asked to describe critical incidents that have occurred on this job that have involved either highly effective or highly ineffective performance. This process has three parts: (1) describe the circumstances in which the job behavior occurred; (2) describe in detail the job behavior itself; and (3) identify the positive or negative consequences of that behavior. These reports of critical incidents often highlight instances of poor judgment, of safety hazards, and of outstanding performance, as well as the role of a variety of personal characteristics on job performance. Inquiring about critical incidents is especially useful when the job seems routine and many of the elements of the job seem obscure to others. Our experience has informed us that SMEs and managers are the most useful sources of critical incident data, which is why including them in these interviews is so important. Document Reviews The archives of most organizations contain a variety of documents that are useful in conducting job analyses. These include analyses of output, performance appraisals, reports by both internal auditors and external consultants about workplace issues, and prior job descriptions. Customer complaint records are another highly useful source about employee job behaviors that are of particular importance to customers. Internal memoranda about unusual events, difficulties encountered by workers on a job, or problems in recruiting applicants for a particular job, among many such issues, can provide worthwhile insights into a job. Reports of accidents and medical records are useful in identifying health and safety issues in jobs. Time and attendance records are important sources of information about the importance that workers place on doing that job. For many years the U.S. military has used a procedure called after-action reports, a process for debriefing participants in any important incident to determine what went well and what went poorly, in order to improve future performance in similar situations. The value of such a process in identifying how to improve performance is obvious and thus has been adopted by many non-military organizations as a way to identify issues that need to be addressed in order to improve the organization’s performance. The records of such after-action reports, when they exist, are a unique and extraordinary source of information about important elements of job behavior and their impact on organizational outcomes. The employee records every activity he/she engages in, in a diary or work log along with the amount of time to perform each activity to produce a complete picture of the job. Pocket dictating machines can help