Job Analysis Method For Managers
Human Resource Management
Managers. Which job analysis method would you prefer to use? How would you overcome the disadvantages associated with this method?
The readings note (as per the reference below) the importance in using a combination of job study methods to realize the forces that influence a job’s demands. When applying a blend of research methods, such as those illustrated in Table 5-1 (i.e. job performance, observation, interview, critical incidents, and structured questionnaires), organizations, managers, or HR can “obtain a total picture of the task and the physical, mental, social, and environmental demands of a job” (Cascio, 2005, pp. 36-47).
Job Analysis in the Government or Civilian Sector
Having the benefit of experiencing government protocols and a civilian career, I can appreciate an understanding of which job analysis method combinations would meet my objectives when exploring job descriptions. While some methods would work well simultaneously in the government sector, some may not (e.g. using “job performance” to understand specific duties that require a classified clearance).
As a manager, for example, within an Operations Department of a military branch, an analysis method I would use is the combination of conducting interviews, acquiring personnel information through critical incidents, and organizing structured questionnaires. Through these methods, I wouldn’t be required to perform or observe the job, particularly jobs that are inaccessible and revolved around sensitive functions or material. However, these methods (interviews, critical incidents, and structured questionnaires), as Cascio displays, can cause personnel/interviewees to become suspicious of interviewing motives, can be time critical, and costly with arduous research. Considering that these disadvantages can never be avoided, to overcome these obstacles, such as those through the interviewing method, I would inform personnel of the method/study’s purpose and focus. As for critical incidents and questionnaires, rather than acquiring superfluous data, I may outline my objectives prior to conducting research, so as to have a more concentrated study.
In the civilian atmosphere however, I would use job performance and observation. Why? In every measure possible and to gain insight of a specific job’s influences and requirements, a manager must experience the job through engagement. Also, job performance and observation can decrease any interruption to the flow of personnel, which can lead to a drop in productivity. Then again, similar to job analysis disadvantages I explained in the military, job performance and observation have limitations, such as the time required through training indoctrination.
In general, all job analysis methods have advantages and disadvantages. Using one, or a combination of several, requires an understanding of impacts. Analysis approaches should be tailored to the organization specifically, with the aim of preventing interference to typical employee output.
More by this Author
“In general, management is experiencing a revolution” (Nickels, McHugh & McHugh, 2008, ¶ 13). Why are the skills of managers today different from management skills 50 years ago? The clear...
“You get what you reward.” Implications for Management Decision-Making I believe this quote to be absolutely true. This statement, in relation to management decision-making, signifies the negative or...
The United States Navy follows three major words as core values to develop positive relationships with people, countries, and governments. Honor, Courage and Commitment were the words I swore to. They were the seeds...
No comments yet.