Productivity Improvement
Employee Evaluation and Selection
Profile Analysis
Evaluating employees against job requirements
Few aspects of management command more attention and are fraught with more difficulties than that of managing human resources. First line supervisors feel the pressure daily to find the right persons for each position and, when found, to keep the individual challenged against the requirements of the position.
Unfortunately, there are no scientific formulas for defining position requirements and evaluating job applicants. The position / person matching process seems more art than science. While it is performed daily by many, few feel comfortable at handling the required complexities. One reason is that they have no analytical framework for addressing this process of balancing with people.
Whether
- establishing a new position,
- seeking qualified applicants to hire,
- evaluating performance of existing personnel,
- or attempting to develop personnel career advancement,
one is involved in matching a person to a position. When a supervisor decides to hire someone, it is because that person is thought to offer qualities that match certain job requirements.
To evaluate the performance of an existing employee, a supervisor compares the expectations for the position with the employees actual performance. The requirements of the position must be determined, the performance or capabilities of individuals must be evaluated against these requirements.
This process is carried out continually, often without the aid of any concrete discipline. Each case seems unique. The need is for an ordered methodology for doing this, that accommodates the different environments and the non quantifiable elements that must be taken into account.
Profile analysis is the tool of choice in these circumstances
Job position profile
The first step is establishing a definition of the job position. That starts by stating its expectations, asking, "What is the position to accomplish?" This definition can take a variety of forms, and is frequently developed using such documents as job descriptions, key performance objectives, and a listing of functional responsibilities and activities.
From the expectations, the position can be dissected into the knowledge / skills that are essential to accomplish those expectations. This identification of knowledge / skill factors is simple acknowledgment of their importance to the position.
Each position should be supported by from six to ten knowledge / skills constructs, each with a brief description. The following are examples of a computer programmer position within a financial organization. The person who fills the position will need
- oral and written communication skills,
- knowledge of the industry,
- knowledge of accounting systems,
- knowledge of and experience using Cobol programming language,
- knowledge of the computers operating system, and
- skills in data base management.
Once the list of knowledge / skill constructs has been prepared, the next step is to determine the level of knowledge / skill required for each factor. To do this, envision each factor on a continuum ranging from zero to some theoretical maximum, with 0 representing no knowledge / skill required and 10 the theoretical maximum. This continuum is illustrated in Knowledge / skill continuum graphic below.
Determine the level of the knowledge / skill for each of the constructs identified. This level determination acknowledges that while the knowledge / skill factor is required, the level required is not the same for each. Nor is the highest (10) always the best.
It is important to acknowledge that not all factors can be quantified to the same extent. Actually, some are quite subjective by their nature. However, if important to the position, such factors should be listed and an attempt made at determining a level.
To illustrate, if once again a computer programmer position is being considered, skill in programming Cobol will be a factor. But the level of skill required for the position will rarely be such that it will require rewriting the Cobol compiler. If the position is for a maintenance programming position, a four or five (on the 0 to 10 scale) many be appropriate. For a position that will be developing new computer applications, a higher rating of a six or seven would be appropriate. For this factor, the skills required can be readily quantified.
In a management analyst position, problem solving skills are a likely required factor. If the person holding the position will be involved in negotiating relatively simple solutions between small groups of people, a four or a five may be adequate as a rating. If the position requires developing complex solutions involving large numbers of people with widely divergent interests, the level needed may be a six or seven. If the issues are exceptionally delicate and risks of failure are extremely high, an eight may be more appropriate.
Naturally, it will be more difficult to quantify these skills than the programming skill in the earlier example.
Regardless of the ability to quantify each construct, this factor analysis will result in the placing of an x somewhere along each applicable knowledge / skills continuum. When these continua are combined (one for each knowledge / skill factors), the result is a profile for the position, This profile can be graphically shown be placing each knowledge / skill continuum into a single diagram using a common axis.
The position profile analysis diagram below shows the profile for a non supervisory computer programmer using the six knowledge / skill constructs listed earlier. Note that each knowledge / skill factor has a determined requirement level indicated by an x on the zero to ten continuum. The shaded area of the diagram is the profile of the position.
For convenience of evaluation, the specialized factors are grouped together on the right and the more general, non technical ones on the left. This shows at a glance whether the position requires strong technical skills, strong supervisory skills, or a balance. As would be expected, in the case of a non supervisory computer programming position, technical skills are more important. This is reflected by the profile itself being skewed to the right and the fact that two of the technical factors have been labelled critical .
Personnel profile
Once the position requirements are established, attention can turn to evaluating the job applicant side of the equation.
Input for this part of the evaluation will come from a variety of sources, including
- a job application
- resume / CV,
- a job interview,
- discussion with former employers,
- actual on the job observations and
- discussion with peers.
Using the information obtained, a personnel evaluation of each job candidate can be performed in which the individual qualifications are matched with the previously developed knowledge / skill factors required, factor by factor. Using a spider chart, the individuals level can then be annotated for each factor. When connecting lines are drawn, a corresponding personnel profile results. Position profile for an applicant shows the completed result.
At a glance, it is evident that the person being evaluated in the chart is somewhat suited for the position. There are some weaknesses in the area of database management, accounting systems and the required communication skills. But these dimensions are considered to be not among the two critical factors to the position. Hence, the candidate may still be acceptable, especially when future developmental needs are considered.
The gap between position and person is not substantial (indicating the applicant has some experience with the operating system), the non quantifiable approach to determining these levels makes precision difficult, and finally knowledge in this factor can be acquired via added training in a relatively short period of time. The persons strengths in the key dimensions more than compensate for the deficiencies encountered.
Step beyond
The above discussion focuses on the immediate application of the profile analysis technique, but it is its potential use that holds the greatest excitement. Since much of it is quantifiable, its use with it is a real possibility. It is quite conceivable that a system could be designed and built to allow a manager to sit at a computer and go through a series of questions to identify a position's required knowledge / skill factors and the level of each.
Potential job candidates could also be given a series of questions (via a computer) that would tie directly to these factors. The result would be a computer-generated profile for both the position and each candidate employee. While this would not be a substitute for applications, interviews, and the like, it could be an added screening instrument. It would add a level of quantification frequently missing in matching personnel with positions.
Employment agencies could use this technique to insure that only those applications with a relatively good fit are sent to be interviewed. Within a company, decisions about internal career moves, training needs and the like could be aided.
Conclusion
In many ways, the position / employee profile analysis described in this article is not new. Managers and supervisors intuitively perform it frequently. What this methodology adds, however, is an element of discipline in the marching of positions with potential or existing employees. Because it can be portrayed graphically, it is easy to grasp and communicate. Additionally, the methodology has four advantages.
Profile analysis provides for quantifying where applicable, but does nor force non-quantifiable elements into a rigid structure.
The methodology is oriented toward knowledge / skill and therefore does not carry the negative personal connotations often associated with personnel evaluations. It focuses on not only where there may be weakness, but also where there are strengths. And, most importantly, weakness' or strengths are seen only in relation to the position not as an assessment of personal worth. This technique sets the stage for bringing about improvements where the need is identified.
This methodology provides continuity because the same structure can be used for establishing a job position, hiring for a position, evaluating existing employees, and planning training. This continuity should go a along way toward reducing the ambiguity frequently associated with managing human resources.
The profile analysis technique has the benefit of being well adapted to information technology. Databases could be established for a wide range of knowledge skill factors, each with associated questions to help identify required levels, for any given position. Corresponding questions to evaluate the existing knowledge / skill levels of candidates / employees could be included. Databases could also be established for each employee for making reassignments, promotions, special projects etc.
A cure all? No, but most definitely a tool to help managers and supervisors accomplish a very critical element of their responsibilities.
