Exported for Rona Cadiente on Sun, 08 Sep 2024 05:42:59 GMT

Chapter 4: Job Analysis and Competency

Models
This chapter was adapted by Dr. Peter A. Hausdorf, University of Guelph.

Learning Outcomes
AFTER READING THIS CHAPTER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO:

Recognize the importance of job analysis and the role it plays in recruitment and selection.
Describe guidelines for conducting analyses employing a variety of job analysis techniques.
Use standard tools and techniques to conduct a job analysis.
Discuss the processes for identifying job specifications to be used in recruitment and selection of
human resources.
Describe competencies and their role in recruitment and selection.
Know how to identify competencies.
Recognize the need to validate competency-based systems.
Identify competency-based HR models from those based on job analysis.
Recognize best practices in competency modelling.
Describe the steps to develop a competency model.

HIRING THE RIGHT PERSON

You are the HR person for a small business enterprise and oversee hiring as part of an expansion. You want
to be sure that you hire the right people for the new positions. The first question that comes to mind is how
to identify exactly whom you are looking for. A job analysis will help get you the necessary information. Job
analysis procedures can be very elaborate; however, a job analysis is nothing more than finding answers to
a series of questions about the job. Ask yourself a series of questions that will help you find the right
person.

1. What do you wish your new hires to accomplish on a daily, weekly, monthly, or annual basis?
2. What are the tasks and responsibilities that you want the new employees to do as part of their jobs
• What equipment will the new employees use?
• Will they supervise other employees?
• Will they do different things on different days?
3. What knowledge, skills, abilities, or other attributes or competencies (KSAOs) should the new
employees have to perform successfully for the tasks required for the position?
• What knowledge should new employees bring with them to the job?
• What skills must new employees have or be capable of developing?
• What abilities should they have?
• If the position requires the new employees to work as part of a team, what interpersonal skills should
they have?
4. What do people who hold similar jobs (subject matter experts [SMEs]) think about the tasks,
requirements, and KSAOs needed for the new positions?
5. Will there be any differences between the job now and in the future?

Once you have answered these questions you will have the information needed to develop an accurate job
description that will be used as part of the recruiting process. The job description and its associated KSAOs
will assist you in sorting through the résumés you receive to identify those applicants with the KSAOs that
will lead to success on the job.

INTRODUCTION
This chapter is divided into two parts. Part I begins with a discussion of job and work analysis and its
relevance to HR development and continues with a discussion of several job analysis techniques. Part II
concludes the chapter with a presentation on competency modelling as an alternative procedure to job
analysis.
PART I: WORK AND JOB ANALYSIS
WHAT IS WORK AND JOB ANALYSIS?
Recently researchers working in the area of personnel selection have broadened the classic definition of
job analysis to reflect more contemporary approaches to this topic, although both terms can be used
interchangeably. Work analysis, in its broadest sense, refers to any systematic gathering, documenting, and
analyzing of information about the activities performed by people in organizations; the worker
characteristics related to doing those activities; or the context, both psychological and physical, in which

the work is performed.1 The change in terminology has been made to reflect recent and important
innovations2 such as the Occupational Information Network that we will discuss later in this chapter.

Job analysis refers to the process of collecting information about jobs.3 In its simplest terms, a job analysis
is a systematic process for gathering, documenting, and analyzing information about what gets done in the
job. Job analysis information includes a description of the context and principal duties of the job, job
responsibilities and working conditions, and information about the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other
attributes (KSAOs) required to accomplish job tasks. In short, it is a method that describes aspects of the
job in detail and identifies the necessary characteristics or competencies people need to complete job

tasks. It is widely accepted as the foundation of many HR activities and functions.4 For the most part, the
distinction between the definitions of work and job analysis is minor from an applied view. In this chapter
we will use job analysis to refer to both and talk about work analysis only when it makes a difference in our
understanding. There are three key points to remember about job analysis:

Identifying the KSAOs as part of a job specification. PinkBlue/Shutterstock.com

1. A job analysis does not refer to a single methodology but rather to a range of techniques.
 2. A job analysis is a formal, structured process carried out under a set of guidelines established in
advance.
3. A job analysis breaks down a job into its constituent parts, rather than looking at the job as a whole.
Figure 4.1 presents an overview of the job analysis methods, information sources, and outcomes; it shows
that job analysis information is foundational to most HR activities (e.g., recruitment and selection, training
and development, performance management).5 Job analysis is essential for effective recruitment and
selection. Most hiring processes focus on identifying the match between the job requirements (e.g., KSAOs)
and job candidate characteristics (e.g., KSAOs) and these rely on accurate information produced by job
analysis. Furthermore, job analysis helps to ensure that the tools used in hiring reflect the job requirements
so that decisions are accurate, fair, and legally defensible.

FIGURE 4.1: Overview of Job Analysis Process and Outcomes. Source: From KELLOWAY/CATANO/DAY. People
and Work in Canada, 1E. © 2011 Nelson Education Ltd. Reproduced by permission.
www.cengage.com/permissions

Because job analysis methods focus on different aspects of the job, it is important to know how the
information will be used (i.e., the purpose for the job analysis) before deciding on an approach or method
for collecting the data. As we will see after we review the different job analysis methods, each has its
strengths and weaknesses, and these vary with respect to the reason for collecting the data. For example,
not all job analysis methods identify KSAOs, which would be a problem if these were needed to develop
tools to assess job candidates. In addition, it is very unlikely that one method will produce information
adequate to meeting all the HR applications for which a job analysis is required.

Therefore, HR must develop a strategic plan like the one presented in Chapter 1. As part of that exercise, HR
may wish to undertake an organizational analysis that can be used to anchor job analysis in the context of
the organization’s mission, goals, and strategy. When designing and implementing recruitment and
selection programs to fill jobs within their organization, HR specialists must be aware of the overall
organizational mission and strategic goals. Losing sight of the organization level can result in less-than-
optimal recruitment and selection policies and practices that are used to fill positions at the job level.
Although there are many ways to conduct an organization analysis, most methods share the common goals
of describing and understanding the design and structure, functions and processes, and strategies and
missions of organizations, issues that we discussed in Chapter 1. Data obtained from an organization
analysis can highlight areas of strengths and weaknesses useful to HR planning, such as:

identifying expected changes in the external environment,

aligning staffing and development plans to ensure appropriate succession planning,
identifying expected structural changes in the organization, and
understanding how expected changes will affect recruitment and selection practices.

Once HR has gone through a strategic planning process, including an organizational analysis, it should be
able to determine the type of job analysis procedure that will produce information that best satisfies the
purpose for which the job analysis is required. Recruitment and Selection Notebook 1.1 presented the
elements of a recruitment and selection action plan. As part of that plan, HR must develop or review the
job description for positions needing to be filled. A job analysis should be used to specify the requirements
of the job and knowledge, skills, and abilities of the people who will be selected to fill the positions.

After completing the planning process, job analysis is the next step in identifying job tasks and duties, as
well as the KSAOs needed to carry out those duties. These are the two basic products of a job analysis. The
first is formally referred to as a job description a written description of what the persons in the job are
required to do, how they are supposed to do the job, and the rationale for any required job procedures. A
job description contains a summary of job analysis data. Recruitment and Selection Today 4.1 presents a
job description for an Associate Consultant working for a management consulting company. The second
product is a job specification , which states the KSAOs that are required to do the job. These may
include the compensable factors that are used in performing a job evaluation , such as analytical
abilities, physical exertion, accountability for budgets, and unpleasant working environments. A job
description like that in Recruitment and Selection Today 4.1 is typically used to recruit employees and is
based on an actual job analysis. The job description does not present all the information gathered as part
of a job analysis—only a summary of the important aspects. As we go through this chapter, we will use
examples based on similar consulting jobs to demonstrate how the information was collected.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION TODAY 4.1

JOB DESCRIPTION FOR A JUNIOR CONSULTANT WORKING IN A MANAGEMENT CONSULTING FIRM

TITLE: ASSOCIATE CONSULTANT

Category: Management Consulting
Key Accountabilities/Activities

Reporting to the Practice Leader, the Associate Consultant implements consulting project components to
support successful project implementation. Guided by the project plan and directions from the project
leader, the job incumbent will design, gather, and analyze data to support the project. The Associate
Consultant works on multiple project teams providing research and data management support to the team
within the office and with occasional client contact.

MAJOR ACTIVITIES INCLUDE:

1. Conducting research on evidenced-based practices to support consulting solutions.

2. Implementing project components based on project plans and liaising with the project leader, project
team members, and clients.
3. Collecting data using multiple data collection methods such as interviews, focus groups, and surveys.
4. Analyzing data to identify patterns and to evaluate project outcomes.
5. Writing reports and preparing presentations to team members and clients based on data analyses.

REQUIREMENTS:

Attributes and competencies

Knowledge of evidenced-based organizational practices, research methodologies, data analysis, and

project management
Ability and willingness to follow policies and procedures
Critical thinking skills
Data analysis skills
Communication—writing and presenting
Teamwork
Client relationship management
Stress management

EXPERIENCE

Recent consulting experience in a project-based environment

Previous experience working in organizations is an asset
SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Must be a graduate of a university undergraduate business or social science program

Must have completed courses in statistical analysis

This is a salaried position. Hours: 37.5 hours per week; some travel may be required. May be called upon to
work overtime. We are an equal opportunity employer. It is our policy to recruit and select applicants for
employment solely based on their qualifications, with emphasis on selecting the bestqualified person for
the job. We do not discriminate against applicants based on race, colour, religion, sex, national origin, or
disability, or any other status or condition protected by applicable federal, provincial/territorial, or local
law.

Job Versus Position

In understanding the key concepts in this chapter, keep in mind the difference between a job and a
position . A job consists of a group of tasks; a job may be held by one or more people. Many individuals
perform the same job in an organization: for example, administrative assistant, architect, or electrician. A
position, on the other hand, consists of the group of tasks performed by one person in an organization at a
given time. Each person in the organization is assigned a position. For example, one administrative
assistant may be assigned to the HR director, while another is assigned to the vice president of finance.
Both administrative assistants would perform the same set of general tasks, although each may be
responsible for a small set of tasks that are unique to each administrative assistant position. In most
organizations the terms of job and position are used interchangeably.

Another way of distinguishing between jobs and positions is to consider a job as a collection of positions
that are similar in their significant duties and a position as a collection of duties assigned to an individual in

an organization at a given time.6 When the two sets of position-relevant tasks begin to diverge considerably
from the common set of job tasks or they begin to outweigh the common job tasks, the two positions
might then be considered to be different, but related, jobs. Job family is a term used to refer to a set of
different, but related, jobs that rely on the same set of KSAOs. Jobs and positions are among the basic
building blocks of any organization and selecting individuals for them will significantly impact the success
of the organization (refer to Figure 4.2).
 FIGURE 4.2: Comparison of Job, Position, and Job Family

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS

Job analysis data are collected from the people most knowledgeable about a job and how it is currently
performed. In practice, this means that data are collected from job incumbents (those employees currently
holding the position in question) and their immediate supervisors. Using these sources as
subject matter experts (SMEs) will generally result in the most accurate, and richest, information
about the job. However, anyone with detailed knowledge about the job can serve as an SME. A good “rule
of thumb” in choosing SMEs is that the closer the SME is to the job, the better the resultant information.
However, trained professional job analysts may provide more accurate information on a job than job
incumbents using self-report and survey instruments. Specifically, job incumbents (i.e., SMEs), when
assigning importance weightings to job skills tend to weigh heaviest those skills that most reflect their own

abilities (i.e., their bias).7,8

One question that must be answered is how many SMEs a job analysis method requires. This requirement
will generally be stated in the procedures that have been established for each method. The lack of the
requisite number of SMEs may argue against using a specific method. To ensure the defensibility of the job
analysis results, SMEs should be representative of the target population for the job with respect to age, sex,
ethnic background, and seniority in their position. Information from a diverse group of SMEs will produce
job information that is likely to be more accurate, reliable, and valid.
Recall that one of the failures of the job analysis in the Meiorin case was the lack of job information from
female firefighters. If the job analysis is challenged in court, the analyst must be able to defend the
procedure. A charge of unfair discrimination will be hard to defend if the analyst cannot demonstrate that

the job analysis results were obtained from a sample representative of those who actually do the work.9
Job information from a diverse group of SMEs is likely to produce a better picture of what the job is all
about.

JOB ANALYSIS AND EMPLOYMENT LAW—A REPRISE

Although there are no laws that specifically require a job analysis prior to implementing recruitment and

selection programs, employment decisions must be based on job-related information.10Job analysis is a

legally acceptable way of determining job-relatedness. In 1984, the Canadian Human Rights Commission
criticized CN Rail for its failure to use job analysis to demonstrate the job-relatedness of a mechanical

aptitude test that had adverse impact against women in the hiring process.11

We also saw in Chapter 3 the long list of precedent-setting cases in Canada that have established the need
to determine that any job requirements with the potential to discriminate against members of protected
groups must meet the standards for being considered bona fide occupational requirements (BFOR) as set
out in the Meiorin decision (British Columbia [Public Service Employee Relations Commission] v. BCGSEU). In
the Meiorin case, the Supreme Court of Canada found that new job requirements were not based on job-
related information, and that the job analysis in that case was seriously flawed. This perspective has been
echoed in other human rights cases and analyses across the country. Conducting a job analysis, then, is
also the first line of defence in protecting the organization if its selection procedures are challenged in

court.12 For example, the Ontario Human Rights Commission states this position clearly:13

Having a clearly defined job description and an understanding of the essential requirements of the job
provides a solid basis for designing rules and standards, providing accommodation, assessing the
performance of applicants and employees, and making decisions on hiring, promotions, discipline and
termination. Organizations that have not defined the essential duties of a position, provided required
accommodation and individually assessed ability to perform the essential duties will have difficulty
defending themselves if a human rights complaint is filed.
A good job analysis ensures that accurate information on skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions
is specified, reducing the likelihood of impediments to equitable employment access for all Canadians. A
job analysis provides objective evidence of the skills and abilities required for effective performance in the
job, which can then be used to provide evidence of the relevance of the selection procedures measuring
those abilities.

In Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, the U.S. Supreme Court, in reaching its decision, relied heavily on the

Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection.14 The Uniform Guidelines represent a joint agreement
between several U.S. government departments and agencies (the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, Civil Service Commission, Department of Labor, and Department of Justice), outlining
professional standards for employee selection procedures. Even though they are not law, the U.S. courts
have granted them significant status in guiding administrative interpretations of the job-analysis—job-

relatedness link.15,16

Canadian human rights commissions and courts also recognize the Uniform Guidelines on Employee

Selection as professional standards in applicable circumstances.17 In Canada, although the Uniform

Guidelines are not consistently adopted or applied, they may provide a reasonable starting point for the
development of an appropriate selection system.

In accordance with the guidelines, the existence of job analysis data supports defending selection
decisions. Job analysis methods are described in the next section.

JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

One job analysis expert18 proposes three criteria that should be considered in choosing a method. First, the
goal of job analysis should always be the description of observable work behaviours and analysis of their
products. Second, the results of a job analysis should describe the work behaviour “independent of the

personal characteristics or attributes of the employees who perform the job.”19 Positions in an organization
exist independently of the incumbents who fill those positions; in job analysis, it is the job (i.e., the
collection of positions) that is being analyzed, not the performance of the individual incumbents. Worker
specifications (i.e., the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes—or KSAOs) necessary to perform
successfully on the job are inferred in a separate process using the results of a job analysis. We must note
that not everyone agrees with Harvey’s second criteria; several worker-oriented methods we discuss below
focus directly on identifying worker attributes or characteristics and not work behaviours, as do the
competency models that we present in Part II of this chapter.
Third, any job analysis must produce outcomes that are verifiable and replicable. Reliability and validity

evidence is essential to assess the quality of the information produced by the analysis.20 The reliability of
job analysis data can be assessed by the extent of inter-rater agreement amongst SMEs.21 Additionally, a
second group of SMEs can be used to independently confirm the results of the first group.

Although the reliability of job analysis data can be measured easily, determining the validity of job analysis
data has been more challenging. High reliability confirms that there is agreement amongst SMEs, but
agreement does not confirm that the job analysis data accurately reflects the job (i.e., validity). As a result of
the difficulty of assessing job analysis validity, some researchers have argued that if the job analysis data

are reliable then the method used to collect that data should be considered valid.22

Rather than follow this assumption, other researchers have23 identified five validation approaches that can
be applied to job analysis information. Each approach responds to a specific validation question: is the job
language appropriate (linguistic validation); does the information describe the worker’s experience
(experiential validation); does the information generalize across job, function, and organizational contexts
(ecological); is the information useful to users and others in the organization (social-organizational); and
does the information relate to other variables, processes, and dynamics (hypothetico-criterial).

As an example of the hypothetical-criterial approach, researchers compared the relationship between

importance ratings for KSAOs obtained from job analysis with how well measures of these KSAOs predicted
job performance (i.e., criterion-related validity). It is logical that the KSAOs with the highest importance
ratings should best predict job performance, such that if conscientiousness receives a high importance
rating then a measure of it should be highly predictive. Consistent with these expectations the researchers
found (based on four different samples and 48 validation studies) high correlations between importance

ratings and test validities.24 This new method allows organizations to empirically confirm job analysis
validity without inferring validity from convergence among independent SME ratings (i.e., reliability).

Although the various job analysis techniques differ in the assumptions they make concerning work, they
follow the same logical process when applied to HR recruitment and selection. First, work activities are
described in terms of work processes or worker behaviours. Next, machines, tools, equipment, and work
aids are defined in relation to the materials produced, services rendered, and worker knowledge applied to
those ends. The job context is characterized in terms of physical working conditions, work schedules, social
context and organizational culture, and financial and nonfinancial incentives for performance. Finally, job
specifications are inferred by linking the requirements of the job, as identified in the job analysis, with the

education, experience, skills, and personal attributes needed for successful job performance.25
GETTING STARTED: GATHERING JOB-RELATED INFORMATION
In preparing for a job analysis, the first step should be to collect available information describing the target
job. The analyst reviews information from organizational charts, legal requirements, job descriptions, union
regulations, and previous data from related jobs. In addition, job-related information can be found in the

National Occupational Classification (NOC) system.26 The NOC systematically describes occupations in the
Canadian labour market based on extensive occupational research and is available at the Employment and
Social Development Canada website. It can provide initial information about relevant jobs as a starting
point for job analysis in a specific organization.

Recruitment and Selection Today 4.2 presents the NOC description for a professional occupation in
business management consulting (NOC 1122). The NOC profile presents both a description and
specification of the job or occupation. Each occupation or job is given a four-digit code that will provide the
analyst with a more extensive description related to the KSAOs associated with the job.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION TODAY 4.2

NOC DESCRIPTION FOR PROFESSIONAL OCCUPATIONS IN BUSINESS MANAGEMENT CONSULTING
(CODE 1122)

Professionals in business management consulting occupations provide services to management such as

analyzing the structure, operations, managerial methods, or functions of an organization in order to
propose, plan, and implement improvements. They are employed by management consulting firms
throughout the public and private sectors or are selfemployed. Examples of titles classified in this group

Business management consultant

Business methods analyst
Health information management consultant
ISO consultant
Organizational analysis consultant

MAIN DUTIES

Management consultants perform some, or all, of the following duties:

 Analyze and provide advice on the managerial methods and organization of a public or private sector
establishment
Conduct research to determine efficiency and effectiveness of managerial policies and programs
Conduct assessments and propose improvements to methods, systems, and procedures in areas such
as operations, human resources, records management, and communications
Conduct quality audits and develop quality management and quality assurance standards for ISO
(International Organization for Standardization) registration
Provide guidance and support to businesses on regulatory policies and procedures, ensure internal
compliance with regulatory requirements, and prepare submissions and filings with regulatory bodies
Plan the reorganization of the operations of an establishment
May supervise contracted researchers or clerical staff

Employment Requirements

A bachelor’s degree or college diploma in business administration, commerce, or a related discipline

is usually required
A graduate degree in business administration may be required
Some establishments may require management consultants to be certified by a provincial
management consulting association
Certification as a quality auditor may be required for some occupations in this unit group

Occupations in health information management consulting may require certification by the Canadian
Health Information Management Association (CHIMA).

Source: Canada. 2020. National Occupational Classification,

https://noc.esdc.gc.ca/Structure/NocProfile/01fdf956c9a84c4faa7fd8012d7d2d15?objectid=hTVs7Pv
QQWa2ZOTc%2B2HYbQpJiJ2L2d3CpOGvYQ38BLzO86%2Ft4%2BTgZnMxSytEZ5or. Reproduced and
distributed with the permission of Statistics Canada.
 Planning the job analysis process. © iStockphoto.com/mbbirdy

Figure 4.3 presents a synopsis of the descriptors used in the NOC system, along with scales used to rate
each job. For example, a rating of 2 on the “General Learning Ability” in the Aptitudes section means that
the management consultant job (1122.0) requires the ability to “catch on” or understand instructions and
underlying principles as well as to reason and make judgments at a level that is above the upper 33 percent
of the population. When testing job applicants on their general learning ability, this value can be used to set
the minimum passing score on the test. Full descriptions of all the scales can be found in the Career
Handbook that is available on the NOC website. Such information, when gathered and studied in advance,
will prove invaluable for organizing and conducting the ensuing analysis.
 FIGURE 4.3: A Synopsis of Descriptors and Labels

Source: From Career Handbook, Third Edition, https://noc.esdc.gc.ca/CareerHandboo

/DescriptionSections/58b744f999e94f529c392f73deb337d9?objectid=mMudUndkHInB
%2F5YuXj2K6w%3D%3D. Reproduced and distributed with the permission of Statistics Canada.
Occupations in this group are characterized by the following aptitudes, interests, and worker functions as
they relate to main duties:

General learning ability to plan the re-organization of the operation of establishments.

Verbal ability and clerical perception to review work studies, organization and flow charts, records,
reports, manuals, and job descriptions
Directive interest in conducting assessments and proposing, planning, and implementing
improvements to methods, systems, and procedures in areas such as operations, human resources,
records management, and communications; may supervise contracted researchers and clerical staff
Innovative interest in analyzing managerial methods and organization of public and private sector
establishments, in conducting research to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of managerial
policies and programs, in conducting quality audits, and in developing quality management and
quality assurance standards for ISO (International Organization for Standardization) registration.
Social interest in consulting with senior officials to provide advice on managerial methods and
organization of public and private sector establishments.

As well, the summary states that Management Consultants must have near vision (colour not necessary),
hearing to support verbal interactions with others, are sitting predominantly, and need limited use of
strength. They work in a regulated inside climate (i.e., office environment).

Alternative sources to the NOC have until recently included the Canadian Classification Dictionary of
Occupations (CCDO)27 and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT).28 The CCDO, designed in 1971 by
Employment and Immigration Canada, was widely used by HR professionals in Canada. Although some

found the CCDO easier to use than the NOC29 (which replaced it), the CCDO was abandoned in 1992
because its design was no longer able to accurately reflect the contemporary Canadian labour market.

Similarly, the DOT has been replaced by the O*NET system of gathering and disseminating job analysis data
in the United States. O*NET, the Occupational Information Network, is an electronic database developed by
the U.S. Department of Labor to replace the DOT. The occupational/skill descriptors “serve as a solid, but
flexible foundation for vendors and others to develop sophisticated occupational and career information
systems.”30 O*NET was first released for public use in the fall of 1998 and is available online at
www.onetonline.org. The database grows as information becomes available on more occupations, and the
U.S. Department of Labor encourages organizations to use the new database in place of the DOT, which
was last updated in 1991. O*NET has also established an O*NET Resource Center at www.onetcenter.org
that provides information on how to use the O*NET system as well as career tools and publications for HR
professionals and access to the O*NET databases. A portion of the occupations listed in O*NET are updated
annually.
Figure 4.4 presents the conceptual foundation of the O*NET model and “provides a framework that
identifies the most important types of information about work and integrates them into a theoretically and

empirically sound system.”31 This 2001 review32 presents an excellent introduction to the O*NET model
and the implications for researchers and practitioners.

FIGURE 4.4: The O*Net® Content Model. Source: The O*NET® Content Model.
http://www.onetcenter.org/content.html. U.S. Department of Labor.

In addition to occupational databases, attention should be given to determining which techniques will be
employed for gathering job information. Depending on the objective of the job analysis, some techniques

are better suited than others for providing job information.33 Analyses typically involve a series of steps,
often beginning with interviews or observations that provide the information to construct a task inventory
or to complete a structured questionnaire. Ideally, the job analyst employs a combination of strategies to

arrive at a comprehensive and accurate description of the job in question,34,35 although analysts operating
within the very real constraints of time and money often use a single method. Each analysis method
contributes slightly different information and, by using a combination of methods, potential gaps in the
results are minimized. The next section on work and worker-oriented job analysis methods illustrates the
different types of information that may be obtained from job analysis procedures.

WORK AND WORKER-ORIENTED JOB ANALYSIS

There are several ways of classifying job analysis methods. One of the most complete classification

schemes36 is to categorize a job analysis technique as either work oriented or worker oriented.37,38,39,40
Job analyses falling into either of these two categories are legally defensible. With one or two exceptions,
all job analysis methods, including all those presented here, fall into either of these two categories. In
work-oriented job analysis , the emphasis is on work outcomes and description of the various tasks
performed to accomplish those outcomes.

These methods produce “descriptions of job content that have a dominant association with, and typically

characterize, the technological aspects of jobs and commonly reflect what is achieved by the worker.”41
The descriptions of tasks or job duties generated via work-oriented methods are typically characterized by
their frequency of occurrence or the amount of time spent on them, the importance to the job outcome,

and the difficulty inherent in executing them.42,43 Because task inventories generated via work-oriented
techniques are developed for specific jobs or occupational areas, the results are highly specific and may

have little or no relationship to the content of jobs in other fields.44

Alternatively, worker-oriented job analysis methods focus on general aspects of jobs, describing
perceptual, interpersonal, sensory, cognitive, and physical activities. Worker-oriented methods generate
descriptions “that tend more to characterize the generalized human behaviours involved; if not directly,

then by strong inference.”45 These techniques are not limited to describing specific jobs; they are generic in

nature and the results can be applied to a wide spectrum of task-dissimilar jobs.46,47,48,49

WORK-ORIENTED JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

Structured Job Analysis Interviews

The Structured Job Analysis Interview is perhaps the most frequently used technique for gathering
job facts and establishing the tasks and behaviours that define a job. It may be used as a stand-alone job
analysis method or to collect information for a subsequent task inventory, structured questionnaire, or

other analytic technique.50,51 This method involves questioning individuals or small groups of employees
and supervisors about the work that gets done. To ensure that the same data are collected across job
incumbents, it is important that the same questions be used for each interview (i.e., the interview is
structured).

When interviews are conducted by multiple interviewers, using the same questions helps to ensure the
consistency of information that is collected (i.e., producing higher inter-rater agreement across
interviewers). Because it is such an important step in most job analyses, the interview should be well
planned and carefully conducted. Several job analysis experts52,53,54,55,56 offer many valuable guidelines
for conducting interviews. These are summarized in Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.1.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.1

GUIDELINES FOR A JOB ANALYSIS INTERVIEW

1. Announce the job analysis well ahead of the interview date. The purpose and process should be
clear to employees and supervisors. The job analysis process should be positioned as a collaborative
effort, with all job incumbents and their supervisors invited to share their valid information about the
job.
2. Participation in interviews should be voluntary, and job incumbents should be interviewed
only with the permission of their supervisors. The most accurate information is collected from job
incumbents when they feel that their participation is voluntary and supported by their supervisor.
3. Interviews should be conducted in a neutral and secure office or meeting room. This ensures
that the interviewee feels comfortable, that the interview is not disrupted, and that information
collected is not overheard by others.
4. Open the interview by establishing rapport with the employee and explaining the purpose of
the interview. Internal company interviews are exceptional events in organizations and as a result
they can be stressful for employees. The experienced interviewer takes time at the outset to explain
the purpose of the interview, reviews the confidentiality provisions, and alleviates any fears that
interviewees might have.
5. Ask open-ended questions, using language that is easy to understand, and allow ample time
for the employee’s responses. Most people, given the opportunity, will talk in detail about the work
they do. The good analyst avoids rushing or intimidating people, does not talk down to them, and
takes a genuine interest in the interviewee’s responses.
6. Guide the session without being authoritative or overbearing. Keep the interview on topic and
avoid discussions concerning worker-management relations and other unrelated topics. When
discussions become tangential, the analyst can bring them back on track by summarizing relevant
details and referring to the interview outline.
7. Explain to the employees that records of the interviews will identify them only by
confidential codes. The names of interviewees and other personal information should be protected
to ensure that, employees can be honest in their descriptions. The job analyst should identify any data
that will be used beyond their job information (e.g., age, sex, tenure, ethnic background) for
organizational purposes (e.g., to ensure representativeness across job incumbents).
The job analyst should record the job incumbent’s or supervisor’s responses by taking notes or by tape-
recording the interview. Trying to remember what was said following the interview is difficult at best and
likely to produce inaccurate information. Recall that the purpose of the interview is to obtain information
about the work that the employee does; thus, questions should elicit information describing important job
tasks, physical activities involved in the job, environmental conditions (physical and social) under which
the work occurs, and typical work incidents. Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.2 provides a protocol
for a structured job analysis interview that covers the essential questions needed to obtain the required
information on these topics. This protocol should be considered as a guide; different positions may require
modification of the protocol.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.2

JOB ANALYSIS INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Interview Information

Name of Employee:
Job Title:
Department:
Date:

2. Education and Experience

What is your highest level of education? Is this the level required for your job?
Is any specialized training required for your job? How long will it take?
Do you have to have a certificate or licence to perform your job?
What level of experience do you need to do your job? Can it be learned on the job?

3. Job Purpose

What is the primary purpose of your job?

What is a secondary purpose?
4. Job Duties

Are you familiar with the description for your job? Does it cover all the duties you are currently doing?
If not, which ones does it not cover? Are you performing duties not currently included in your job
description?
What are the main duties and responsibilities of your position? Do you perform these duties daily or at
irregular intervals?
How long does it take to perform each duty?
Have any standards been set for these duties? Who evaluates your work to see if these standards are
met?

5. Data, People, and Things

List the names of the principal tools or equipment you use in performing your job duties. Do you need
special training to use any of these?
Are any manual skills needed to operate these tools or equipment?
Are you required to work with data or information as part of your job? If so, please describe what you
do. Describe any mathematical ability or skills required.
What level of reasoning or problem solving is required to do your job?
Does your job involve working with people? Describe the types of interpersonal actions that take place
on your job and with whom. What interpersonal skills and abilities does your job require?
Does your job involve supervising other people? In what way? Are you considered management?
Does your job require you to handle confidential information, or material such as money? If so,
describe what is involved. Do you have to be bonded to carry out these duties?
Do you prepare records or reports as part of your job? What type? For whom?

6. Physical Activities

Describe the types of physical activities needed to carry out your job. These might include visual
acuity, colour discrimination, hearing, sitting, standing, walking, upper or lower limb coordination,
and required strength.

7. Environmental Conditions

Describe the location of your job: inside work or outside? In a car, van, or truck?
Does your work involve working with hazardous chemical or biological materials? Electricity?
Radiation? Fire or hot surfaces? Flying particles?
Does your job involve working in an uncomfortable environment involving things such as noise,
vibration, odours, dust, or moisture? If yes, how often?
8. Health and Safety

Are there any safety regulations related to your position?

Is your job stressful? Please explain.

9. Supervision

Who is your immediate supervisor?

How closely are you supervised?
How much independence or authority do you have to do your job?
When must you consult your supervisor?

10. Compensation

Do you believe you are fairly compensated for the work you do? If not, why and in what ways?

An interview protocol such as that in Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.2 prompts the interviewer to
ask important questions about the job. Based on responses to the structured questions, and on the
interviewer’s previous knowledge of the job, the interviewer probes for more detail.57,58 The tasks that
make up each job area are identified, and the result of the interview should be a clear description of critical
job domains and their related elements. Interview protocols can vary from presenting a few informal
prompts to very structured questions as shown here. In general, the more specific and structured the
interview protocol, the more reliable will be the obtained information.

While there are no hard-and-fast rules concerning how many people should be interviewed, those who are
interviewed should be representative of the employees whose job the analysis reflects. For example, when
conducting a job analysis for event planning consultants employed in a large travel company, the analyst
may obtain a stratified sample that reflects the proportion of males and females in the position. Other
demographic variables such as ethnicity, age, physical disabilities and abilities, and native language would
also be considered in a representative sample of interviewees. Supervisors should always be included in
the pool of interview respondents, as they have a unique perspective on how jobs are performed and the
standards for acceptable performance.

Structured interview protocols should also allow interviewees to contribute information that may not be
covered in the protocol. There are certain disadvantages to job analysis interviews. First, they can be
expensive and time consuming, and may be impractical if a representative sample is needed for jobs with a
large number of incumbents. However, the benefits of individual interviews can outweigh their relative
costs. Employees when interviewed individually are likely to respond with greater openness than when
interviewed in a group thus producing more honest and accurate information. A second disadvantage of
interviews is that workers may distort the information they provide about their jobs, particularly if they
believe that the results will influence their pay.59 This distortion can be overcome to some extent by making
the purpose of the interview clear and by interviewing multiple incumbents and supervisors.
Direct Observation

One job analysis expert makes the case that “the most effective way to determine what effective job

incumbents do is to observe their behaviour.”60 In direct observation , the job analyst watches
employees as they carry out their job activities. This procedure is sometimes called “job shadowing.” This
method allows the analyst to come into direct contact with the job; thus, the data are obtained firsthand, as

contrasted with the “more remote types of information generated by questionnaires and surveys.”61

Direct observation is most useful when the job analysis involves easily observable activities.62 A job that
requires a lot of thinking (e.g., a poet) cannot be analyzed effectively through direct observation, whereas
the job of “landscaper” lends itself more readily to direct observation. Before conducting direct
observations, the analyst will already have learned about the job by studying existing documents. Next, the
job analyst determines the nature of the job by asking: “Does the job involve easily observable activities?”
and “Is the work environment one in which unobtrusive observations can be made?” If the answer to both
questions is “yes,” then direct observation may be a viable analysis method. There may be aspects of some
jobs that can be directly observed (e.g., an internal presentation delivered by a management consultant)
and others that cannot (e.g., a management consultant thinking about solutions for a company problem).

In direct observation, systematic observations of employee activities can be recorded either in narrative

format or by using a customized checklist or worksheet.63,64 Different jobs and environments will require
different observation methods. Prior to the observation the analysts should review the archival material to
determine how best to record the information.

In preparing for observations, the analyst might ask: “How many observations are enough?” or “How long
should observations be?” These questions are addressed in planning the job analysis; once again, there is
no rule book one can turn to for the answers. As with job analysis interviews, a representative sample of
workers is needed. If the organization or department is small (e.g., Modern Builders, with only three
employees in the job “electrician”), samples from all workers should be obtained. If, however, the
organization or department is large (e.g., New World Residential Centres, with 10 homes employing over
120 residential counsellors), the analyst should observe a sample of workers consisting of at least 10 to 15

of the staff.65
Observation times should be stratified so that all shifts are covered, and all work conditions are observed,
ensuring that important patterns in worker activities are evident and extraneous information is eliminated.
When observing at New World Residential Centres, for example, an analyst would want to observe
morning, afternoon, and evening shifts during weekdays and weekends, as activities during these periods
can change substantially. Similarly, when observing shift workers in a manufacturing plant, activities may
change during peak and down times, and shift and day considerations will influence the observation
schedule.

A variety of technological aids are available to the observer. Audio and video recording, for example, can
facilitate the observation process. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Digital audio recordings can
augment observer notes with the important verbal behaviour of the worker, but they are rarely useful
observation tools on their own. Important information may be lost because of poor recording quality and
background noise, or because many of the behaviours of interest may be nonverbal.66

Video recording provides a permanent product of the verbal and nonverbal components of the observation
session, which the analyst can review in private for later data collection. When the work area is small and a
camera can be placed unobtrusively, videotaping is an option to consider. But, while it may be easier to
make unobtrusive observations in some settings using a video recorder, the camera cannot follow workers
around in large work areas without someone at the controls. As technology shrinks video recorders to
increasingly smaller sizes, this becomes less of a disadvantage. Another disadvantage, reactivity to
observation, may be greater during videotaped sessions than during observation sessions employing live
observers.

Analysts conducting direct observation sessions should be aware that regardless of the observation
technique employed, their presence may change the behaviour of the employees. Imagine yourself at
work, and an unfamiliar individual with a clipboard begins to write down everything you do. Knowing you
are being watched, you may respond by doing your work according to what you think the observer is
looking for rather than doing it as you would in the normal day-to-day routine. This effect can be minimized
when the analyst blends into the surroundings (e.g., by choosing an unobtrusive observation position) and
when the employees have been informed of the purpose of the observations and are observed only with
their explicit permission. Again, newer technologies may be helpful. Closed circuit television or web cams
allow the analyst to observe from remote locations, which may reduce reactivity to the process. Ethically,
the workers would still need to be advised that they were under observations as part of the job analysis
study.
In addition to direct observation, the job analyst may ask incumbents to monitor their own work

behaviour.67,68 The workers may be asked to keep a diary of their daily activities. Self-monitoring has
several advantages over other observation procedures.69 First, it is less time consuming and less expensive
because the job incumbents observe and record their own behaviour. Second, self-monitoring can be used
when the conditions of work do not easily facilitate direct observation by another person, as in potentially
dangerous or sensitive work. Finally, self-monitoring can provide information on otherwise unobservable
cognitive and intellectual processes involved in the job. The potential shortcomings of self-monitoring are
that incumbents may not be reliable observers of their own behaviour, they may not accurately record or
recall their activities, the self-monitoring task is an additional duty to be completed in addition to the
normal workload, and some amount of training may be required in order to generate valid and reliable
results from self-generated data.

Analyzing Structured Interview and Direct Observation Data

After collecting the interview, observational, or self-monitoring data, the analyst uses the resulting notes
and summary information (e.g., based on diary and video data) to identify critical task statements, which
are used to generate employee specifications. The analyst uses the task statement to describe the critical
components of the job through a standard format. A task statement is a discrete sentence containing
one action verb that concisely describes a single observable activity performed by a job incumbent. Task
statements are based on data collected from a variety of sources including archival information, structured
interviews, questionnaires, and direct observation. Each task statement includes:

1. Action verb—describes the actions performed;

2. Object of the verb—person, data, or things affected by the action;
3. Rationale or observable work product—the intended outcome or product of the action;
4. Materials, tools, procedures, or equipment used to carry out the action; and
5. The directions or guidelines under which the action is taken.

The following task statement for a Management Consultant reflects the five parts of a task statement noted
above:

(1) Administers (2) surveys (3) to client organization employees (4) using approved survey questionnaire (5)
in accordance with survey administration protocol.

The number of task statements needed to describe a job will vary with the complexity of the job, ranging
from a few to a hundred or more. The goal is to describe all the essential functions of the job to give a clear
understanding of its nature and level of complexity.
Once the task statements are identified, the job analyst must identify the KSAOs needed to perform each
task successfully. Three researchers70 proposed the following definitions of knowledge, skills, and abilities:

Knowledge: A body of information, usually of a factual or procedural nature, that makes for successful
performance of a task.

Skill: An individual’s level of proficiency or competency in performing a specific task. Level of competency
is typically expressed in numerical terms.

Ability: A more general, enduring trait, or capability an individual possesses at the time he first begins to
perform a task.

The “O” in KSAO stands for “other attributes” and includes personality traits and other individual
characteristics that are integral to job performance. For example, some jobs may require people to work in
teams and specify “cooperativeness” as a necessary characteristic, to hold a valid driver’s licence, or to be
fluently bilingual. Sometimes, a job description will specify physical requirements or other attributes that
may be related to a person’s age, sex, or race, which may bring about a legal challenge based on
discrimination. The job analyst must ensure that any characteristics of this type will pass legal scrutiny
should they be challenged.

KSAO statements describe specific characteristics needed to carry out a task. They are not simply task
statements with “knowledge of” or “ability to” tacked on at the front end. There is no formal procedure that
is used to identify KSAOs. They are inferred through the knowledge and experience of the job analyst. In the
case of formal job analysis procedures such as the Position Analysis Questionnaire, the vendor will have
established an extensive data bank of KSAOs related to different types of tasks. KSAO statements should
convey the context or effect that is expected and the level of proficiency that is required. In the case of the
task statement for a Management Consultant, here are KSAO examples:

Knowledge of survey measurement principles.

Skill in using computer statistical software.
Ability to present information.
Other: Inquisitiveness—demonstrates curiosity in exploring data.

There are as many KSAOs for each task statement as the job analyst can identify.
Rating Task Statements and KSAOs

In addition to the identification of job information, some job analysis methods also assign ratings to the job
analysis data. For example, SMEs can be asked to rate the importance of the identified task statements and
the KSAOs associated with each task after the final inventory is generated. All tasks are not equal. Some are
performed more frequently than others, some are more important, and some require a degree of difficulty
to perform. A task may be performed frequently but have little importance and not require a great deal of
skill, while another may be performed rarely but have extreme importance attached to it. Table 4.1
presents an example of one task statement for the job of a Management Consultant working in a consulting
firm. The SMEs would rate this task, and all the others, with respect to frequency, importance, and difficulty.
Evaluation of the ratings obtained from all the SMEs helps the job analyst to fully understand what goes on
in the job.

TABLE 4.1: Task Statement and Associated KSAOs with Rating Scales
The KSAOs, as well, must be rated, as these will ultimately be sampled by the selection measures used in
choosing new employees or assigning current employees to new positions. Each of the KSAOs must be
rated by the SMEs with respect to at least its importance in performing the specific task and its proficiency
(i.e., the level that is required by the job). Keep in mind that the SME would perform the ratings for all the
KSAOs identified for each task statement. Reviewing the proficiency information helps to set the selection
standards for entry into the job. They are also useful in establishing training standards for the new hires to
show what the person must be capable of doing after a period of learning either through courses or on-the-
job training.
The job analyst finally integrates the information by compiling a Task × KSAO matrix,71 as illustrated in
Table 4.2. Several tasks may require the same KSAOs. It is impossible to assess all the KSAOs when hiring
someone, so the strategy is to base selection on the most important KSAOs as determined by the job
analysis. To accomplish this, the job analyst develops a table like the one shown in Table 4.2. In Table 4.2
the rows represent task statements and the columns KSAOs that the job analysis has identified for the
target job. Each cell in the matrix states whether the KSAO applies to the specific task and in this case the
level of proficiency needed. This type of matrix can be established with any of the criteria in Table 4.1
depending on organizational priorities. In Table 4.2, it is evident that different tasks rely on different types
and levels of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics. For example, analyzing data and
delivering presentations requires advanced knowledge of data analysis and statistics (K3) whereas
administering surveys does not. In developing selection instruments, the HR staff might wish to
concentrate on the KSAOs that apply to the most tasks in the matrix and to the highest level of proficiency.
In the case of Table 4.2, these would be K3, S1, S2, S3, A2, A4, and O1. The Task × KSAO matrix provides a
linkage between the KSAOs that are needed to perform tasks effectively; it also provides the basis for
developing a defensible selection system.

Structured Job Analysis Questionnaires and Inventories

TABLE 4.2: Task Statement by KSAO Matrix

Note: “N” means that the KSAO does not apply to the specified task. “B” means that basic skill is needed. “I”
means that intermediate skill is needed. “A” means that advanced skill is needed.

The rating methods illustrated in Tables 4.1 and 4.2 can be used with any procedure that generates task
statements that are used to derive KSAOs. A limitation of this approach is that it may be very time
consuming when there are large numbers of task statements and KSAOs. Job analysis software (discussed
later in this chapter) can increase the efficiency, speed, and accuracy of this process.
Structured job analysis questionnaires and inventories require workers and other SMEs to respond to
written questions that reflect their activities and tasks, tools, and equipment as well as working conditions
involved in the job. These can be off-the-shelf questionnaires and inventories that can be used for a variety

of jobs, such as the worker-oriented Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ),72 or they can be developed by
the analyst for the specific job and organization in question using the critical incident technique,73 or

functional job analysis.74,75 As well, the interview protocol shown in Recruitment and Selection Notebook
4.2 could be administered to many SMEs as a written questionnaire. Many organizations simply provide the
existing job description to employees with the instructions to confirm, add, or delete components based on
how it applies to their job as they know it.

Task Inventories

Task inventories are structured work-oriented surveys that break down jobs into their component tasks
and ask job incumbents and supervisors to make judgments about activities and tasks, tools and
equipment, and working conditions involved in the job. A well-constructed survey permits workers to

define their jobs in relation to a subset of tasks appearing on the inventory.76 Some task inventory methods
were developed in response to the Uniform Guidelines criteria for job analysis.77 According to these
criteria, job analysis should assess (1) the duties performed, (2) the level of difficulty of job duties, (3) the
job context, and (4) the criticality of duties to the job. An inventory comprises task statements that are
objectively based descriptions of what gets done on a job. Tasks are worker activities that result in an
outcome that serves some specified purpose.78,79 The task inventory is next used to identify a list of
relevant KSAOs as outlined above. These inventories are typically developed for specific jobs or
occupations. Task inventories are advantageous in that they are efficient to use with large numbers of
employees and are easily translated into quantifiable measurements. On the other hand, they can be time
consuming to develop and thus can be expensive. Motivating incumbents to participate in the rating
process may also be a problem with long inventories. When the task inventory procedure and analysis are
well planned, the results can be extremely valuable in developing HR selection programs. Task inventories
are unique to a specific job in contrast to worker-oriented methods that permit application of survey
instruments to a wide variety of unrelated jobs.

Table 4.3 presents a sample of the task inventory that could be used for the Management Consultant job
analysis. The items in the task inventory were gathered by reviewing archival sources such as the NOC,
O*NET, and the organization’s documents. Tasks on which these sources agreed were included in the
survey that SMEs then rated.

TABLE 4.3: Sample of a Task Inventory for the Management Consultant Job
Functional Job Analysis (FJA)

Functional Job Analysis consists of two components: the focus group with SMEs to generate the job
information and several rating processes to describe this information. Both components are implemented
by one or more certified FJA analysts. The analyst convenes a focus group of approximately six job
incumbents who have a broad range of experience in the position. The focus of the workshop is on
obtaining two types of information, specifically what a worker does and how a task is performed. Under the
guidance of the analyst, the focus group collects information on (1) the outputs of the job for which they
are paid, (2) the tasks that they need to do to perform their job, and (3) the KSAOs required to perform
those tasks. After identifying the job outputs, tasks required to achieve those outcomes, and the KSAOs,
much of the time is spent writing task statements that clearly define what needs to be done to deliver the
outputs and the KSAOs that are needed for each task.

The task statement is the basic unit of analysis. Task statements follow the same format we presented
earlier in this chapter. The facilitator writes as many task statements as possible. Generally, 20 to 30 task
statements are enough to describe the essential job components, although with complex jobs the number
needed may go as high as 100. This bank of task statements should cover at least 95 percent of the work
that the job entails. The task bank is then edited by the analyst to ensure clarity and conformity to the
format and then sent to the focus group participants for their feedback and evaluation.
Once the task bank has been confirmed as reflecting 95 percent of the job, the information is then rated
along several dimensions to provide more insight into the job (refer to Figure 4.3). These dimension ratings
can also be used to establish selection criteria for hiring. The FJA scales assign ratings to the task
statements that reflect the level of worker instruction (WI) needed (i.e., the amount of discretion a worker
has with respect to accomplishing the task), the level of interaction the task requires with things, data, and
people, as well as three General Education Development (GED) scales. These three scales reflect Reasoning
Development, which assesses problem-solving and decision-making demands of a task; Mathematical
Development, which assesses the math operations required by a task; and Language Development, which
assesses the oral and written materials related to the task. Table 4.4 presents the descriptors that serve as
a guide in making the things, data, and people ratings. As FJA was the methodology used to develop the
original classification systems, it is not surprising to see these scales in the Dictionary of Occupational
Titles, the Canadian Classification Dictionary of Occupations, and the National Occupational Classification.

Table 4.4: The Data, People, and Things Scales Used in Functional Job Analysis

DATA PEOPLE THINGS

Worker
involvement with Worker Worker use of
ideas, facts, interactions with equipment and
information, and other humans. tools.
statistics.
HIGH COMPLEXITY Mentoring
Negotiating
Synthesizing Setting up
Instructing
Coordinating Precision working
Supervising
Analyzing Opering/controlling
Diverting
Compiling Manipulating
Persuading
Computing Tending
Speaking/signalling
Copying Feeding/offbearing
Serving
Comparing Handling
Taking
LOW COMPLEXITY instructions/helping
An optional last step in the FJA is to ask workers to rate the frequency, importance, and difficulty of each
task (refer to Table 4.1). One FJA expert80 notes that the usefulness of all three ratings is dubious because
the critical issue is whether the task needs to be performed to get the work done, in which case it is
important and the other two criteria (i.e., frequency and difficulty) do not matter. A worker in a nuclear
power facility may, for example, be required to enter and conduct rescues in radiologically contaminated
confined spaces. While such a rescue operation is rarely, if ever, necessary in the life of a job, it is essential
that certain workers be able to perform to stringent standards at any given time, so this is a critical

component in employee selection.81,82

When multiple experts provide ratings, the mean values from the seven scales are used to summarize each
task in the task bank. The mean ratings are used to develop the job requirement and specifications. There

is no agreed-upon formula for how to do this. However, one approach83 requires that at least 75 percent of
the employees perform the task and that there should be good agreement across raters on their scale
ratings. The KSAOs from frequent, important, and difficult tasks can be prioritized in the selection process.

Critical Incident Technique (CIT)

Critical incidents are examples of effective and ineffective work behaviours that reflect superior or inferior
performance. The critical incident technique (CIT) generates behaviourally focused descriptions of
work activities. It was originally developed as a training needs assessment and performance appraisal

tool.84 The critical incident technique provides important, contextually rich examples of job behaviours
that are particularly useful in developing behaviourally anchored rating scales (BARS; see Chapter 5) and
behavioural interviews (see Chapter 9), as well as being the basis for situational judgment tests and

assessment centre exercises such as role-plays and in-basket tests (see Chapter 8).85

The first step in this method is to assemble a panel of job experts, usually consisting of people with several
years’ experience who have had the opportunity to observe both poor and exemplary actions on the job.

The developer of the critical incident technique86 defined an incident as an observable human activity that
is sufficiently complete to facilitate inferences and predictions about the person performing the act. Panel
members describe incidents, including the antecedents to the activity, a complete description of the
behaviour, the results of the behaviour, and whether the results were within the control of the worker. All
the incidents are then rated by the panel in terms of whether they represent effective or ineffective
behaviour on the part of the employee. Figure 4.5 presents an example of a form used to collect critical
incidents.
 FIGURE 4.5: Critical Incident Report Form

After the incidents are gathered, they are edited and reviewed by a panel of SMEs who sort the incidents
into themes or dimensions that they believe characterize the complete set of incidents. These dimensions
may have been predetermined or they may be inferred from the incidents. At least 60 percent of the SMEs
must agree that an item belongs in a dimension; if this criterion is not met, the item is dropped. This

technique87 was used to develop a new measure to evaluate teaching based on competencies. From close
to 500 critical incidents the designers identified nine competencies (dimensions) that formed the new
scale: communication, availability, creativity, individual consideration, social awareness, feedback,
professionalism, conscientiousness, and problem solving. Examples of ineffective and effective incidents
for four of the competencies are presented in Table 4.5.

TABLE 4.5: Examples of Effective and Ineffective Critical Incidents Sorted Into Dimensions

AVAILABILITY
The teacher is a part-time instructor and is rarely seen on campus. The teacher was never
available during office hours. The teacher did not provide an email or other means of
contact. There was no support for the students who required extra assistance or
supplementary information to understand the material and assignments.
The course material in the class was very difficult, and students were concerned that the
lectures were not helping them to understand the material. The professor took time out of
his schedule and offered tutorial sessions. The students greatly appreciated this and felt
that they received higher marks in the class because of it.
COMMUNICATION
The professor was new at teaching and was very nervous. The professor’s style was to read
off the PowerPoint slides and he or she was so uncomfortable when he or she spoke that it
was difficult to understand what he or she was saying. The result was that the students felt
they did not learn as much as they could.

The student told the professor that the professor could not be heard properly from the
back of the room. The professor thanked the student and proceeded to conduct the lecture
in a louder voice. The student was able to fully hear the professor and to take better notes.
CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
The professor arrived early for class and listed on the blackboard the concepts that would
be covered that day. Beside the concepts were small but effective descriptions for each
concept. The class was extremely organized and was taught succinctly. The student
understood what the professor was talking about and was able to generate extremely
efficient notes.

The professor did not give out a syllabus explaining what would be covered during the
semester and when it would be covered. The student was not sure what to read for class or
what would be covered during the class. This made it very difficult to keep up with the
readings.
INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
A student approached the teacher to discuss some concerns about the class. The teacher
was very cold and uninterested. The student felt very uncomfortable and did not receive
any support from the teacher. The student never returned to discuss issues regarding the
class.

Because of the death of a family member, a student had to leave for an extended period
during the semester. The teacher kept the student updated in order to prevent the student
from falling too far behind. Consequently, the student was accommodated and obtained a
good grade for the course.
The dimensions or competencies, rather than tasks, are used to describe the job. The performance
dimensions and the rated incidents are used to derive KSAOs and to identify appropriate selection
methods. If we were hiring teachers, we might consider selecting them on the basis of their communication
skills and the personality factors of openness and conscientiousness, as suggested by Table 4.5. The rated
incidents within each dimension can be used to develop the anchors for the BARS instruments, situational
judgment tests, and structured interviews that are discussed in later chapters.

The critical incident technique has the advantages of being flexible and collecting data from employees in
their own words. It identifies rare events that may help to define the work situation. It is relatively
inexpensive compared to other methods and provides rich behavioural data that can be used in selection
interviews and performance evaluations. On the other hand, the focus on critical incidents may miss
important routine tasks. The critical incidents rely on memory and often only recent events are recalled. It
may take a while to collect enough critical incidents to describe a job. CIT develops rich qualitative data

that provide great insights but are relatively labour-intensive to develop.88

WORKER-ORIENTED JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ)

The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) is a structured job analysis questionnaire that focuses on
the general behaviours that make up a job. It assumes that all jobs can be described in terms of six
dimensions: information input, mental processes, work output, relationships, job context, and other job
characteristics. The PAQ includes 195 items with 187 job elements, organized into 32 job division

dimensions that reflect the six overall dimensions.89 For example, the dimension of mental processes
contains additional sub-­sections reflecting the scope of decision making, reasoning and
planning/scheduling; information processing activities; and the use of learned information. Figure 4.6
presents a sample of the PAQ items used in assessing information input from visual sources.
 FIGURE 4.6: Sample of PAQ Items. Source: Courtesy of PAQ Services, Inc.

The PAQ can be used for any job. Figure 4.7 shows the scores on the PAQ job dimensions provided by job
analysts to four very different occupations. The scores are percentiles and represent comparisons for the
dimension with normative data from the PAQ database of over 300 000 job analyses. For example, ratings
for homemakers on demanding situations were equal to or greater than ratings on this dimension for 85
percent of jobs in the PAQ database. Figure 4.7 illustrates how the PAQ uses percentiles to compare job
elements across jobs, which can be used to prioritize these elements in the selection process.
 FIGURE 4.7: PAQ Dimension Scores for Four Occupations. Source: S.K. Butler and R.J. Harvey. 1988. “A
comparison of Holistic Versus Decomposed Ratings of Position Analysis Questionnaire Work Dimensions,”
Personnel Psychology, 41(4): 761–771. Blackwell Publishing Limited. Note: Entries are percentile ranks for each
job on the relevant PAQ dimension; dimensions 1–5 are the overall PAQ factors, whereas dimensions 6–32 are
specific dimensions.

The PAQ can be completed by trained job analysts, HR practitioners, or through interviews with job
incumbents and supervisors; trained job analysts produce the most accurate and reliable results in the
least amount of time.90 The PAQ has good reliability and is available “off-the-shelf” for immediate use. It
can be used with a small number of SMEs. After the data are collected, they are uploaded to PAQ Services
who score the data and provide comparisons to the thousands of jobs in its database as benchmarks.

Finally, the PAQ has been rated as one of the most cost-efficient job analysis methods.91
There are drawbacks, however, including questions about the readability of the statements in the inventory
(i.e., high level of reading ability and comprehension required), with the suggestion that a job analyst
complete the inventory after interviewing job incumbents and supervisors. Having the job analyst
complete the inventory increases the time and cost of administering the PAQ. The content of the PAQ
makes it more suitable for blue-collar jobs. It does not quantify what work gets done on a job. Because of
its focus on behaviours rather than tasks and on de-emphasizing job context, important differences
between jobs may be missed.

Recently, the PAQ has been updated to include items that meet a wider variety of human resource needs,
including those related to disabilities. A separate version of the PAQ designed for use with occupations
involving professional and managerial work is now available. The PAQ offers free services, materials, and
sample scoring reports to classes in HR and I/O psychology.

More information on the Position Analysis Questionnaire is available on the PAQ website.

A key aspect of the PAQ is the idea that any job can be described by ratings across the six dimensions. By
comparing jobs on a fixed set of standardized criteria, the PAQ provides for simple comparisons across
jobs. In addition, the online submission of data, online reporting of results, database comparisons, and low
cost make the PAQ a simple and cost-effective job analysis tool.

With the increased availability of software and online systems to describe jobs, organizations have
additional options to support their job analysis work. For example, Guidelines Oriented Job Analysis
(GOJA,) is a hosted job analysis application that organizations can use for a fee (the first job analysis is free).
Although the job dimensions are different than those for the PAQ, the general approach is the same with all
jobs being assessed on a standardized set of questions. The GOJA approach reflects the job analysis
recommendations from the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures.

Another software tool, JDXpert by HRTMS, provides organizations with a complete job description
management system. This system supports user defined job questionnaires, online input into job
descriptions, comparisons across jobs, the linking of KSAOs across job families and hierarchies, as well as
job description archiving. This approach is unique because it allows for integration and comparisons across
all the jobs in an organization rather than focusing on one job as with other methods. In other words, it is
an integrated job analysis data management system.
Worker Traits Inventories

Worker traits inventories do not provide information on the job as a whole or any tasks associated
with it, but only certain requirements needed to carry out the job. For this reason, some researchers argue
that worker traits inventories are not legitimate job analysis methods.92 However, these methods are
widely used to infer employee specifications from work or job analysis data and are useful for selection and
training purposes. These methods are commonly included in the job analysis literature and accepted by
most practitioners as legitimate work or job analysis methods. Worker traits inventories are designed to
identify the traits or KSAOs that predict job success. The identification of these KSAOs is made by SMEs who
are most familiar with the job or occupation. In many ways, worker traits inventories are similar to
procedures used to identify worker competencies that we discuss in Part II of this chapter.

O*NET provides a list of KSAOs that many job analyses have associated with particular jobs or occupations.
These lists can be used to develop a trait inventory that is then evaluated by the SMEs for the job in
question. In addition, the list of attributes may be obtained through focus groups where the SMEs are asked
to identify the attributes that make for successful performance of day-to-day duties. Table 4.6 presents a
sample of the trait inventory for a Management Consultant job analysis. If you go to O*NET and review the
listing for a Management Analyst (the closest comparator to the consultant job), you will see the full list of
traits associated with that job. This is a starting point; however, the job analyst must determine which of
these attributes apply to the job in question. Thus, there is a need to rate the attributes and to determine if
the list is complete by giving the SMEs an opportunity to add traits.

TABLE 4.6: Sample of Trait Inventory Used as Part of Management Consultant Job Analysis
Personality Oriented Job Analysis (POJA)

With the increasing use of personality assessments in selection the

Personality Oriented Job Analysis (POJA) 93 method provides for the identification of specific
personality traits for any job. The designers of POJA developed a methodology to allow SMEs to rate the
positive or negative contribution of defined personality traits with job performance. Their approach allows
for the direct connection between traits that are measured in personality inventories with job performance,
making it easy for organizations to select personality tools for use in selection and to legally defend these
decisions. As evidence supporting POJA, their research validated the trait ratings with self-assessed job
performance for a sample of medical students on their job rotations with correlations ranging from .12 for
agreeableness as important for family medicine and pediatrics versus .17 for responsibility for internal

medicine and .16 for endurance with surgery.94

Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS)

The Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS) 95 is a system for identifying which and to what degree an
array of empirically derived ability constructs are critical to perform a specific job effectively. It assumes
that job tasks differ with respect to the abilities required to perform them successfully and that jobs can be

classified according to the abilities required to perform them. Fleishman and his colleagues,96,97using
factor analysis methods, identified 52 human ability categories, such as “oral comprehension” and “multi-
limb coordination” and “night vision.” In the F-JAS booklet (F-JAS-1) these abilities are grouped into four
clusters: cognitive, psychomotor, physical, and sensory/perception. The methodology employs a minimum
of 10 raters familiar with the job to assess the job with behaviourally anchored rating scales ranging from a
high of seven to a low of one on that ability requirement level. The average of these 10 rater scores is
obtained to provide a statistically significant value for the degree of expertise that job requires of that
ability. These 52 abilities are now used by O*NET in describing the level of abilities required by jobs in its

database. Additional research98,99 has enhanced the development and uses of the F-JAS.

Figure 4.8 provides the rating scale used for the ability “Oral Comprehension.” Unlike many other rating
systems, this scale and those shown in Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 include definitions of the ability and how
it differs from others. The scale is anchored with behaviours that help the rater to determine the level of the
ability needed for the job.
FIGURE 4.8: The F-JAS Ability Scale for Oral Comprehension. Source: Copyright © Management Research
Institute, http://www.managementresearchinstitute.com.
 FIGURE 4.9: The F-JAS Ability Scale for Dependability. Source: Copyright © Management Research Institute,
http://www.managementresearchinstitute.com/.

More recently, Fleishman and his colleagues extended this work to the development of F-JAS-2, which
provides 21 job-related social and interpersonal abilities. A number of these abilities, such as dependability
and assertiveness, reflect the current research on the role of personality variables in selection and job
performance. Administration of the F-JAS-2 requires that same sample of subject matter experts, the job
incumbents, supervisors, and others, be presented with the job description and assess it against the
component social and interpersonal abilities. The method offers job analysts the flexibility to rate the
extent that each ability is required at the job as a whole level or at more specific levels of inquiry such as
task statements or job dimensions.

Figure 4.9 provides an example of the rating scale for “Dependability.”

In addition to F-JAS-1 (ability requirements) and F-JAS-2 (social requirements), Fleishman and

colleagues100 have developed an additional F-JAS-3 component to cover the 49 major knowledge and skill
requirements of jobs, using the same rating scale formats as the F-JAS. They101 have also produced a
companion handbook that provides a compilation of commercially available assessment instruments
designed to measure each of the specific abilities required of job incumbents.

More information on the F-JAS can be found at www.managementresearchinstitute.com.

Job Analysis for Physical and Physiological Requirements

Physically demanding jobs such as policing and firefighting require additional job information to be
collected reflecting their physical aspects. Physical demands analysis identifies the physical requirements
of job tasks (e.g., the physical load and movements as well as the equipment and environmental
conditions) and the physiological strain (e.g., heart rate and oxygen consumption) placed on the worker

when completing those tasks.102

Legally defensible physical demands analysis must meet the same criteria as all job analysis
methodologies: essential to do the job, established in good faith, with supporting evidence for reliability
and validity. This approach relies heavily on job incumbent observation with corresponding strength,
movement, and physiological measurements being collected. From this information test activities are
developed for the selection process that reflect the physical requirements. For example, firefighters must
be able to drag an unconscious person to safety, which is assessed in selection by job applicants dragging

an 83 kg (183 lb) mannequin through an obstacle course in 57 seconds or less.103 This test was developed
based on a physical demands analysis and assesses the job applicant’s upper and lower body muscle
strength and endurance for pulling and dragging.

Other Job Analysis Methods

Because there are so many other job analysis methods that are available for general or ­specific purposes, it
is impossible to cover all of these. Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.3 presents brief information on
some of the more popular of these methods.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.3

OTHER JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

Common-Metric Questionnaire (CMQ)104

The CMQ is a structured, off-the-shelf job analysis questionnaire that captures information about the job’s
background, contacts with people, decision making, physical and mechanical activities, and work setting,
based on observable behaviour rather than subjective ratings systems. The reading level is appropriate for
lower-level jobs and the content appears to be appropriate for both lower- and higher-level jobs. More
information on the CMQ can be found at http://commonmetric.com.

Threshold Traits Analysis System

The Threshold Traits Analysis System105 is designed to identify worker traits that are relevant to the target
job. Supervisors, incumbents, and other SMEs rate the job according to the relevancy and level of 33 worker
traits (e.g., stamina, perception, oral expression, adaptability to pressure, and tolerance) they believe are
necessary to perform the job and the need to have the traits upon hiring. More information on the
Threshold Traits Analysis System can be found at http://www.flopez-associates.com/services.html.

Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA)

CTA refers to a class of methods that are similar in their approach to understanding the cognitive processes
used by experts to complete tasks. CTA is generally used following a behavioural-based task analysis with

the intent of identifying mental processes used by experts in performing those tasks.106 Because there are
numerous CTA methodologies, the purpose of the task, the nature of the task, and the available resources
must be considered before deciding on an approach. CTA is relatively new and must be used with caution
even as a secondary analytic procedure. CTA methods suffer from a lack of detailed procedural
information, complexity and difficulty in using the procedures, and lack of sufficient data on their reliability
and validity. CTA is also time consuming, labour intensive, and expensive. CTA is more suitable for training
applications rather than selection.

BEST PRACTICE IN CHOOSING JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

Throughout this chapter we have discussed several different job analysis methods. Recruitment and
Selection Notebook 4.4 presents the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods. So, which
method is best? Which one should we choose for use? There is no right answer to these questions. It
depends on the purpose for which you are doing the job analysis: selection, job evaluation, compensation,
pay equity, and so on. Some methods are better suited to one purpose than another. Several job analysis
experts107 identified 11 criteria that could be used in assessing job analysis methods. These are presented
in Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.5.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.4

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF COMMONLY USED JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

Method Advantages Disadvantages

Easy to use
Existing data
O*NET and NOC provide
Existing Documentation May not cover job of
rich, detailed
interest
information
O*NET NOC Job descriptions Information may be
May be used to suggest
Job specifications Training outdated or not relevant
information that is
manuals Job may have changed
needed
Useful for several
purposes

Requires experienced
interviewer
Job incumbents
Requires well-designed
describe work
questions and probes
Information obtained
Provides qualitative data
Structured interview from persons most
that may be difficult to
familiar with the job
combine and analyze
May provide unexpected
Time consuming
information
Interviewees may distort
information
 Observations may not
cover all time periods in
Analyst sees firsthand
which job is performed
what the job involves
Time consuming
Useful for blue-collar
Not useful for jobs
Direct observation work
involving cognitive tasks
Simple to use
Observation may bias
May verify data from
performance
other sources
Validity and reliability
may be problematic

Only a portion of
Job incumbents
workers may respond
describe work
Respondents may not
Information obtained
answer honestly
from persons most
Structured questionnaires Questions are fixed and
familiar with the job
do not allow flexibility
Access information from
May not capture points
large number of workers
that the worker believes
Relatively inexpensive
are important
 Provides task bank of
standardized task
statements
Identifies the level of
involvement with Only trained analysts
people, data, and things may use the method
Used to develop job Very costly for analyst
Functional job analysis descriptions training
Helps to identify KSAOs Very time consuming,
related to task laborious, and costly to
statements collect task statements
Produces reliable and
valid data, if data
collected by trained
analyst

Analysis based on
observable behaviour
Work described in Does not require
workers’ own words training for the analyst
Relatively easy to collect May not capture all the
data dimensions critical for
Perceived as relevant job performance
Critical incident technique
and practical Relies on memory of
Has good reliability and recent events
validity Reliability and validity
Good cost-benefit ratios may be lower than off-
Provides rich the-shelf inventories
behavioural data
Best used for selection

Position Analysis
Allows standardized Requires an experienced
Questionnaire
comparisons between job analyst
jobs in PAQ data bank Statements are lengthy
Information is not task and detailed
specific
 Information includes Requires an above-
KSAOs related to average reading level on
selection the part of the person
Mostly suited to blue- completing the
collar jobs inventory
Relatively inexpensive
Has very good reliability
Requires only a small
number of SMEs

Easy to administer
Can be used with task
statements or the whole
job
Needs at least 10 SMEs
Cost efficient
Does not provide task
Does not require trained
statement or
analyst to collect data
Fleishman Job Analysis information on the job
Ratings are
Survey duties
behaviourally anchored
Task information needs
Provides rich data for
to be obtained through
writing worker
another process
specification
Useful for both blue-
and white-collar jobs
Has good reliability

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.5

CRITERIA FOR CHOOSING A JOB ANALYSIS METHOD

The following criteria were developed by Levine and his colleagues to evaluate seven job analysis
techniques. They remain a useful set of questions for any HR practitioner to use in deciding among various
procedures.

Operational status: Has the method been tested and refined sufficiently?
Availability: Is it available off the shelf?
Occupational versatility: Is it suitable for analyzing a variety of jobs?
Standardization: Is it possible to compare your results with others that have been found elsewhere?
User acceptability: Is the method acceptable to the client and the employees who will have to
provide the information?
Training requirements: How much training is needed and available to use the method; must one
receive special certification in the procedure to use it? Can it be done “in-house”?
Sample size: From how many employees must data be collected for the method to provide reliable
results?
Reliability: Will the method give results that are replicable?
Cost: What are the costs of the method in materials, consultant fees, training, and person-hours?
Quality of outcome: Will the method yield high quality results (e.g., legally defensible)?
Time to completion: How many calendar days will the data collection and analysis take?

Source: E.L. Levine, R.A. Ash, H. Hall, and F. Sistrunk. 1983. “Evaluation of Job Analysis Methods by
Experienced Job Analysts.” Academy of Management Journal, 26: 339–48. Copyright © 1983 Academy of
Management, NY. Reproduced with permission of ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT via Copyright Clearance
Center.

An important issue that must be addressed as part of selecting a job analysis method is the reliability or

accuracy of the information that the method will provide. Two researchers108 used a meta-analysis of 299
reliability estimates that were from different job analyses involving a variety of occupations. They
concluded that methods that gathered specific task data (e.g., “replaces ink cartridges in desktop printers”)
did so with greater accuracy than methods that assessed generalized work activity (e.g., “supervises work of
office staff”). They also reported that professional job analysts made more accurate assessments than did
job incumbents who made self-reports or surveys. Finally, their analysis showed that SMEs made the most
reliable estimates when using “importance” and “frequency” scales rather than other types of
measurements.

This information should be of value to practitioners in designing job analysis projects: “For instance, when
only a certain amount of financial resources are procurable to conduct a job analysis, one could use the
information presented herein to provide an estimate of how much reliability could be expected from using

25 incumbents versus five trained analysts rating tasks [generalized work activity]” (p. 643).109 These meta-
analytic findings do not imply that only task-oriented job analysis methods should be used. The value of a
job analysis lies in how the information from the analysis will be employed. For some uses, such as training
and development, task data may be necessary, while for some other uses, such as designing a performance
management system, a more holistic method may be acceptable. The practitioner must take the intended
use into consideration when choosing a method.
Recently, job analysis proponents have debated the best way to assess the reliability and validity of

different job analysis methods. Two job analysis experts110 have taken the position that traditional
methods of assessing reliability are inappropriate for assessing job analysis data in that they are of little
practical value. They propose that job analysis data be evaluated in terms of their consequences: “Thus, the
evaluation of [job analysis] data should focus on (1) the inferences derived from such data; and (2) the rules
governing the making of such inferences” (p. 814). For example, four very different job analysis methods,
which likely had very different degrees of accuracy, led HR professionals to develop very similar selection

strategies.111

Two researchers112 echo these arguments by endorsing an inferential approach to validation, similar to our
presentation in Chapter 2 (refer to Recruitment and Selection Notebook 2.2). In their model at the
conceptual or construct level, the analyst identifies job performance and job-related psychological
constructs. SMEs produce a job description outlining tasks and duties that is made by inference from the
job performance construct. Similarly, job specifications, in terms of KSAOs, are inferred from the job-related
psychological constructs. An operational linkage is assumed to tie the KSAOs to the tasks and duties.
Validation rests on verifying the different inferences.

Some experts113 take issue with these approaches; they maintain the position that a procedure that
focuses only on job specifications or the consequences of those specifications is not a true job analysis
procedure. They argue that holistic ratings, or direct inferences of KSAOs from psychological constructs
rather than from job tasks, will always produce inferior data. However, this position runs directly counter to
the procedures used to develop competency-based models that we discuss in Part II of this chapter. There
is little empirical evidence currently on which to judge the merits of these two competing positions to
provide guidance to an HR practitioner. The best advice that we can give is to be aware of these two
differing views toward assessing reliability and validity of job analysis systems and the implications for legal
defensibility.
Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.6 presents guidelines developed from research on court records114
to determine whether a job analysis procedure would meet legal standards. The guidelines are based on
U.S. court decisions but represent what HR professionals could expect from Canadian courts and tribunals
when they evaluate the information produced by a job analysis. Although the guidelines are a bit dated,
they are still relevant, but they may change with the adoption of new laws or standards or what is
acceptable professional practice.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.6

ASSESSING THE LEGAL DEFENSIBILITY OF A JOB ANALYSIS

Although there are no Canadian checklists for factors influencing the legal defensibility of job analysis here,

the approach based on U.S. court and tribunal decisions,116 should improve the legal defensibility of job
analysis in Canada:

A job analysis must be performed according to a set of formal procedures. It is not acceptable to rely
on what “everyone” knows about a job because that knowledge may be based on inaccurate
stereotyped notions of the job demands.
The job analysis must be well documented; it is not enough to simply carry around job information in
the analyst’s head.
The job analysis should collect data from several up-to-date sources. This suggests using several
different methods of job analysis.
The sample of people interviewed should be sufficient in number to capture accurately the job
information. The sample should also represent the full diversity of job incumbents (e.g., ethnic and
gender groups, people with and without formal qualifications) to ensure the validity of the data.
The job analysts should be properly trained in the different techniques to ensure that they collect
objective information and are as free from bias as possible.
The job analysis should determine the most important and critical aspects of the job, and it is on
these that the key attributes and selection and evaluation for the job should be based.

Source: D.E. Thompson and T.A. Thompson. 1982. “Court Standards for Job Analysis in Test Validation,”
Personnel Psychology, 35: 872–73. Reproduced with permission of Blackwell Publishing, Inc. via Copyright
Clearance Center.
No guarantee exists that any job analysis method will find acceptance before the courts. The best that can
be said is that having done a formal job analysis, regardless of method, is better than not having done one,
and having carried it out properly will increase the probability that the courts will accept its results. Given
the limitations of different methods and their suitability to different HR management functions, it is not
unusual for an organization to use several job analysis techniques. Often, such multi-method approaches
are needed to understand the complexity of today’s jobs where the dividing lines between job, worker, and
job-related behaviours become blurred.

Using a variety of approaches is a form of “triangulation” and provides different perspectives on the job that
when synthesized produce the best information for matching people to jobs. Ultimately, what the HR
practitioner must decide is (1) Which job analysis method best serves the intended purpose of the job
analysis (i.e., will the data be used for selection, performance appraisal, job evaluation, etc.)? (2) Can the job
analysis be carried out reliably given the number of positions to be assessed, the availability of SMEs, the
time allowed to complete the project, and the cooperation of job incumbents? (3) Which job analysis

method has the best track record with respect to technical adequacy and legal defensibility?115

Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.7 summarizes the job analysis information in this part of the
chapter and presents guidelines on conducting a job analysis. These are guidelines as the specific nature of
how the analysis is carried out may depend on many issues. We present a procedure that we believe will
meet the requirements of legal defensibility while producing important, job-relevant information.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.7

GUIDELINES FOR CONDUCTING A JOB ANALYSIS

1. Determine the purpose of the job analysis. Is the job analysis to be used for selection, performance
appraisal, compensation, or other purposes? Different job analysis methods are more suited to some of
these purposes than others.
2. Determine the resources that are available and those needed for the job analysis.

a. What is the budget for the job analysis?

b. How many job incumbents are there in each job position of interest?
c. Are subject matter experts available to assist?
 d. Will consultants be involved?
e. Where is the job analysis worksite: one or several
locations?
f. What is the deadline for completing the process?
3. Review available documentation/information for the position or job in question. This may include job
or position descriptions, recruitment information, past job analyses, and website information, e.g., O*Net,
NOC.
4. Determine the job analysis method to be used. The choice of a job analysis depends on answers to
Points 1 and 2. Review these points in the context of the criteria for choosing a job analysis method in
Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.5. Does the job analysis method require special training on the part
of the analyst?
5. Identify subject matter experts (SMEs) and incumbents who will participate in the job analysis.
SMEs used in the job analysis process should include first-level supervisors or hiring managers.
Additionally, previous employees or trainers may be appropriate. A good SME has direct knowledge of the
job and knows what is required to succeed in the job. The number and role of incumbents depends on the
job analysis method; in most cases, they should be top performers who know the job.
6. Conduct the job analysis to obtain task and/or KSAO statements. The type of statement will depend on
the job analysis method. Some methods, for example, will not produce task statements.
7. Confirm the task and KSAO statements. Have a second SME panel review the output of the job
analysis. Such a review increases the accuracy of the statements and adds validity to the job analysis
process. The task and KSAO statements should include important aspects of the job.
8. Compile the task and KSAO statements into a job analysis questionnaire (JAQ). Administer the JAQ to
SMEs and job incumbents to obtain individual ratings for the tasks and KSAOs. For each task, rate (1) the
importance of the task to successful job performance, (2) the frequency of the task performance, and (3) the
difficulty or criticality of the task in job performance. Similarly rate each KSAO in terms of (1) how important
the KSAO is to successful job performance, and (2) whether the KSAO is essential and required on the first
day of the job.
9. Establish cutoff criteria to determine the critical tasks and KSAOs necessary to successfully perform
the job. In addition, identify the tasks and KSAOs with ratings that did not meet the cutoff criteria. These
statements may be useful for purposes other than selection (e.g., training needs analyses).
10. Develop a Task × KSAO matrix to link tasks to KSAOs and to identify those KSAOs that relate directly
to performing the job. Organize the critical tasks and KSAO statements into logical content areas,
performance domains, or competencies such as oral and written communication, machine operation
program management, leadership, decision making, safety, and so on. This becomes the basis for the
choice of selection instruments related to critical job functions.
11. Select employment selection method(s) that are the most effective way to measure the KSAOs that
are essential to job performance. In some cases, more than one instrument may be chosen to measure a
KSAO.
12. Document the job analysis through a report that summarizes the specific methodology used to
gather all relevant information about the job, how the job content was analyzed, and how appropriate
selection modalities were identified to assess job candidates in terms of KSAOs relevant to successful job
performance. In an appendix present all the data from the job analysis.

Part II: The Role of Competencies in Recruitment and

Selection
Today’s workplace is in the midst of unprecedented change as it struggles to adapt to increasing global
competition, rapid advances in information technology, multitasking, and changing work force
demographics. Emerging from this turbulence are worker requirements unlike any we have seen in the
past. With many of the routine aspects of work now done by machines, jobs have been redefined, with
greater emphasis given to the management of technology.

In this post-industrial information era, workers are required to apply a wider range of skills to an ever-
changing series of tasks. Individuals just entering the work force will face at least three to four career
changes in their lifetime. Workers will be expected to possess the skills and knowledge of two or three

traditional employees.117 On the factory floor, jobs change rapidly, and workers constantly rotate among
positions, acquiring multiple and generic skills. Today’s workplace poses special challenges when trying to
match people to jobs.

For many workers, these changes mean that the tasks performed today may be radically different from
those required a few months later. Skill requirements for employees may be increased or decreased,

depending on the type of technology employed.118 Task and job instability create a growing need for hiring
people with an already-learned set of skills and the ability to make decisions and adapt to changing
organizational demands. The results of a job analysis may hold for only as long as the job remains

configured as it was at the time of the job analysis.119 For example, today there is a greater emphasis on the
strategic role played by HR professionals than in the past. With decreasing specialization and shifting of
shared work assignments typical of today’s work, traditional methods of job analysis may not be
appropriate as they do not present a strategic approach to defining work.120 That is, they are simply
inconsistent with the new management practices of cross-training assignments, self-managed teams, and
increased responsibility at all organizational levels. A job analysis should be linked to an organization’s
strategic focus.
The evolution toward rapidly changing jobs and organizations that demand flexibility of their workers has
led some HR practitioners to search for alternatives to traditional job analysis techniques. In order to
recruit, select, and promote flexible workers who are able to make their own rules and adjust to the
changing demands of work, HR specialists are faced with the ever-increasing need to adjust their methods
to ensure that people are hired based on the needs of the organization, while remaining within legal
boundaries. One approach that HR practitioners are using in a rapidly changing environment is to select
employees through work-related competencies that are thought to be related to successful job
performance. A growing number of U.S. and Canadian organizations have implemented competency-
based management strategies. A recent survey121 of 48 HR and I/O practitioners in 2011, found that 69
percent of their organizations had used competency modelling for five or more years, which represented an
increase from 33 percent in a similar survey conducted in 2000. The practitioners noted several concerns
over the use of competencies.

1. Some organizations that adopt competency models do not know how to implement them.
2. There are challenges in linking or integrating different applications when different competency
models are developed for different HR functions.
3. Competencies may be too broad and cannot be measured, while some are too detailed for use and
acceptance by employees.
4. Changes in top organizational leadership may lead to changes in the competencies and instability in
their application to HR functions.
5. Organizations often fail to validate their competency model in predicting job performance, particularly
when adopting an off-the-shelf competency dictionary.

WHAT IS A “COMPETENCY”?
David McClelland was the first person to suggest that competencies rather than IQ tests should be used as

predictors of academic or job success.122 A colleague of McClelland123 popularized the term “competency”
in The Competent Manager and defined it as a combination of a motive, trait, skill, aspect of one’s self-
image or social role, or a body of relevant knowledge. Another definition describes a competency as an
underlying characteristic of an individual (including motives, traits, self-concept, knowledge, and skill) that

is causally related to criterion-referenced effective or superior performance in a job situation.124 The

inclusion of these different aspects has made identifying competencies challenging for organizations. One
review of these definitions suggests that they generally contain two elements.125 First, most suggest that
competencies are the KSAOs or behaviours that differentiate between average and superior performers;
second, the KSAOs or behaviours must be observable or measurable.126 Competencies, then, are
measurable attributes or behaviours that distinguish outstanding performers from others in a defined job
or organizational context.
Although traditional job analysis methods focus on describing the job, many are vague (the critical incident
technique is a notable exception) as to whether their descriptions contribute to average or superior
performance. Competency modelling, in contrast, starts with the explicit position that competencies will

distinguish between average and superior performers.127 This explicit connection between competencies
and superior performance elevated their importance in organizations beyond job analysis and facilitated
their connection to organizational strategy. As a result, their use in organizations has grown considerably
since their introduction in the early 1980s.

Although one HR practitioner in 1994128 forecasted a future in which competency models would replace
traditional job descriptions and many HR practices would change as well, competency models have not
replaced traditional job descriptions and now exist alongside them in many organizations.

COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK OR “ARCHITECTURE”

Although early competency models focused primarily on specific jobs that were critical for
organizational success (e.g., sales), later models reflected job families, organizational functions, and even
strategic competencies for the whole organization. Although competencies were considered valuable to
companies because of this connection to corporate strategy, how this connection was made in the early
competency modelling projects was less clear. In 2019, a conceptual framework was developed to link

organizational strategy with employee behaviour using competency models.129 When competencies are
developed in consideration with company strategies, they can establish the critical motives, traits, self-
concept, knowledge, and skills that are needed for company success.

To the extent that the competency descriptions form the basis for new recruitment, selection, training,
performance management, and compensation, they can start to change behaviours in the company
toward aspects that reflect the strategy. For example, if a consulting firm has decided that it will make client
excellence a hallmark of its brand, competencies reflecting client service, client relationship building,
finding client solutions, and meeting client needs at all costs can support changing employee behaviours
in alignment with the strategy.

Today, organizations that use competency models mostly develop a three-tiered

competency framework or architecture. They identify competencies that apply across all jobs in the
organization (core competencies), those that apply to a group of similar jobs (functional competencies),
and those that apply to a single class of jobs (job-specific competencies). Moreover, because competencies
do not focus on specific tasks or job responsibilities, they are typically used alongside traditional job
analysis methods.
COMPETENCY CATEGORIES
Core competencies are those characteristics that apply to every member of the organization regardless
of position, function, or level of responsibility within the ­organization. Core competencies support the
organization’s mission, vision, and values. They are organizational KSAOs and behaviours that are required

for organizational success.130 Core competencies are what an organization or individual does or should do

best; they are key strengths that organizations and individuals possess and demonstrate.131 An ­airline
could require that all employees from the chief executive officer down to pilots and flight attendants and
on to the lowest-level employee exhibit the common core competencies of leadership, motivation, trust,
problem solving, interpersonal skills, and communication.

Functional competencies are characteristics shared by different positions within an organization that
belong to a common job group or occupational family or by employees performing a common function.
They are the common characteristics shared by different positions within the job group. They describe the
KSAOs that are required for any job within the job group or job family. For example, pilots and navigators
may share the same KSAOs of map reading and developing flight plans, while flight attendants and ticket
agents must both exhibit courtesy and a service orientation.

Job-specific competencies are characteristics that apply only to specific positions within the
organization. These are competencies that are associated with a position in addition to core and functional
competencies. A pilot needs a wide range of skills to fly a plane; a navigator does not have to have those
skills even though the jobs may be part of the same occupational family. Similarly, a ticket agent needs to
operate the computerized reservation system; the flight attendant does not need those skills. Employees
need to know the competencies that are required for them to do their own jobs successfully.

Core, functional, and job-specific competencies comprise the architecture of a company’s competency
model. Core competencies are the foundation on which to build functional competencies, which in turn
serve as the base for job-specific competencies (see Figure 4.10). In practice, the architecture may vary
across organizations, with some companies increasing or decreasing the number of layers. As well,
organizations may choose to use different names for the layers in the competency model; for example,
referring to “organizational” competencies in place of “core” competencies, “group” or “role” in place of
“functional,” and “task” in place of “job-specific.”
 FIGURE 4.10: A Common Architecture for Competency Models. Source: From HRSG. 2016. “Defining a
competency architecture and all of its components,” July 5, http://resources.hrsg. ca/blog/defining-a-
competency-architecture-and-all-of-its-components. Reprinted by permission of HRSG.

The Canadian Association of Management Consultants (CMC-Canada) is a governing body in Canada that
fosters excellence and integrity in the management consulting industry.132 To support its work, CMC-
Canada has developed a competency framework with eight core competencies within three competence
clusters that it uses to assess consultants who apply for the CMC designation. These nine core
competencies and their definitions are presented in Table 4.7.

TABLE 4.7: Nine Core Competencies for Management Consultants

Core Competence Cluster Competence Classes

1. Business Competence, which refers to the This cluster is subdivided into two
application of factbased knowledge of competence classes:
technical skills, business understanding, A—Client Business Insight, which is the set
sector insight, and external awareness. of discrete competencies that allow a CMC
to understand the client condition in the
 context of the client’s operating, regulatory,
and competitive environments.
B—Consulting Business Insight, which is the
set of discrete competencies pertaining to
the business of consulting itself, and the way
consulting services are marketed, procured,
and delivered. It may include matching
resource requirements to client needs,
sourcing resources (either internally or
externally), and managing those resources in
the context of the engagement.
This cluster is further broken down into two
competence classes:
C—Functional Specialization, which is
composed of the blend of competencies
2. Technical Competence refers to the core related to business, management, and
consulting skills, tools, and techniques used sector/industry expertise that consultants
by consultants to deliver professional bring to an assignment.
service to clients. D—Engagement Management Skills, which
describe the competencies which
consultants employ to manage client
engagements and deliver consulting
services.
3. Values and Behavioural Competence This cluster is broken down into four
refers to the blend of professional values competence classes:
and skills that enable consultants to deliver E—Ethics and professionalism, which is
results for clients now and into the future. composed of the discrete competencies that
They establish credibility and trust, leading reflect a consultant’s professional conduct
to superior results. and ethical behaviour.
F—Analytical skills, which describes the
competencies for decision-making, problem
solving, and innovation/creative thinking
that allow the CMC to deliver advice and
solutions tailored to the client situation.
G—Personal interaction skills, which
describe the set of competencies that allow
 the CMC to work effectively with others.
H—Continued learning and development,
which describe the competencies that allow
the CMC to continue to learn, grow, and
develop their skills in the service of their
clients and the profession.
Source: CMC Canada, https://www.cmc-canada.ca/cmcprofileoverview.

COMPETENCY DICTIONARIES
A competency dictionary lists all the competencies that are required by an organization to achieve its
aims. It includes the core and all functional and job-specific competencies identified throughout the
organization and defines each competency in terms of the behaviours and KSAOs related to it. A
competency dictionary describing all the competencies supports the use of job descriptions in the
organization.

A competency dictionary also includes information on the proficiency level needed to successfully
perform each competency for each position in the organization. All organization members are expected to
exhibit all the core competencies; however, they are not expected to do so to the same degree. Similarly,
individuals may need the same functional and job-specific competencies, but each competency may

require a different level of proficiency, depending on the organizational level of the individual.133 As
employees take on more responsibility in an organization, they may be required to become more proficient
with respect to any competency if they are to perform effectively.

For example, risk management might be identified as a core competency; however, the behavioural
expectations for risk management may vary across positions in the organization. Figure 4.11 provides an
example from the competency dictionary developed by the Police Sector Council for use by police forces
across Canada. As shown in the figure, the level of proficiency increases with organizational level. A senior
constable is expected to have a greater proficiency in risk management than a rookie police officer. Those
at the higher levels are expected to be capable of expressing the behavioural demands at all the lower
levels before moving on to a higher-ranking position. That is, the levels are cumulative. Organizations using
a competency model identify the proficiency levels on the required competencies for each position in the
organization. The competency dictionary for an organization includes definitions for each core, functional
and job-specific competency, structured as the one shown in Figure 4.11, for every position in the
organization.
 FIGURE 4.11: Example of a Competency and Proficiency Levels from a Competency Dictionary. Source: Police
Sector Council. 2013. A Guide to Competency-based Management in Police Services.
http://www.policecouncil.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Competency-Based-Management-Guide.pdf.

Proficiency scales , of the kind represented in Figure 4.11, are included in the competency dictionary.
The proficiency scale is independent of any position. The levels in a proficiency scale reflect real,
observable differences from one organizational level to another. The proficiency scale is not a tool to assess
employees; rather, it presents a series of behaviours that are expected at specific levels of a competency.
Figure 4.11 presents a competency dictionary entry for a “Risk Management” competency, along with its
associated proficiency scale. The behavioural indicators are there simply to illustrate the concept. An actual
scale might have considerably more indicators at each proficiency level as well as having more rating
levels. The proficiency scale would be developed to meet the needs of the organization; normally,

proficiency scales are based on four- or five-point rating scales.134,135

COMPETENCY PROFILES
A competency profile is a set of core functional and job-specific competencies related to a function,
job, or employee expressed in terms of the expected level of the proficiency. Because core competencies
apply to all functions and jobs, they are included as part of functional and job-specific profiles. The
proficiency level required on the core competencies, however, would vary across functions and positions. A
functional competency profile would include the proficiency levels for all the core and functional
competencies related to the occupational family that form the functional group. A job-specific profile adds
the proficiency levels required for a specific position within the functional group. Figure 4.12 presents a
competency profile developed by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (now ESDC) for its

citizen service agents.136 The number in parentheses following each competency represents the
proficiency level required for that competency for successful job performance.

FIGURE 4.12: A Competency Profile for an HRSDC Citizen Service Agent. Source: Arieh Bonder. 2008. A Blueprint
for the Future: Competency-based Management in Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC).
Unpublished presentation, HRSDC.

An employee profile represents the proficiency level demonstrated by an employee on each competency
that is included in the competency dictionary. A match between an employee profile and a job-specific or
functional profile suggests that the employee is suitable for holding the specific position or a position in the
functional group. Once they know their own profile, employees can match it to other jobs in the
organization for career planning or they can identify competency gaps for developmental activities.

An organization that decides to use competency models must have the capability to identify the required
competencies and then to assess accurately the competency level of each employee with respect to the
competency. It must also have an information management system capable of storing all the required
competency information for each position and for each employee. It must also allow accessibility to
managers and employees to track the competency profiles for positions and for themselves.
LEGAL DEFENSIBILITY OF COMPETENCY MODELS
Competency modelling can be defended. Most likely courts will use past precedents for judging the
acceptability of any model. Courts and tribunals in both Canada and the United States have ruled that HR
systems must be supported by empirical evidence that there is a link between selection measures and the
essential duties of a job (refer to Chapter 3). There is no agreed-upon methodology for developing
competency models. Whether a competency-based system is deemed to meet legal standards may well
depend on the methodology chosen to develop the competency dictionary, the resultant competency
profiles, and their links to jobs. More rigorous competency methodologies that incorporate job analysis

procedures are more likely to withstand legal scrutiny.137,138 Competency models that fail to establish, and
to document, the necessary link to work performance may not survive a legal challenge. An additional
concern is the lack of reliability and validity data for most competency-based inferences; professional
standards and guidelines have an expectation that selection systems have reasonable psychometric
properties.

One perspective139 suggests that legal defensibility of a competency model depends on its intended use. A
company using it to align training and organizational development with strategic objectives may not

require a great deal of rigour or validation.140 On the other hand, using the model to select and hire job
applicants or for internal selection (promotion) will require rigorous methods that meet psychometric
standards. In a highly litigious environment, it may be better to use a traditional job analysis method, or to
include some type of work analysis into the competency model.141

Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.8 presents a methodology that should meet those standards.
Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.9 presents key considerations regarding competency modelling
that are based on experiences and lessons learned over time from academic, applied, and professional

perspectives.142 Several competency experts provide detailed examples for each of the 20 practices listed
in Recruitment and Selection Notebook 4.9. Following these best practices in developing a competency
framework also helps to ensure legal defensibility against challenges to decisions based on the framework.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.8

STEPS IN DEVELOPING A COMPETENCY-BASED MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
1. Obtain executive-level support, including sufficient human and financial resources, to develop a
competency model.
2. Review the organization’s mission, vision, and values statements.
3. Adopt a competency definition that meets the needs of the organization (e.g., average versus superior
performance issue; KSAOs versus behaviour).
4. Determine the HR functions for which competencies will be used (e.g., selection, training,
compensation).
5. Determine the architecture of the competency model (core, functional, job-specific layers) that best
meets the intended functions for which it will be used.
6. Develop the competency dictionary.
7. Define the profiling methodology.

a. Conduct advance planning and preparation.

b. Review jobs and data collection techniques most appropriate for use.
c. Consult key stakeholders in the organization.
d. Identify SMEs for each level in the competency model.
e. Specify the competencies and proficiency levels.
f. Validate the draft competency profiles.
g. Use focus groups or surveys to ensure that profiles accurately reflect the critical competencies
required for the function and/or job.
h. Confirm compatibility of draft competency profile and HRM information system.
i. Revise and finalize competency profiles based on feedback from key stakeholders.

8. Identify reliable and valid assessment strategies to determine employee competency profiles.
9. Document all steps in the development and implementation of the system and the rationale for key
decisions, in case these are needed as evidence before tribunals or courts.
10. Evaluate the system on an ongoing basis to ensure that the competency profiles continue to predict
successful job performance.

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.9

KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN COMPETENCY MODELLING
 1. Will the organization develop competencies on their own or engage a consulting firm to support the
process?
2. What does the organization want to accomplish with the development of competencies (e.g., increase
perfor­mance, align employee behaviour with organizational strategy)?
3. How will competencies be deployed in the organization (i.e., to reflect core, functional, and/or job
specific aspects)?
4. What company information can guide the initial identification of competencies and how is this
available (e.g., document review, interviews with leaders)?
5. Will the competencies be developed from scratch or using a generic dictionary as a starting point?
6. What will the specific design process be to develop the different types of competencies (e.g.,
interviews, focus groups, surveys)?
7. How will participants be identified for the competency modelling sessions (e.g., performance,
leadership, experience)?
8. How will the competencies and proficiency levels be asses-­sed for fairness, reliability, and validity?

ASSESSING EMPLOYEE COMPETENCIES

Developing reliable and valid ways of measuring employee competencies is crucial to the success of the
competency model and to its legal defensibility. At some point, an HR manager must determine whether a
job applicant possesses the required competencies or whether an internal candidate is qualified to hold or
be promoted into a position. An organization must adopt an assessment strategy for assessing employee
proficiency levels for jobs, organizational culture, and company values. A variety of assessment methods
may be used to assess employee competencies. One of the advantages of competency models is the
detailed descriptions and proficiency levels that can be used to support developing work samples,
situational judgment tests, interviews, and other customized assessments for selection. Chapters 7–9
examine the different techniques that have been developed over the years to make assessments that are
fair, reliable, and valid. In addition, the behavioural statements for proficiency levels can also serve as the
criteria to evaluate job applicant answers to structured interview questions discussed in Chapter 9. Table
4.8 presents structured interview questions to assess the job-specific competencies for a management
consultant job.

Table 4.8: A Comparison of Job Analysis and Competency Modelling

JOB-SPECIFIC COMPETENCIES STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS*

 Describe a time when you were given a
project with a new client organization and
Client Business Insight you knew very little about their business.
What were the circumstances? What did you
do? What was the outcome?
Describe a time when a project you were
working on was not going well. What was
Consulting Business Insight the situation? Why was the project not going
well? What did you do? What was the
outcome?
Tell me about a time when you were having
difficulty managing a client relationship
Engagement Management Skills effectively. Describe the situation. What was
the nature of the problem? What did you do?
What was the outcome?
Tell me about a time when you had to make
a decision to solve a complex client
problem. What was the situation? Why was
Analytical Skills
the problem complex? How did you
approach the problem? What was the
outcome?
Describe a time when your project team was
Personal Interaction Skills not collaborating well. What was the issue?
What did you do? What was the outcome?
*A scoring guide must be developed for each question. Please see the section on Behavioural Interviews in
Chapter 9.

HOW TO DEVELOP A JOB COMPETENCY MODEL

Like job analysis, competency modelling starts with identifying the SMEs who are knowledgeable about the
job and establishing the research method (e.g., interviews, focus groups, surveys) to gather this
information. As mentioned previously, the goal of these sessions is to identify and describe the
competencies that are essential for superior performance in the job. With the Behavioural Event

Interviewing (BEI) method,143 average and superior job incumbents are interviewed individually with their
responses recorded and categorized into competencies and proficiency levels (using a generic dictionary).
The frequencies of responses are compared between the two groups. Those competencies and levels that
are described equally between the groups are considered threshold competencies (i.e., important for the
job) and those competencies and levels that are more frequently mentioned by superior performers are
considered the differentiating competencies. With the generic competency dictionary as an initial starting
point, a company-specific dictionary is developed using SME language with modified proficiency levels and
new competency descriptions based on the data collected.
Conducting a focus group with SMEs is another approach to developing a job competency model. With this
method, SMEs are asked to describe the characteristics of average and superior performers in the job. An

example of this process144 is as follows: (1) a warm up exercise with job relevant scenarios to stimulate
identifying competencies; (2) a facilitated discussion of the cognitive, interpersonal, and intrapersonal skills
needed to perform effectively in the job; (3) a process to group these descriptions into five to six categories;
(4) a group discussion to eliminate redundancies; (5) group decisions to prioritize these descriptions into
levels; (6) facilitated development of competency scales; and (7) facilitated creation of behavioural
examples for specific competency levels. After the session, participants received copies of all the focus
group output for confirmation and revisions.

VALIDATING COMPETENCY-BASED SELECTION SYSTEMS

Since 1973, when David McClelland first introduced the concept of competency modelling, nearly 2000

professional and business articles have been written on competency-based models;145 however, most of
these articles offer only theoretical or anecdotal descriptions of competencies.

Only 68 articles looked at the current practices in competency modelling from a scientific or applied
perspective. The reliability and validity of competency models used in selection must be established.
Several research groups provide similar procedures that can be used to build in reliability and validity to a

competency model.146,147 Both studies showed how ratings of frequency and criticality by supervisors and
incumbents could be built into a competency model followed by validation against supervisor measures of

performance and assessment of inter-rater reliability. Service Canada148 developed a competency-based

framework that incorporated into the competency model information obtained through job analysis,

particularly information on KSAOs. Keep in mind the criticisms of some experts149,150 that without knowing
something about the tasks associated with a position, the inferences of competencies, or KSAOs, in a
holistic fashion will produce less reliable data. More research, however, is needed on defining the
psychometric properties of competency models particularly in the use of selection and promotion. More
consideration must be given to the role that rater training plays in enhancing reliability and validity as well
as the nature of the competencies that are rated. Is the reliability and validity of inferences based on
narrow, behaviourally based competencies better than that for broad strategic ones? These questions
remain to be answered.
Approaches to validating job analysis data151 can be adapted to validating competency models. One
study152 applied a job analysis approach to the validation of a competency model for home health care
case managers in the province of Alberta. After developing a competency model based on focus groups
with front-line employees and managers (SMEs), their preliminary model was assessed by surveying other
employees and managers in the organization. Respondents rated the competencies and behavioural
statements for clarity, importance, and their frequency of demonstration. Most of the competencies and
behavioural descriptions were supported based on these ratings. Moreover, the behavioural statements
within each competency were highly consistent with each other. The competencies were related to each
other in a meaningful way with higher correlations between the two thinking competencies. In addition,
proficiency ratings that were closer together (e.g., levels 1 and 2 or levels 3 and 4) were more highly related
than those that were farther apart (e.g., levels 1 and 4) supporting the structure of the levels. Although this
study did not validate the competency model with job performance (as per the hypothetico-criterial

component outlined for job analysis validation),153 it does illustrate that competency models can be
validated in a similar way as job analysis data.

COMPETENCY MODELLING VERSUS JOB ANALYSIS

Concern over the increasing use of competency models led the Professional Practice Committee and the
Scientific Affairs Committee of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology to form the Job
Analysis and Competency Modeling Task Force. The task force, which was composed of advocates of both
traditional job analysis and competency-based procedures, identified 10 technical criteria on which it
evaluated both approaches. Job analysis was judged superior on 9 of the 10 criteria. The only criterion
where competency modelling was seen to have an edge was with respect to a more transparent linkage
between business goals or strategies and the information provided by the competency-based approach. In
all other instances, both proponents of job analysis and competency modelling rated the traditional job

analysis methods as more rigorous, particularly in providing more reliable information.154

The task force also identified other, less technical criteria and concluded that competency approaches
were more likely to focus on generic personal characteristics that are common across a broad range of jobs.
It viewed competency approaches as being closely aligned with worker-oriented job analyses. The
emphasis on these types of characteristics gave competency modelling higher levels of “face validity” with
organizational decision makers. Executives typically commented that competencies provided them with a
common language. As organizations continue to “de-complicate” business processes, the increased face
validity of competency modelling procedures and their focus on core competencies holds wide appeal.
However, these factors have resulted in decreased quality of the technical information needed for legal

defensibility purposes.155 More recently, one study156 compared traditional job analyses and competency
models along six dimensions, which are shown in Table 4.9. These comparisons help to differentiate the
two methodologies. Each method has its strengths and weaknesses. They should be viewed as being

complementary to one another, with each providing unique information about jobs. One practitioner157
and his colleagues make the point that even though competencies may seem to be the primary focus of
many organizations, job analysis is still important because it provides an objective picture of the job, not
the person performing the job, and provides fundamental information to support HR functions such as
recruitment and selection, among others. HR practitioners have received the message as most
organizations continue to use both job analysis and competency models as a basis for HR activities and
programs.
TABLE 4.9: A Comparison of Job Analysis and Competency Modelling

DIMENSION JOB ANALYSIS COMPETENCY MODELLING

To better understand worker
To better understand what
characteristics that
gets done in the job and
Primary purpose contribute to superior job
what is needed by the
performance and align with
worker to do the job.
an organization’s strategy.
The essential elements of a
The essential elements of a job do not change but
View of job job do not change from one competencies demonstrated
job incumbent to another. can vary across job
incumbents.
Competency modelling can
focus solely on the job but
The focus of job analysis is
Focus also cuts across jobs and
solely on the job.
places value on common
behavioural themes.
Competency models
Job analysis provides a prescribe the way work
descriptive, objective activities should be carried
Time orientation account of work activities out to achieve superior
and associated job performance and in
requirements. alignment with an
organization’s strategy.
 Competency models are
Job analysis is based on
based on maximal
typical job performance
performance as reflected in a
Performance level described in a job
strategic interpretation of the
description as performed by
job that identifies behaviours
an average worker.
related to strategic themes.
Job analysis captures sound,
Competency models capture
unitary constructs that
multiple constructs that are
Measurement approach define job performance and
best suited to global, clinical
lend themselves to
judgments.
quantitative measurement.

INTEGRATING JOB ANALYSIS WITH COMPETENCY MODELLING

Although job analysis and competency modelling have been considered competing methods by
researchers (and to some extent in this chapter), these methods focus on different aspects of job
information that can be compatible with each other. Many job analysis methods (e.g., worker trait
inventories, functional job analysis) identify personal attributes that are needed to do the job. Competency
models describe these attributes in extensive detail as well as connect them to superior job performance
and organizational strategy. In other words, both approaches provide complementary information in
support of HR activities. Job analysis is best positioned to describe and measure jobs, whereas

competency modelling is best positioned to identify behaviours related to superior performance.158 Job
analysis and competency modelling can both be used to understand the nature of jobs and the behaviours
needed in those jobs (or job families and functions) that reflect superior performance and organizational
strategies. Future research needs to integrate these two approaches to better support recruitment and
selection activities in organizations.

LEADERSHIP COMPETENCY MODELS

Leadership competencies are one of the fastest growing areas in competency modelling primarily because
organizations typically want to establish a core set of leader behaviours for all leadership positions.
Leadership competencies contribute to superior performance on the part of those leading organizations in
both the private and public sectors. The Canadian government as well as provinces of British Columbia,
Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia have all developed competency models for their senior executives. IBM,
PepsiCo, and 3M have developed their own customized leadership competency models, as have many
other private companies. The leadership competency model is based on the company’s strategic vision and
business goals. The competency model identifies the relevant competencies along with a definition of
each. The number of leadership competencies ranges from as few as four to as many as 67. The norm
seems to be 8 to 10 competencies.
It is impossible to list all the competencies that have been identified as leadership competencies. To give
you an idea of what leadership competencies are we reviewed different sets of leadership competencies.
The following appear to be common among the different government and private organizational
leadership competency models. In some models, components of the competencies are cited as separate
competencies. We have integrated them to what we believe are the essential eight leadership
competencies; however, we recognize that there will be differences of opinion on this.

1. Integrity and Ethics—Serving with respect; being honest; ensures integrity in personal and
organizational practices. Builds a respectful workplace. This is the basis for other leadership
competencies.
2. Strategic Thinking—Visioning the future and building plans and making decisions to get there.
Aligns program policy with the strategic direction of the organization.
3. Engagement—Showing passion for the job. Engages people, organizations, and partners in
developing goals, executing plans, and delivering results. Follows and leads across boundaries to
engage broad-based stakeholders, partners, and constituencies in a shared agenda and strategy.
4. Innovation—Thinks creatively; is open to new ideas and technologies. Champions organizational
change. Is flexible and adaptable in meeting changing demands of clients, stakeholders, and public.
5. Accountability—Accepts and creates a culture of accountability; fosters personal growth; takes
personal ownership and inspires others to do the same. Is self-aware and demonstrates a
commitment to ongoing learning and development.
6. Building the Organizational Team—Recognizes that the leader alone cannot get the job done.
Surrounds self with excellent talent. Builds successful relationships with individuals, staff
stakeholders, and partners.
7. Effective Communication—Fosters open communication, listens to others, speaks effectively, and
prepares written communication so that messages are clearly understood.
8. Results Focus—Action-oriented. Maximizes organizational effectiveness and sustainability. Aligns
people, work, and systems with the business strategy to harmonize what they do and how they work
to meet organizational objectives. Responsible for human and financial resources.

The primary benefit of leadership competencies is that they communicate a view of leadership to the
public in terms that can be easily understood. They provide a unifying mechanism for leadership at all
levels of the organization. As is the case with any competency, profiles are developed that identify the
behaviours needed at different leadership levels. Leadership competencies, to be useful and defensible,
must meet the same standards we have discussed that apply to any competency model.
RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION NOTEBOOK 4.10
JOB ANALYSIS ON THE INTERNET

These resources help students and professionals learn about and conduct job analyses. The websites
provide information on job analysis methods and their uses, along with links to other relevant sites. The
most comprehensive site, HR-Guide.com, also provides links for users to research legal issues, tips for
conducting job analyses, and FAQs, along with up-to-date descriptions of commonly used interview,
observation, and structured questionnaire methods. Official websites for the NOC, DOT, and O*NET are
sources of standard occupational dictionaries and employment specifications. The NOC site, for example,
contains a search engine enabling the user to retrieve information by searching job titles, aptitudes,
interests, and other work characteristics. Sites for specific job analysis tools enable users to review the tools
and learn about their applications, scoring, and commercially available services. Other useful sites are HR
Zone for job analysis and personality research, and sites for different job analysis tools: PAQ, F-JAS, CMQ,
WPS, and Job-Analysis.Net. Many management consulting firms also provide job analysis services (e.g.,
www.autogoja.com; www.HRTMS.com) via the Internet and sometimes offer the first job analysis for free as
a sample of their approach. You can find these sites by typing in the name into your favourite browser.

SUMMARY
This chapter began with a discussion of job analysis and its relevance to employee recruitment and
selection, continued with a discussion of several job analysis methodologies, and ended with an
introduction to competency-based models. As the workplace rapidly changes with the introduction of new
technologies and global competition, HR practitioners will need to combine organizational and job
analysis techniques to develop employee selection programs that lead to the selection and hiring of the
best job candidates. At the organizational level, objectives for success are defined relative to delivery of
products or services to paying customers. At the job level, the analyst describes collections of positions that
are similar in their significant duties, which when taken together contribute to process outputs. Job
analysts must link job requirements to organization functioning to optimize recruitment and selection
systems.

Job analysis is a process of collecting information about jobs and encompasses many methods, which fall
into two broad categories: work-oriented and worker-oriented methods. Work-oriented methods result in
specific descriptions of work outcomes and tasks performed to accomplish them. Worker-oriented
methods produce descriptions of worker traits and characteristics necessary for successful performance.
There is no one right way of conducting a job analysis; all methods follow a logical process for defining
employment or worker specifications (KSAOs). While job analysis is not a legal requirement for determining
KSAOs and selecting employees, the employer must demonstrate job-relatedness of selection criteria if
challenged in court.
Regardless of the method used, a good job analysis begins with collection of background information.
Gathering job descriptions defined in the NOC or O*NET is a recommended first step. It is also good
practice for the analyst to employ a combination of methods, typically beginning with interviews or
observations of employees on the job. The resulting information can then be used to construct a task
inventory or provide a backdrop for completing structured questionnaires. Employment specifications are
generated by identifying the most frequently occurring activities or requirements in interviews and
observations or by identifying those items in an inventory or questionnaire receiving the highest ratings of
criticality.

A wide variety of techniques are available for analyzing jobs. While some focus primarily on the work that
gets done, others focus on generic human behaviours that are relevant to all work. Deciding which of these
techniques to use is based on the goal of the analysis, the resources available to the analyst, and the needs
of the organization. No one method will be completely acceptable for all selection needs in an organization.
Job analysts must themselves be adaptable in the methods they apply. Recruitment and Selection
Notebook 4.10 presents a list of job analysis resources available on the Internet.

Organizations that compete in a global environment that is often unpredictable and unstable must change
quickly to survive. To meet these demands, some organizations are placing more emphasis on the
competencies of individual workers in addition to the specific tasks that those workers will perform. These
organizations expect all employees to possess core competencies that are related to the organization’s
mission or goals, as well as functional and job-specific competencies, which are related to successful
performance in a position or job. This emphasis on competencies has taken place in the absence of an
agreed-upon definition of what constitutes a “competency” and of an agreed-upon methodology for
identifying competencies. In several respects, competency-based systems are similar to worker-trait job
analysis methods in providing information about the KSAOs and behaviours needed for successful job
performance, but without identifying the tasks that workers are required to do in their jobs.

Competency-based systems must provide information that is valid and meets legal requirements, just as
more traditional job analysis methods must. The chapter provides several guidelines that should help in
choosing job analysis and/or competency-based methods to identify KSAOs. This decision to use one or
several approaches from both job analysis and competency modelling methods should reflect what the HR
practitioner wants to accomplish with that information.
KEY TERMS
competencies
competency dictionary
competency framework
competency model
competency profile
core competencies
critical incident technique (CIT)
direct observation
Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS)
functional competencies
Functional Job Analysis (FJA)
job
job description
job evaluation
job family
job-specific competencies
job specification
Personality Oriented Job Analysis (POJA)
position
Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ)
proficiency level
proficiency scales
Structured Job Analysis Interview
subject matter experts (SMEs)
task inventories
task statement
work-oriented job analysis
worker-oriented job analysis
worker traits inventories

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...
 Loading...

EXERCISES

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

CASE STUDY
ANALYZING JOBS IN A CHANGING ORGANIZATION

In 1998, the Ontario government passed Bill 35 to deregulate competitive aspects of the gas and electricity

industry.159 Prior to this time this sector was highly regulated by the Ontario Energy Board for all services
related to gas and electricity distribution. After de-regulation, companies separated into regulated
(primarily the storage and distribution services) and de-regulated (primarily energy purchasing, service,
and equipment sales) components. As a result of this change, consumers had more choices with respect to
the companies they chose for their energy services and products. As a result, companies (e.g., Consumers
Gas, Union Gas) that operated in a regulated environment for their services and products now had to
compete with other firms for a significant portion of their business (e.g., selling gas and gas appliances).
This competition was a new and significant change in their approach to sales and service. Although they
had Sales Representatives in the regulated business (and a job description), they were concerned that the
job may need to change due to the increased competition and number of products and services after de-
regulation.
In response to these changes in the regulations, one gas company has decided to re-organize itself into two
new companies: one operating in gas storage and distribution and the other in the competitive gas, service,
and retail equipment business. You have been hired on a consulting contract to assist in the identification
and placement of sales employees into the two new businesses.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

ENDNOTES
1. Pearlman, K., and J.I. Sanchez. 2010. “Work Analysis.” In J.L. Farr and N.T. Tippins, eds., Handbook of
Employee Selection (pp. 73–98). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
2. Morgeson, F.P., and E.C. Dierdorff. 2011. “Work Analysis: From Technique to Theory.” In S. Zedeck, ed.,
APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2: Selecting and Developing Members
for the Organization (pp. 3–41). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Wilson, M.A., W. Bennett, Jr., S.G. Gibson, and G.M. Alliger. 2012. The Handbook of Work Analysis:
Methods, Systems, Applications and Science of Work Measurement in Organizations. New York:
Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
 4. Sackett, P.R., P.T. Walmsley, and R.M. Laczo. 2013. “Job and Work Analysis.” In N.W. Schmitt, S.
Highhouse, and I.B. Weiner, eds., Handbook of Psychology (pp. 61–81). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and
Sons Inc.
5. Levine, E.L., R.A. Ash, and N. Bennett. 1980. “Exploratory Comparative Study of Four Job Analysis
Methods.” Journal of Applied Psychology 65(5): 524–535.
6. Harvey, R.J. 1991. “Job Analysis.” In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough, eds., Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. I (pp. 71–163). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
7. Dierdorff, E.C., and M.A. Wilson. 2003. “A Meta-Analysis of Job Analysis Reliability.” Journal of Applied
Psychology 88(4): 635–646.
8. Cucina, J.M., N.R. Martin, N.L. Vasilopoulos, and H.F. Thibodeuax. 2012. “Self-Serving Bias Effects on
Job Analysis Ratings.” The Journal of Psychology 146(5): 511–531.
9. Thompson, D.E., and T.A. Thompson. 1982. “Court Standards for Job Analysis in Test Validation.”
Personnel Psychology 35: 872–873.
10. Sparks, C.P. 1988. “Legal Basis for Job Analysis.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis Handbook for Business,
Industry and Government, Vol. I (pp. 37–47). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
11. Action Travail des Femmes v. Canadian National Railway. 1984. Canadian Human Rights Reporter 5
(Decision 396): 2327–2416.
12. Levine, E.L., J.N. Thomas, and F. Sistrunk. 1988. “Selecting a Job Analysis Approach.” In S. Gael, ed.,
The Job Analysis Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. I (pp. 339–352). New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
13. Ontario Human Rights Commission. Human Rights at Work 2008, 3rd ed. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from
http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/iv-human-rights-issues-all-stages-employment/5-interviewing-and-
making-hiring-decisions.
14. Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. 1978. Federal Register 43: 38290–39315.
15. Levine, E.L. 1983. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Job Analysis. Tampa, FL: Mariner
Publishing Company.
16. Sparks, C.P. 1988.
17. Cronshaw, S.F. 1988. “Future Directions for Industrial Psychology in Canada.” Canadian Psychology 29:
30–43.
18. Harvey, R.J. 1991. “Job Analysis.” In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough, eds., Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. I (pp. 71–163). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
19. Ibid.
20. Peterson, N.G., and P.R. Jeanneret. 2007. “Job Analysis: An Overview and Description of Deductive
Methods.” In D.L. Whetzel and G.R. Wheaton, eds., Applied Measurement: Industrial Psychology in
Human Resources Management (pp. 13–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Robinson-Morral, E.J., C. Hendrickson, S. Gilbert, T. Myers, K. Simpson, and A.C. Loignon. 2018.
“Practical Considerations for Conducting Job Analysis Linkage Exercises.” Journal of Personnel
 Psychology 17(1): 12–21.
22. Peterson, N.G., and P.R. Jeanneret. 2007.
23. Cronshaw S.F., R. Best, L. Zugec, M.A. Warner, S.J. Hysong, and J.A. Pugh. 2007. “A Five-Component
Validation Model for Functional Job Analysis as Used in Job Redesign.” Ergometrika4: 12–31.
24. Weekley, J.A., J.R. Labrador, M.A. Campion, and K. Frye. 2019. “Job Analysis Ratings and Criterion-
related Validity: Are They Related and Can Validity Be Used as a Measure of Accuracy?” Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology 92(4): 764–786, doi:10.1111/joop.12272.
25. McCormick, E.J. 1979. Job Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: AMACOM.
26. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. “About the NOC.” Retrieved July 20, 2017, from
http://noc.esdc.gc.ca/English/NOC/AboutNOC.aspx?ver=16.
27. Employment and Immigration Canada. 1987. Canadian Classification and Dictionary of Occupations
Guide. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing Centre.
28. Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
http://www.occupationalinfo.org.
29. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. “About the NOC.” Retrieved July 20, 2017, from
http://noc.esdc.gc.ca/English/NOC/AboutNOC.aspx?ver=16.
30. DOL Office of Policy and Research. 2000. “Occupational Information Network (O*NET).”
http://www.doleta.gov/programs/ONet.
31. O*NET Resource Centre. “The O*NET Content Model.” Retrieved March 30, 2020, from
http://www.onetcenter.org/content.html.
32. Peterson, N.G., M.D. Mumford, W.C. Borman, et al. 2001. “Understanding Work Using the Occupational
Information Network (O*NET): Implications for Practice and Research.” Personnel Psychology 54: 451–
492.
33. Gael, S. 1988. “Interviews, Questionnaires, and Checklists.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis Handbook
for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. I (pp. 391–402). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
34. Cascio, W.F. 1998. Applied Psychology in Human Resources Management, 5th ed. Toronto: Prentice Hall
Canada.
35. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
36. Peterson, N.G., and P.R. Jeanneret. 2007. “Job Analysis: An Overview and Description of Deductive
Methods.” In D.L. Whetzel and G.R. Wheaton, eds., Applied Measurement: Industrial Psychology in
Human Resources Management (pp. 13–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
38. McCormick, E.J. 1979.
39. McCormick, E.J., P.R. Jeanneret, and R.C. Mecham. 1972. “A Study of Job Characteristics and Job
Dimensions as Based on the Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ).” Journal of Applied Psychology 56:
347–367.
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid.
42. Gael, S. 1983. Job Analysis: A Guide to Assessing Work Activities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
43. Ghorpade, J.V. 1988. Job Analysis: A Handbook for the Human Resource Director. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
44. McCormick, E.J., and P.R. Jeanneret. 1988. “Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ).” In S. Gael, ed., The
Job Analysis Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 825–842). New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
45. McCormick, E.J., P. R. Jeanneret, and R.C. Mecham. 1972. “A Study of Job Characteristics and Job
Dimensions as Based on the Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ).” Journal of Applied Psychology
56(4): 347–368.
46. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
47. McCormick, E.J. 1979.
48. McCormick and Jeanneret. 1988.
49. McCormick, Jeanneret, and Mecham. 1972.
50. Gael, S. 1983.
51. Gael, S. 1988.
52. McCormick, E.J. 1979.
53. Fine, S.A., and S.F. Cronshaw. 1999. Functional Job Analysis: A Foundation for Human Resources
Management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
54. Gael, S. 1988.
55. Gatewood, R.D., H.S. Feild, and M. Barrick. 2008. Human Resources Selection. Mason, OH: Thomson
Learning/South-Western.
56. Levine, E.L. 1983.
57. Gael, S. 1988.
58. Ghorpade, J.V. 1988.
59. Cascio, W.F. 1998.
60. Martinko, M.J. 1988. “Observing the Work.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis Handbook for Business,
Industry and Government, Vol. I (pp. 419–431). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
61. Martinko, M.J. 1988.
62. Cascio, W.F. 1998.
63. Ibid.
64. Martinko. 1988.
65. McPhail, S.M., P.R. Jeanneret, E.J. McCormick, and R.C. Mecham. 1991. Position Analysis Questionnaire:
Job Analysis Manual, rev. ed. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists
Press.
66. Martinko, M.J. 1988.
67. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
68. Martinko, M.J. 1988.
69. Ibid.
70. Gatewood, Feild, and Barrick. 2008.
71. Tenopyr, M.L. 1977. “Content-Construct Confusion.” Personnel Psychology 30(1): 47–54.
72. McCormick E.J., P.R. Jeanneret, and R.C. Mecham. 1989. Position Analysis Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
73. Harvey, J.L., L.E. Anderson, L.E Baranowski, and R. Morath. 2007. “Job Analysis: Gathering Job-Specific
Information.” In D.L. Whetzel and G.R. Wheaton, eds., Applied Measurement: Industrial Psychology in
Human Resources Management(pp. 57–96). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. Fine and Cronshaw. 1999.
75. Ibid.
76. Christal, R.E., and J.J. Weissmuller. 1988. “Job-Task Inventory Analysis.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis
Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 1036–1050). New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
77. Drauden, G.M. 1988. “Task Inventory Analysis in Industry and the Public Sector.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job
Analysis Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 1051–1071). New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
78. Levine, E.L., R.A. Ash, H. Hall, and F. Sistrunk. 1983. “Evaluation of Job Analysis Methods by
Experienced Job Analysts.” TheAcademy of Management Journal 26(2): 339–348.
79. McCormick and Jeanneret. 1988.
80. Fine, S.A. 1988. “Functional Job Analysis.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis Handbook for Business,
Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 1019–1035). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
81. Fine and Cronshaw. 1999.
82. Fine, S.A., and M. Getkate. 1995. Benchmark Tasks for Job Analysis: A Guide for Functional Job
Analysis(FJA) Scales. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
83. Gatewood, Feild, and Barrick. 2008.
84. Bownas, D.A., and H.J. Bernardin. 1988. “Critical Incident Technique.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis
Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 1120–1137). New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
85. Harvey, Anderson, Baranowski, and Morath. 2007.
86. Flanagan, J.C. 1954. “The Critical Incident Technique.” Psychological Bulletin 51(4): 327–358.
87. Catano, V.M., and S. Harvey. 2011. “Student Perception of Teaching Effectiveness: Development and
Validation of the Evaluation of Teaching Competencies Scale (ETCS).” Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education 36(6): 701–717, doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.484879.
88. Pearlman and Sanchez. 2010.
89. McCormick, Jeanneret, and Mecham. 1989.
90. McPhail, Jeanneret, McCormick, and Mecham. 1991.
91. Levine, Ash, and Bennett. 1980.
92. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
93. Goffin, R. D., M.G. Rothstein, M.J. Rieder, A. Poole, H.T. Krajewski, D.M. Powell, R.B. Jelley, A. Boyd, and
T. Mestdagh. 2011. “Choosing job-related personality traits: Developing a valid personality-oriented
job analysis.” Personality and Individual Differences 51(5): 646–651.
94. Ibid.
95. Fleishman, E.A., and M.E. Reilly. 1992. Handbook of Human Abilities: Definitions, Measurements, and Job
Task Requirements. Bethesda, MD: Management Research Institute.
96. Fleishman, E.A., and M.D. Mumford. 1988. “Ability Requirement Scales.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis
Handbook for Business, Industry and Government, Vol. I (pp. 917–935). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
97. Fleishman, E.A., and M.K. Quaintance. 1984. Taxonomies of Human Performance: The Description of
Human Tasks. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
98. Caughron, J.J., M.D. Mumford, and E.A. Fleishman. 2012. “The Fleishman Job Analysis Survey:
Development, Validation, and Applications.” In M.A. Wilson, W.J. Bennett, S.G. Gibson, and G.M. Alliger,
eds., The Handbook of Work Analysis: Methods, Systems, Applications and Science of Work Measurement
in Organizations (pp. 231–246). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
99. Wilson, Bennett, Gibson, and Alliger. 2012.
00. Costanza, D.P., E.A. Fleishman, and J.C. Marshall-Mies. 1999. “Knowledges.” In N.G. Peterson, M.D.
Mumford, W.C. Borman, P.R. Jeanneret, and E.A. Fleishman, eds., An Occupational Information System
for the 21st Century: The Development of O*NET. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
01. Fleishman and Reilly. 1992.
02. Beck, B., D.C. Billing, and A.J. Carr. 2016. “Developing Physical and Physiological Employment
Standards: Translation of Job Analysis Findings to Assessments and Performance Standards: A
Systematic Review.” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 56: 9–16.
03. Ontario Fire Administration. “Stage Three-Firefighter Physical Aptitude Job-Related Tests (FPAT).”
Retrieved on February 26, 2020 from https://www.ofai.ca/ofai-candidate-testing-services/candidate-
physical-ability-test-cpat.
04. Personnel Systems and Technologies Corporation. 2000. “The Common-Metric System.”
http://commonmetric.com.
05. Lopez, F.M. 1988. “Threshold Traits Analysis System.” In S. Gael, ed., The Job Analysis Handbook for
Business, Industry and Government, Vol. II (pp. 880–901). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
06. Schraagen, J.M., S.F. Chipman, and V.L. Shalin, eds. 2000. Cognitive Task Analysis. Mahweh, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
07. Levine, Ash, Hall, and Sistrunk. 1983.
08. Dierdorff and Wilson. 2003.
09. Ibid.
10. Sanchez, J.I., and Levine, E.L. 2000. “Accuracy or Consequential Validity: Which Is the Better Standard
for Job Analysis Data?” Journal of Organizational Behavior 21(7): 809–818.
11. Levine, Ash, and Bennett. 1980.
12. Morgeson, F.P., and M.A. Campion. 2003. “Work Design.” In W.C. Borman, C. Walter, D.R. Ilgen, and R.J.
Klimoski, eds., Handbook of Psychology: Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 12 (pp. 423–
452). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
13. Harvey and Wilson. 2000.
14. Thompson, D.E, and T.A. Thompson. 1982. “Court Standards for Job Analysis in Test Validation,”
Personnel Psychology 35: 872–73.
15. Peterson and Jeanneret. 2007. “Job Analysis: Overview and Description of Deductive Methods.” In D.L.
Whetzel & G.R. Wheaton (Eds.), Applied measurement: Industrial psychology in human resources
management (pp. 13–56). Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Thompson and Thompson. 1982.
17. Greenbaum, P.J. 1996. “Canada’s Hiring Trends: Where Will Canadian Jobs Come From in the Next
Millennium?” HR Today (July). Ottawa: Canadian Institute of Professional Management.
18. Methot, L.L., and K. Phillips-Grant. 1998. “Technological Advances in the Canadian Workplace: An I-O
Perspective.” Canadian Psychology 39: 133–141.
19. Cascio, W.F. 1998.
20. Singh, P. 2008. “Job Analysis for a Changing Workplace.” Human Resource Management 18(2): 87–99.
21. Stone, T.H., B.D. Webster, and S. Schoonover. 2013. “What Do We Know About Competency Modeling?”
International Journal of Selection and Assessment 21: 334–338.
22. McClelland, D.C. 1973. “Testing for Competence Rather Than for ‘Intelligence.’” American Psychologist
28(1): 1–14.
23. Boyatzis, R.E. 1982. The Competent Manager: A Model of Effective Performance. New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
24. Spencer, L.M., and S.M. Spencer. 1993. Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.
25. Stevens, G. 2013. “A Critical Review of the Science and Practice of Competency Modeling.” Human
Resource Development Review 12(1): 86–107.
26. Catano, V.M. 2002. “Competency-based Selection and Performance Systems: Are They Defensible?”
Summary. Canadian Psychology 43(2a): 145.
27. Spencer and Spencer, 1993.
28. Lawler III, E.E. 1994. “From Job-based to Competency-based Organizations.” Journal of Organizational
Behavior 15(1): 3–15.
29. Campion, M.C., D.J. Schepker, M.A. Campion, and J.I. Sanchez. 2019. “Competency Modeling: A
Theoretical and Empirical Examination of the Strategy Dissemination Process.” Human Resource
Management 59(3): 1–16, doi:10.1002/hrm.21994.
30. Prahalad, C.K., and G. Hamel. 1990. “The Core Competence of the Corporation.” Harvard Business
Review(May–June): 79–90.
31. Lahti, R.K. 1999. “Identifying and Integrating Individual Level and Organizational Level Core
Competencies.” Journal of Business and Psychology 14(1): 59–75.
32. CMC Canada. “About CMC-Canada.” Retrieved February 26, 2020, from https://cmc-
canada.ca/aboutus.
33. Trainor, N.L. 1997. “Five Levels of Competency.” Canadian HR Reporter 10: 12–13.
34. Bonder, A., C.-D. Bouchard, and G. Bellemare. 2011. “Competency-based Management—An Integrated
Approach to Human Resource Management in the Canadian Public Sector.” Public Personnel
Management 40: 1–10.
35. Campion, M.A., et al. 2011. “Doing Competencies Well: Best Practices in Competency Modelling.”
Personnel Psychology 64: 225–262.
36. Bonder, A. 2003. A Blueprint for the Future: Competency-Based Management in HRDC. Unpublished
presentation, HRDC Canada.
37. Bonder et al. 2011.
38. Campion et al. 2011.
39. Stevens. 2013.
40. Sanchez, J.I., and E.L. Levine. 2009. “What Is (Or Should Be) the Difference Between Competency
Modeling and Traditional Job Analysis?” Human Resource Management Review 19(2): 53–63.
41. Stevens. 2013.
42. Campion et al. 2011.
43. Spencer and Spencer. 1993.
44. Hausdorf, P.A., and S. Swanson. 2014. “A Nonclinical Competency Model for Case Managers: Design
and Validation for Home Health Care.” Home Health Care Management & Practice 26(3): 154–162,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1084822314521209.
45. Stevens. 2013.
46. Rodriguez, D., R. Patel, A. Bright, D. Gregory, and M.K. Gowing. 2002. “Developing Competency Models
to Promote Integrated Human-Resource Practices.” Human Resource Management 41(3): 309–324.
47. Catano, V.M., W. Darr, and C.A. Campbell. 2007. “Performance Appraisal of Behavior-based
Competencies: A Reliable and Valid Procedure.” Personnel Psychology 60(1): 201–230.
48. Bonder et al. 2011.
49. Harvey, R.J. 1991.
50. Harvey and Wilson. 2000.
51. Cronshaw et al. 2007.
52. Hausdorf and Swanson. 2014.
53. Cronshaw et al. 2007.
54. Shippmann, J.S., R.A. Ash, M. Batjtsta, L. Carr, L.D. Eyde, B. Hesketh, J. Kehoe, K. Pearlman, E.P. Prien,
and J.I. Sanchez. 2000. “The Practice of Competency Modeling.” Personnel Psychology 53: 703–740,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.
tb00220.x.
55. Shippmann et al. 2000.
56. Sanchez and Levine. 2009.
57. Bonder et al. 2011.
58. Sanchez, J.L., and E.L. Levine. 2012. “The Rise and Fall of Job Analysis and the Future of Work
Analysis.” Annual Review of Psychology 63: 397–425, doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100401.
59. Wilson, Hon. J. “Bill 35, Energy Competition Act, 1998.” Office of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/bills/parliament-36/session-2/bill-35.

Exported for Rona Cadiente on Sun, 08 Sep 2024 05:42:59 GMT

Chat with Ace