Hay Manual

(1)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 1

The Hay Advisory Team offers special thanks to Cindy Lukas for her dedication and her thoughtful work that has been the foundation for this manual. The Hay Advisory Team also offers special thanks to Wayne Veum (Chief Classification Analyst-retired); John Kuderka (Hay rater and Hay historian emeritus); Sue Wickham (Admin); and others who have reviewed past editions of this manual to ensure its accuracy and usability.

2010 Hay Advisory Team: Darlene Hueser (MMB) co-chair Faith Zwemke (MMB) co-chair Gwen Aubineau (MnSCU) Wanda Barrett (MnSCU) Brent Boyd (Merit System) Janice Cano (DEED) Cathy Fah (DOC) Russ Havir (Agriculture) Loretta Mattson (Lottery) Richard Morey (MnDOT) Laura Sengil (DHS)

(2)

HayGroup®

“Hay” is not an acronym. HayGroup® is an international organizational and human resources consulting firm with more than 2,000 employees that was founded in 1943 by Edward N. “Ned” Hay. Hay is considered to be a pioneer in the human resources community, particularly with regard to the

compensation issue of measuring jobs.

He started E.N. Hay and Associates while he was the head of personnel for the First Pennsylvania Bank of Philadelphia – while in his early fifties and at the height of World War II. During the war, Ned Hay also served as Deputy Administrator of the Office of Price Administration. At that time, the War Labor Board imposed pay controls that could be lifted only if a company could show – through a sound job evaluation method – that a particular job’s content put it into a higher control range. This, combined with a major contract with General Foods in 1945 to study 450 management jobs planted the seed for what would become the Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ of job evaluation.

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

• Organizational Clarity

Employee surveys, strategy alignment, accountability assessment, organization analysis and design, role clarity • Employee Capability

Assessment and selection, executive coaching, leadership development, team development, talent management • People Commitment

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

Still headquartered in its birthplace – Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania – HayGroup® has offices in 43 countries around the world:

Argentina Finland Malaysia South Africa

Australia France Mexico South Korea

Austria Germany

New

Zealand Spain

Belgium Greece Netherlands Sweden

Brazil Hungary Norway Switzerland

Canada India Peru Thailand

Chile Indonesia Poland Turkey

China Ireland Portugal

United Arab Emirates

Columbia Israel Russia

United Kingdom

Costa Rica Italy Singapore United States

Czech

Republic Japan

Slovak

(3)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 3 The State of Minnesota has had a long-term relationship with

HayGroup® related to job evaluation. Consistent with the belief that jobs with comparable levels of work should be compensated similarly, the State needed an organized, standardized system for comparing the complexity levels of very different types of jobs. HayGroup® provided such a system. Their website at www.haygroup.com states: “It might be a merger or acquisition, new organization design, changing roles, or simply an outdated job measurement plan.

Regardless of the reason, organizations need a sound and straightforward method to measure and value work on an ongoing basis, one that effectively reflects their specific organizational culture and values. HayGroup® is the world’s leading authority on job evaluation and work measurement and has helped thousands of organizations around the world. In addition to in-depth consulting expertise, Hay offers an array of work measurement and analysis tools to help meet a broad range of organization needs. These include our:

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

• Comparison/Questionnaire Methods – streamlined alternatives to our more in-depth Guide Chart approach • Integrated Models – customized approaches to suit a

client’s unique human resources management needs.”

WHY HAY?



Organized, systematic job ranking system



Assigns point values to job components



Widely used - both public and private sector



Useful for large classification studies.



Helps determine appropriate level of a position

within a class series.

(4)

Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method

™

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

The Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ of job evaluation was developed in the early 1950s by HayGroup® and is used by more than 7,000 profit and nonprofit organizations in many different countries. It is the most widely used job evaluation method in the United States, in companies such as Honeywell, Pillsbury and General Mills and in state governments such as Arizona, Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon and New Mexico. The State of Minnesota has used the Hay system of job evaluation since the 1970s, when HayGroup® consultants evaluated managerial positions for the State of Minnesota. In the mid – 1970s, $400,000 was allocated to the Department of Finance for a Public Employment Study. Part of the study involved evaluating the State’s classification (and secondarily, compensation) system. At that point, classification and compensation decisions primarily relied on the job audit and salary survey processes we use today – by comparing positions to each other and to class specifications, with consideration given to how similar jobs were paid outside of state government. The Department of Personnel’s

Classification and Compensation Division provided leadership for the resulting broad class clarification project, which

involved reviewing position descriptions and class specifications, interviewing about 1000 State employees across the state, and establishing class clarification files. John Kuderka was the Classification and Compensation Division’s lead for this project.

After much of the initial class clarification work was completed, the Departments of Finance and Personnel agreed to use some of the funding to contract with HayGroup® to train State employees to become Hay raters. State agencies nominated employees to attend Hay training and to serve on three seven member committees to evaluate many of the State’s multiple-person classes under the guidance of HayGroup® consultants. Some of the initial Hay raters were Human Resources

professionals, but many were not. Bettie Lee and Al Bunnett were facilitators for two of the committees. Each committee emphasized a specialty area and used the class clarification information to understand the jobs in order to evaluate them. Presenters weren’t part of the process as they are today. This was a very time-consuming, labor-intensive effort.

When this large group of Hay ratings was completed, the three committees disbanded and the pool of trained State Hay raters began to expand. Later, when pay equity was raised as an issue in the 1980s during the Perpich administration, the State of Minnesota was already using the Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method™ to compare very different types of jobs.

The State’s customized Hay Guide – Profile Charts were revised in 1995, to ensure that they remained up-to-date as the State’s needs changed. One aspect, “Magnitude,” is reviewed annually and revised according to the Accountability Magnitude Index (AMI) provided by HayGroup®. The

Consumer Price Index, as interpreted by HayGroup®, is the primary source for calculating adjustments to the

Accountability Magnitude Index. For example, the current 7.0 AMI (as of Oct 2009) is a multiplier applied to the baseline of 1967 dollars; therefore, $100 1967 dollars are now equal to $700 2009 dollars. 1967 dollars were used as the baseline because HayGroup® did a major update of the 1950s’ Hay Guide Charts that year.

(5)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 5 The Hay job evaluation system has been used by the State of

Minnesota to evaluate most state job classes, including the Governor’s and positions in the Supreme Court. Although the Guide Charts have been updated over the years, there haven’t been major changes; it’s been more a matter of fine-tuning than full-scale revisions.

The Hay Method of Job Evaluation Adds Value by:

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

2. A Strong Future Orientation. The Hay Method is used to measure new jobs or redesigned jobs within new organizational structures and serves as a useful

consulting tool to guide state managers as they continue to strive to do more with less. During Fiscal Years 2000 thru 2010 a total of 677 jobs were evaluated by 335 rating committees resulting in 212 new classes, and the conformation of ratings and levels for exiting classes. 3. A Large Data Base of Evaluations to Guide Current

and Future Class and Compensation Decisions.

Since Fiscal Year 2001, State of Minnesota Hay ratings have been listed on MMB’s web site. Current rosters of evaluations, with complete ratings, are available on the MMB extranet. As of the end of Fiscal Year 2010 the roster contains Hay ratings for 92% of the active classes. 4. A Solid Track Record of Successful Application of

the Hay Method of Evaluation Statewide. The State of

Minnesota’s application of the Hay Method has received statewide recognition and use. At the local level,

Minnesota State job evaluations have provided

representative job evaluations for benchmark job classes to guide local units of government and school districts as they conduct their review of jobs for pay equity. State of Minnesota Hay ratings are the foundation/basis for the State Job Match System available on the internet to over 1500 local units of government.

(6)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 6 How does Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method work

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

Hay Facilitator Hay Raters

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

Product: The Hay Facilitator interprets the Hay rating by assigning the position to a current class or by recommending a new classification,

including salary range, to the State's Compensation Manager, Labor Relations Representative and Chief Classification Analyst.

A committee rating process is used to help ensure a broad perspective and statewide consistency. Committees are made up of three or five professionals from State of Minnesota agencies and Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). All Hay raters meet training standards established by MMB consistent with HayGroup® expectations and participate in advanced training seminars.

Written materials about each position being rated are provided to Hay committee members so they can prepare before a scheduled Hay rating session. Documentation typically includes a memo outlining the need for the Hay rating, an organizational chart, a position description, and anything else that might help the raters understand each position. Subject matter experts provide an overview of each position’s role and responsibilities to the Hay raters at a scheduled Hay rating session, along with information about the position’s

requirements related to Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. Examples are usually helpful.

After the presenters leave the Hay committee begins the rating process. [See Chapter 6 for information on preparing a

presentation.]

When are positions Hay-rated?

Positions are Hay-rated when one or more situations occur:

• A new position is established for which there is no readily discernable existing class comparison.

• The appropriate level of a position within a class series cannot be determined or there is significant dispute about

the level of a position.

• The class hasn’t been reviewed for many years and the concept of the class has changed significantly over time. • A position has been identified as a benchmark position to which others are compared for use in a class study or

(7)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 7 Good Hay Rating Requires...

Skilled (trained and experienced) raters and an accurate understanding of the position, through…

• current, complete position description • background memo

• organizational chart • presentation

Hay raters look at three major aspects when evaluating a job: Know-How, Problem Solving and Accountability. They

consider a position’s role and responsibilities, and the KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities), problem solving and

accountability required to satisfactorily perform the work involved. Hay ratings are typically based on when the position is considered to be “fully functioning,” rather than what

employees know at hire.

The raters look at each of these three basic factors separately, and assign points from the Hay Guide Charts that represent their weight in the job. Every job that is evaluated receives the same treatment. This makes it possible to compare jobs that are verydifferent and place them where they appropriately fit within the State’s classification and compensation systems.

The Hay system is designed to rank positions within the context of all statewide positions, from the Governor and the Supreme Court on down, not just within the context of one State agency. A single number is assigned to each factor consistent with the position’s role and responsibilities. Available options are listed on the charts. The numbers increase at a rounded 15% rate, which is based on the scientific concept of “just noticeable difference.” [see Guide Chart Tip]

After the Hay committee members use their Hay Guide Charts to independently evaluate a position, they must reach a group consensus. Hay committee members are asked to share their individual ratings with the group, which are put on a white board or flip chart. The raters discuss their ratings, including any differences among them, and arrive at a group Hay rating with which everyone can agree. Sometimes additional

information is needed before committee members can agree; the group discussion may be the first indication that raters are making different assumptions about the position that need to be clarified. The points are totaled for each factor. The committee facilitator documents the final Hay rating and submits it to MMB

(8)

(9)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 9 What are the possible outcomes of Hay rating?

Typical reasons for rating a job

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

• New class

• Salary range review/re-assignment (often occurs jointly with Level)

• Other (e.g. previously unrated class, new benchmark for a current class.)

Even though the intent was to rate the position because of one of four reasons listed in the chart above the rating may not support the action that prompted the rating.

For example. The supervisor believed that the job in question had changed over time and should be at a higher level of Hay points and compensation. After a rating session the raters determined that the current class rating was appropriate. In this case the outcome was: “No Change” (see Decision Codes below).

HAY Quality Assurance Summary Decision Codes NC = No Change

REC = Reallocation to an existing class

ENC = Establish new class – list proposed class title RCR = Revised class rating for salary range reassignment TC = Title Change –

TBD = Final outcome to be determined

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

The following chart provides samples of possible rating outcomes.

(10)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 10 R eason

Sample outcomes:

N ew r at ing N o c han ge in rat ing A s s ign t o e xi st in g cl a ss * C reat e new cl a ss S al ar y r ang e Re -as s ign ment H ay Q ual it y A s s ur anc e S um mar y C la ss rat ing? If y e s … Level

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

X X * Movement to a new class generally requires a

one step or more change in Know How points. X Chg

X X Chg

date Is this a class that the agency has

determined to use Hay evaluation for reallocation? If yes, proceed with rating.

X X * Movement to a new class generally requires a

one step or more change in Know How points. X NA

X X NA

Ne

w No existing class was identified as

a fit . Confer with MMB before proceeding.

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

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

Chg

S

al

ar

y Salary range review/re-assignment

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

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

X X X No

Chg

O

th

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

New benchmark for a current

(11)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 11 How does the Hay rating relate to classification and

compensation decisions?

The Hay method evaluates all positions against the same factors. This makes it possible to compare jobs that are very different and place them where they appropriately fit within the State’s classification and compensation systems. A position’s Know-How points and overall Hay rating are used as guides in determining where the job fits in the State’s classification structure and provide a framework for determining the appropriate compensation range. This relationship is

discussed further in the “Hay Ratings and Compensation” and “Trend Lines and Conversion Charts” sections at the end of the manual.

Can anyone have a copy of the Hay Guide – Profile Charts?

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

GUIDE CHART TIP Step Differences

“The Hay Guide Charts use the concept of Just

Noticeable Differences to reflect that people perceive relative, not absolute, differences. This is incorporated into the unique Hay numbering patterns used in the three Hay Guide Charts. This concept provides a systematic

guideline to assess the relationships among jobs — the relative distances between jobs, span of control, size of accountability, career progression opportunity and chains of command, etc…

Source: 2005 HayGroup® Working Paper, Hay Job

Evaluation Foundations and Applications.

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

(12)

Know-How is the body of knowledge,

skills and abilities an employee needs to be successful in a particular job. The most important factor in Hay evaluation is Know how. It defines the boundaries within which the action will take place.

It is made up of three parts: • Depth and Breadth of

Job-Specific Knowledge (aka

Technical and Specialized Know-How and Job-Specific

Knowledge).

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

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

I. Activity

.

E. Basic

Specialized.

200 Human

Relations 2

I. Activity

.

E. Basic

Specialized.

200 Human

Relations 2

CHAP

T

E

R 1:

K

n

ow

-Ho

w

(13)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 13 According to the Know-How Guide Chart, “Know-How is the

total of every kind of skill and knowledge, however acquired, needed to conduct, and to be prepared for, functions that are reasonably expected within the role.”

Know-How considers both the scope and depth of a position. A job may require some knowledge about a lot of things, or a lot of knowledge of fewer things. The overall Know-How rating reflects a combination of scope and depth. This allows for the comparison and weighing of the total Know-How content of different jobs in terms of “How much knowledge about how many things?”

Know-How is the most heavily weighted portion of the overall job evaluation. [SEE FIGURE 1] In fact, the levels in a classification structure are primarily determined by the progression of Know-How levels. In the continuum established by the Hay system, jobs that are more easily learned are ranked near the lower end of the scale. As jobs require more involved and diverse practices and principles, abstract knowledge, mastery of scientific techniques, greater human relations skills and/or significant managerial skills, they are given progressively higher scores.

F i g u r e 1 : J o b F a c t o r s ( H a y S y s t e m ) A p p r o x i m a t e % o f T o t a l P o i n t s 20% 20% 10% 50% Problem Solving Accountabilty Spec Cond Know How Know-How: 50% - 60%

Depth and breadth of skill and knowledge required to do the job Problem Solving: 20%

Original thinking required. Analyzing, reasoning, creating Accountability: 20%

Supervisory and monetary responsibilities, consequences of actions

Special Conditions: 0% - 10%

Unpleasant circumstances, physical effort, environment, hazards, sensory stimulation

(14)

The Three Elements Comprising Know How:

Job-Specific Knowledge

Job-Specific Knowledge includes the depth and breadth of knowledge required to be successful in a job. It includes the position’s requirements for knowledge and skills related to practices, procedures, specialized techniques, and

professional or scientific disciplines. It also includes basic and job-specific supervisory and managerial KSAs, when

appropriate.

This aspect of Know-How does NOT make distinctions among differently-sized managerial jobs or include human relations skills. However, because all three parts of a KH rating

combine to reflect a job’s total KH requirement, the number of total points vary a lot within each technical/specialized KH level (that is, L and A – H).

It is important to remember that this element measures the requirements of the position, not the qualifications of an incumbent.

.

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

Practical Procedures Group

# of Job Classes as of Jan 2011

L Limited Job-Specific Knowledge 1

A Primary 6

B Elementary Vocational 42

Specialized Techniques Group

# of Job Classes as of Jan 2011 C Vocational 160 D Advanced Vocational 351 E Basic Specialized 545

Learned Disciplines Group

# of Job Classes as of Jan 2011 F Seasoned Professional 496 G Specialized Mastery 40 H Professional Mastery 2

(15)

Practical Procedures Group

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

Complexity

levels Indicators Characteristics of work Examples Fine-tuning

L. Limited (added in 1995) Educatio n likely needed 1st to 6th grade

• “Does the simple tasks s/he is told to do with ongoing work direction”

• Basic instructions/very simple routines

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

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

Employees in this job class are expected to have an ongoing job coach employed by a rehabilitation organization as a condition of employment. TOTAL time to learn Hours to days Skill level Unskilled A. Primary Educatio n likely needed Literacy; simple arithmetic; 6th to 9th grade

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

• Ability to understand simple oral and written instructions and perform simple tasks is required • May apply basic skills in

arithmetic, reading and writing • Typically same daily routine

“Leaning back” AI1 50 AI2 57 TOTAL time to learn Several days to 1

month NR Nursery Field Worker

“Solid in the box” AI1 57 AI2 66 Skill level Unskilled

Student Worker Clerical Student Wkr -Custodial/ Maintenance “Leaning forward” AI1 66 AI2 66 B. Elementary Vocational Educatio n likely needed 9th to 12th grade

• “Does more involved, but still standardized, work s/he is instructed to do after basic on-the-job training”

• Learns on the job • Slightly more complex

standardized routines

• Production and service jobs at this level require skills in operating uncomplicated machinery and may include apprentice levels of craft positions.

Food Service Worker “Leaning

back” BI1 66 BI2 76 TOTAL time to learn 2 to 6 months

General Maint Worker Office Specialist Security Guard Human Services Tech

“Solid in the box” BI1 76 BI2 87 Skill level Unskilled to semi- skilled; apprentice

Building Services Lead Work Therapy Technician

“Leaning forward”

BI1 87 BI2 100

(16)

Specialized Techniques Group

Complexity

C. Vocational The median and mode Know-How points at this level are 115. Education likely needed 9th to 12th grade

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

Brings knowledge from some other training or experience

Guided by somewhat diversified procedures and precedents Although tasks are proceduralized

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

Typically require knowledge of multiple procedures.

Office & Admin Spec

“Leaning back”

CI1 87

Customer Svcs Spec Int CI2 100

Building Services Supv CI3 115

TOTAL time to learn

6 months to 2 years - technical positions may require one – two years of post high school education in areas such as nursing, civil

engineering, or office and business

procedures.

General Repair Worker

“Solid in the box”

CI1 100

Office & Admin Spec Sr

Personnel Aide CI2 115

EDP Oper Technical Supv Office Servs Supv 1 Security Supervisor

CI3 132

Skill level

Semi-skilled to journey-level

Account Clerk Senior Transportation Generalist

CI1 115

LPN 2 CI2 132

(17)

Complexity

D. Advanced Vocational The median and mode Know-How points at this level are

152. Education likely needed 9th to 12th grade PLUS additional specialized training,

on or off the job

“Reads, understands and applies significantly diversified practices from books recom-mended by others about what to do”

Employee is likely to have specialized training (which may

include a bachelor’s degree) but

experience can usually substitute Upper level college coursework

that emphasizes theory is usually not needed to do the work Work focuses on using

substantially diversified procedures and specialized standards, rather than theory

Benefit Recovery Tech

DI1 115 Buyer 1

Personnel Aide Senior Transportation Gen Sr

DI2 132

Office Services Supv 2 DI3 152

TOTAL time to learn 2 to 4 years Accounting Technician Carpenter “Solid in the box” DI1 132 Accounting Supv Buyer 2

Information Tech Spec 1 Personnel Officer State Programs Admin

DI2 152

Skill level

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

Offices Services Supv 3 DI3 175

Accntg Officer Planner

DI1 152

Management Analyst 2 DI2 175

Building Maint Supv

(18)

Complexity

E. Basic Specialized The median and mode Know-How points at this level are

200.

Education likely needed

Minimum of bachelor’s or master’s degree plus

professional experience; or equivalent exp is

required at hire

“Understands the underlying theory well enough to research and recommend books that are most likely to help meet the organization’s more complex needs”

Job requires and uses

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

higher-level college coursework or equivalent theoretical or scientific preparation

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

Advanced professionals are mid-E to F

Local Govt Audit

EI1 152 Information Tech Spec 2

Planner Intermediate State Prog Admin Inter

EI2 175 Accounting Supv Senior

Business Manager 1 EI3 200

Chemist 2

Research Analyst Inter

“Solid in the box” EI1 1 75 TOTAL time to learn Accounting Officer Sr Mgt Analyst 3

Pers Officer Principal Planner Sr State

EI2 200

Personnel Director 1 Registered Nurse Admin-Supv

EI3 230

Skill level

Some 2nd level and many advanced professionals, supervisors & managers Pharmacist “Leaning forward” EI1 200 Accounting Officer Principal

Engineer Senior

Information Tech Spec 4 Personnel Representative

EI2 230

Personnel Director 2 EI3 264

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

(19)

LEARNED DISCIPLINES GROUP

Complexity

F. Seasoned Professional The median and mode Know-How points at this level are 350 (median) and 304 (mode.) Education likely needed “Evaluates, critiques, edits and improves books about what to do based on advanced professional expertise” Professional positions with an “F” rating are

recognized experts within their specialized field. Many supervisory and managerial positions are also within “F”. Responsible authority in a learned discipline I in managerial breadth Financial Reporting Analy Supv Research Scientist 2 “Leaning back” FI2 230 FI3 264 Architect 2 Personnel Services Supv 1

State Prog Admin Coordinator “Solid in the box” FI2 264 TOTAL time to learn Requires wide exposure, experience and proficiency in specialized fields Accounting Manager Personnel Services Supv 2 FI3 304 Skill level Licensed positions within professions such as law or medicine are found here and many multi-functional managers

Construction Project Coord Princ

Medical Specialist 1 “Leaning

forward”

FI2 304

State Prog Admin

Manager Sr FI3 350 II in manageria l breadth “Leaning back” FII2 304 Personnel Services Manager FII3 350 “Solid in the box” FII2 350 State Prog Admin

Manager Prin FII3 400

Dir Governmental

Relations Unc “Leaning

forward”

FII2 400 Finance Services

(20)

Complexity

G The median

and mode Know-How

points at this level are 700 (median)

and 608 (mode.)

Education likely

needed _{Senior specialists} in scientific or learned disciplines who are

authoritative in their field and senior managers with substantial knowledge about the organization, its mission and objectives Mastery of an abstract discipline, for example, at a university

“

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

knowledge of the field” _inII managerial

breadth

GII2 400

Exec Dir PERA _{GII3 460}

“Solid in the box” GII2 460 TOTAL time to learn

Functional experts (aka

“gurus”), whose substantial

experience and depth of knowledge enable them to “write the book,” and determine functional policy and practice

Commissioner-Mediation Service GII3 528

Skill level “Leaning forward” GII2 528 GII3 608 III in manageria l breadth “Leaning back” GIII2 528 Commissioners of large

agencies are found here: Commr-Admin GIV3 920 Commr-Educ GIV3 1056 Commr-MMB GV3 1216 Commr-Transp GV3 1400

Asst Commr Revenue Deputy Commr Labor

& Industry GIII3 608

“Solid in the box” GIII2 608 Commr-Commerce _{GIII3 700} “Leaning forward” GIII2 700 Commr-Agriculture Commr-DEED GIII3 800 Complexity

levels Characteristics of work Examples Fine-tuning

H “Authoritative books are written about him or her”

National leadership role and authoritative knowledge that is recognized beyond the state of Minnesota

Likely to be selected for national panels and/or be quoted because of their acknowledged leadership in complex scientific and/or professional activities VI in managerial breadth Governor HVI3 1840 “Solid in

the box” HVI3 2112

“Leaning

(21)

Integrating Know-How (aka Managerial Breadth)

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

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

diversity. Columns II – VI are used to reflect additional scale, complexity, diversity, and size.

T. Task I. Activity II. Related III. Diverse

IV. Compre-hensive V. Very large agency mgmt VI. Total mgmt of state # of job classes 1 (<1%) 1631 (91%) 275 (15%) 43 (2%) 5 (<1%) 7 (<1%) 2 (<1%) B.U./Plans (added in 1995) AFSCME CMR MAPE MGEC MLEA MMA MNA MGR SRSEA MnSCU all all all all all 99% all 25% all all MMA MGR <1% 71 % MGR 3% MGR <1% MGR <1% Governor Chancellor of MnSCU Indicators (see more detail

below)

Almost all individual contributors and supervisors are here; 25%

of the State’s managers are, too

Emphasize doing the work…lighter on planning

and evaluation

Focus is on next 30 days

Typically managers of supervisors; more

homogen-eous functions than at III level

“Do,” but more emphasis on planning 3 – 12 month focus Integrates fields with fundamentally different objectives Example: Reconcile the conflicting interests of several hundred employees 1 – 3 year focus

Commissioners of large agencies are found here:

Commr-Admin GIV3 920 Commr- Educ GIV3 1056 Commr-MMB GV3 1216 Commr-Transp GV3 1400

(22)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 22 T

• Jobs usually focus on completing very simple, routine, repetitive tasks rather than integrating those tasks into the unit’s workflow.

Task

• There’s little need for the employee to coordinate work efforts with others.

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

I

• The vast majority of positions throughout State service are placed here.

Activity

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

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

II

• This rating is typically used for managerial positions; it’s very rare for supervisors to have this rating.

• Incumbents are expected to integrate or coordinate fairly homogeneous activities and functions with similar

purposes, but which have competing needs and interests.

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

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

III

• Positions are responsible for integrating several unrelated functions

Diverse

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

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

• Broad-scale organizational planning and control assume greater importance.

• Examples

o Assistant Commissioners in medium to large-sized agencies

o Deputy Commissioners in medium to large-sized agencies

o Commissioners of small to medium-sized agencies

IV

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

Comprehensive

• Examples:

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

with broad impact

V

Positions typically have overall leadership of one of the largest and most complex state agencies. Very Large Agency Management

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

VI Total Management of the State

(23)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 23 Integrating Know-How T. Task I. Activity II. Related III. Diverse Depth and Breath

of Job Specific Knowledge 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 L. Limited A. Primary B/ Elementary Vocational C. Vocational D. Advanced Vocational E. Basic Specialized F. Seasoned Professional

TIP: Why are there shaded areas on the Hay Guide Charts?

Shaded areas serve as a boundary or guide for raters. For example, a position with a “C Vocational” Job Specific Knowledge rating would not have a “II Related” Integrating rating.

Distribution of State Classes by Know-How Points

(24)

Human Relations Skills

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

1. Basic 2. Important 3. Critical

# classes ₁₉₃_(12%) ₇₁₅_(43%) ₇₄₅_(45%)

Description

“General effectiveness that is ordinary for everyday life is a basic work consideration. Tact and courtesy are required, including conduct of

relationships in which information is requested and provided.”

“Alternative or combined skills in understanding, teaming with,

collaborating with, and/or influencing other people are important and specific considerations to cause action or understanding by others.”

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

Indicators

Tactful, with common courtesy Factual exchange of information Failure to exercise this level of skill will “make waves,” cause problems, and eventually interfere with effective job performance

Job-Specific Know-How is relatively

MORE important than Human Relations Know-How

Regularly interact with others and interactions often require understanding of and sensitivity to others’ points of view and assertiveness to influence outcomes May involve collaboration

Employees who assign, monitor and review others’ work usually need at least this level of human relations skill

EQUAL in importance to Human Relations Know-How

Able to persuade, motivate, lead and accomplish work goals through others Negotiate, sell, supervise, and

manage outcomes

Strong interpersonal skills are the key to success in these jobs – usually supervisory or managerial Characterized by constant, daily interaction with others

LESS important than Human Relations Know-How

Examples

Automotive Mechanic Baker

Carpenter

Customer Services Specialist Delivery Van Driver

Food Service Worker

General Maintenance Worker Office and Admin Spec and Int Parks Worker

Zoo Life Support Operator

Most professional level positions

Community Liaison Rep Food Inspector 1 Labor Investigator

Employee Development Spec Personnel Officer

Recreation Therapist

Most supervisors and managers Labor Relations Rep Sr and Principal Lottery Sales Manager

Management Analyst Supv 3 Mediator

(25)

Human Relations Know-How Q&A

Lessons learned from Hay Group consultant, Al Bunnett, as part of the 2008 Quality Assurance review. The 2008 QA review included several established non-supervisory classes with a “3” in Human Relations Know-How.

Q

Is the following an accurate description of the standards the State should be using to determine a "3" in Human Relations?

‘A "3" in Human Relations is appropriate for supervisory classes using the Public Employees Labor Relations Act (PELRA) as a guide for decision making?’

A

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

Q

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

A

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

Q

A "3" is also appropriate for positions/classifications in State government responsible for changing behavior, e.g. selling products, services or ideas. In this context, changing behavior has a very narrow definition and relies on

understanding how an employer measures successful performance. Changing behavior is so essential to the classification/position that there's a direct correlation between performance and salary and/or continued employment. Typically, a percent of total salary is awarded as a sales

commission based on successful sales/changes in behavior. In some positions, program/salary dollars increase or

decrease based directly on an incumbent's performance which ultimately effects employment or layoff.

A

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

Q

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

A

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

In general, where the job must maintain longer term

relationships (years, not weeks) with the subordinate, "3" is a better choice.

(26)

COMBINING THE THREE PARTS OF KNOW-HOW

NOTE: This table is laid out similarly to the Know-How chart used by Hay raters, for ease in use.

(2) Integrating/managerial breadth (1) Technical/ specialized  T.

Task I. Activity II. Related

III. Diverse IV. Compre-hensive V. Very large agency mgmt VI. Total mgmt of the state (3) Human relations  1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Practical procedures L. Limited <1% NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! A. Primary <1% B. Elementary Vocational 2% 1% Specialized techniques C. Vocational 4% 4% 2% D. Advanced Vocational MAYBE 4% 13% 4% E. Basic Specialized NO! 2% 21% 10% <1% 1% MAYBE Learned disciplines F. Seasoned Professional 4% 12% <1% 12% 2% MAYBE G. Specialized Mastery <1% <1% 1% 1% <1% <1% MAYBE <1% H. Professional Mastery <1%

(27)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 27 Problem Solving is the original

‘self-starting’ thinking required by the job for analyzing, evaluating, creating, reasoning, arriving at and making conclusions.

Problem Solving measures the intensity of the mental process that uses Know-How to: (1) identify, (2) define, and (3) resolve problems. It is a percentage of Know-How,

reflecting the fact that “you think with what you know.”

This is true of even the most creative work. Ideas are put together from something already there. The raw material of any thinking is knowledge of facts, principles and means. Problem Solving includes two dimensions:

• Context (aka Thinking Environment)

• Thinking Challenge

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

Context

E. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge

3. Interpretive

33%

Context

E. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge

3. Interpretive

33%

CHAP

T

E

R 2:

P

ro

b

le

m

S

o

lvi

n

g

(28)

The Two Elements of Problem Solving: Context

Context includes the influences or environment that limit or guide decision-making such as rules, instructions, procedures, standards, policies, principles from fields of science and academic disciplines.

Positions are guided by organizational, departmental or functional goals, policies, objectives, practices or

circumscribed by procedures and instructions. In general,

policies describe the “what” of a subject matter, procedures

detail the steps needed to follow through on a policy (i.e., how, where, when, by whom) and instructions outline the specific aspects of how to perform the tasks, such as the operation of a machine or how to select the appropriate letters to use in particular situations.

HayGroup® cautions against the mechanical application of organization echelons to determine levels. However, each job is expected to resolve problems to meet its specific

accountabilities within an organizational framework or context.

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

A Strict Routine

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

• Positions are guided by simple rules and detailed instructions.

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

B Routine

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

• Positions are guided by established routines and standing instructions.

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

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

procedures and precedents.

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

(29)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 29 D Standardized

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

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

 Positions are guided by substantially diversified business or academic procedures and specialized standards.  Changing priorities or differing situations encountered in

the work environment allow the employee latitude to consider which among many procedures should be followed in what sequence to achieve the required job results.

E Clearly Defined

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

o Some third level professionals o Advanced professionals o Professional supervisors

o Some managers, directors and executive directors

• Positions are guided by policies and principles rather than procedures.

• Incumbents determine how best to accomplish goals or resolve work challenges

• Many higher level professional, supervisory and lower and mid level managerial classes are rated at this level.

PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES

D - Standardized Information Tech Spec 1 and 2 Forensic Scientist 1

Personnel Officer Pers Officer Sr and Princ Pollution Control Spec and Int Psychologist

Registered Nurse/Sr/Princ Registered Nurse Supervisor State Patrol Trooper

State Programs Admin and Int Warehouse Examiner Supv E – Clearly Defined Dentist

Engineer Admin and Princ Finance Specialist 1, 2 and 3 Forensic Scientist 2 and 3 Hydrologist 4

Hydrologist 5

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

State Prog Admin Supv Sr and Princ Systems Analysis Unit Supv

(30)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 30 F Broadly Defined

• Positions are guided by broadly defined policies and specific objectives.

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

G Generally Defined

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

• These positions determine the organization’s (i.e., the State of Minnesota’s) functional direction; the goal is specified in only very general terms, such as “increase in international operations” or “enter new markets.”

H Abstractly Defined

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

• The Governor is the only position in State government with this rating. The Governordetermines the strategic direction of State government, consistent with its charter, and the requirements for the organization’s survival and continuity.

PROBLEM SOLVING EXAMPLES

F – Broadly Defined Assistant Commissioner – DOC Assistant State Negotiator Commissioner – Human Rights Demographer State

Deputy Commissioner – Health Exec Dir – Animal Health Bd

Exec Dir – PERA

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

G – Generally Defined Commissioner – Administration Commissioner – Agriculture Commissioner – DHS

Exec Dir – Investment Board H – Abstractly Defined Governor

(31)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 31 Hay Guide Chart –

Profile Method: a 3-level Thinking Challenge process Like the process that turns loose vegetation into rolls of hay, the Hay method of job evaluation takes relevant pieces of information about a job; subjects them to an organized, standardized process; and results in consistent ratings that can be used for a variety of purposes.

Thinking Challenge

Thinking Challenge includes the nature of the problems

encountered and the mental processes used to resolve the problems. The scale ranges from simple problems to very complex issues, with the

premise that simple issues recur regularly in the same form and after awhile are resolved by rote or instinct, but very difficult issues require substantial thinking and deliberation. The types of situations encountered and the processes involved in identifying, defining or resolving related problems are

considered. Thinking Challenge reflects the degree of difficulty in finding improvements and adapting to changes.

1 Repetitive

• This level has been compared to a true/false test

situation, with very limited options from which to choose. • Employees are expected to resolve identical situations

by making simple choices among a limited number of learned things.

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

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

2 Patterned

• As of 7/10, there were approx. 200 active job classes with this rating, many of them AFSCME positions. • This level has been compared to a multiple-choice test

situation with a finite number of choices, but more varied than true/false.

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

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

(32)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 32 3 Interpretive

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

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

o Some directors and executive directors

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

involved.

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

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

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

• These jobs are confronted with problems that “fall in the cracks” and resolve them by “reading between the lines.” • Solutions result from comparing problem elements to

reference points within one’s own experience and then using one’s judgment to match the appropriate prior decision.

4 Adaptive

• As of 7/10, there were approx. 410 active job classes with this rating. Examples include:

o Some advanced professionals o Higher level supervisors o Most managers

o Some assistant directors o Most directors

o Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners, Assistant Commissioners

• Positions are expected to resolve variable situations requiring analytical, interpretive, evaluative and/or constructive thinking.

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

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

the U.S. to specific circumstances

• The situation to be resolved includes circumstances, facts and issues that are different than those that have been encountered in the past.

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

(33)

4th Edition Hay Operating Manual 2011 33 5 Uncharted

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

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

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

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

• Deliberations are often necessarily time-consuming. Job analysts choose between two percentages for each combination of Context and Thinking Challenge (low and high) to “fine-tune” the rating. For example, a D3 combination could be assigned D3 (29%) for 50 points or D3 (33%) for 57 points. Once the Know-How rating and the Problem Solving

percentage for a position are agreed upon, Hay raters use the Point Conversion Table included with the Hay Guide Charts to determine the position’s total number of Problem Solving points. To use this table, choose the column that matches the position’s total number of Know-How points, look along the left side of the table for the % you’ve chosen, then find the number where these two intersect for the total Problem Solving points. For example, a 33% Problem Solving for 200 Know-How points results in 66 total Problem Solving points.

JOB COMPONENT PATTERNS

Know-How points to Problem Solving percentages

KH Problem Solving Percentages

PTS 66% 57% 50% 43% 38% 33% 29% 25% 22% 920 x 800 x x 700 x x 608 x x 528 x x 460 s x x 400 x x 350 x x x 304 x x 264 x x x 230 s x x 200 x x 175 x x s 152 s x x s 132 s x x 115 s x X= Typical/Probable S = Selectively

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

Hay Manual

Table of Contents

HayGroup®

WHY HAY?



Organized, systematic job ranking system



Assigns point values to job components



Widely used - both public and private sector



Useful for large classification studies.



Helps determine appropriate level of a position

within a class series.

Hay Guide Chart – Profile Method

When are positions Hay-rated?

Sample outcomes:

I. Activity

.

E.

Basic

Specialized.

200

Human

Relations 2

I. Activity

.

E.

Basic

Specialized.

200

Human

Relations 2

CHAP

T

E

R 1:

K

n

ow

-Ho

w

The Three Elements Comprising Know How:

Practical Procedures Group

Specialized Techniques Group

Learned Disciplines Group

Practical Procedures Group

Specialized Techniques Group

LEARNED DISCIPLINES GROUP

“

Q

A

Q

A

Q

A

Q

A

Context

E. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge

3. Interpretive

33%

Context

E. Clearly Defined

Thinking Challenge

3. Interpretive

33%

CHAP

T

E

R 2:

P

ro

b

le

m

S

o