UPI Study › Courses › Human Resources Management › Free lessons › Lesson 3.13 Free with a free account
How Job Analysis Helps Set Fair and Consistent Performance Standards
Human Resources Management · Chapter 3: How Management Theories Shape the Way Jobs Are Built and OrganizedSection 3.13 · lesson 23 of 9115 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Human Resources Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Human Resources Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Human Resource Management: Recruitment and Staffing →← 4 Methods for Figuring Out What a Job Is WorthNext lesson: Human Resource Management: Recruitment and Staffing →
In this lesson
Ground clear expectations in actual work.
- Compare 5 analysis methods and their biases
- Connect tasks with person requirements
- Build job-related, attainable standards communicated in advance
- Evaluate the behavior a measure encourages
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,951 words). Read along, or search it.
How Management Theories Shape the Way Jobs Are Built and Organized
Job Analysis and Fair Standards
Job analysis systematically collects information, about a job's tasks, responsibilities, context, and requirements. It supplies the evidence for documentation, evaluation, selection criteria, performance standards, and accommodation analysis. A weak analysis therefore spreads its defect, into several downstream decisions rather than one document. The original weakness can be hard to see, once it appears later as an unrelated problem. Five methods collect different kinds of evidence, and each carries a characteristic blind spot. The practical rule is to combine methods, so one source can check what another misses. Task-oriented analysis records work; worker-oriented analysis identifies the human requirements that work creates. Competency modeling adds a wider language of success, provided its behavioral indicators remain observable. Valid analysis also recognizes the difference, between the job's official design and its actual performance. Performance standards then identify important outputs, observable indicators, and an attainable acceptable level. The Calder case shows a count improving, while uncounted work deteriorates around it. Our final exercise tests the chain of evidence, before a performance decision is made.
Observation and Interviews
Actual Activity and Reported Reasoning Differ
Observation watches work as it happens, capturing visible actions rather than only the postholder's account. It is strongest for physical, repetitive work, where sequence and timing can be seen directly. Watching a screen cannot reveal the cognitive judgment behind the visible activity. The observer's presence can also change behavior, making the observation itself part of the situation. Observation carries a moderate cost, through analyst time spent where the work is performed. Interviews with incumbents and supervisors capture reasoning, exceptions, and duties absent on the observation day. They can also reveal the context, which makes a particular decision or task necessary. Incumbents may inflate complexity, especially when they suspect the analysis will affect grading. Supervisors may describe intended performance, rather than the work actually carried out by the team. Several interviews create a moderate-to-high cost, but also make different accounts available for comparison. Combine reported reasoning with work evidence, rather than assume either source is automatically complete.
Inventories and Diaries
Standard Data and a Full Work Cycle
Questionnaires and structured inventories collect standardized responses, from many postholders across different jobs. They support economical comparison at scale, once the instrument has been designed carefully. Designing it well has a real cost, even when each additional response is inexpensive. The instrument captures only its questions, leaving unanticipated job content invisible. A neat profile can therefore hide work, which no question permits anyone to report. Work diaries ask postholders to record activities, as they perform them through a work cycle. They capture time distribution and infrequent duties, which a short observation could easily miss. The analyst pays little, while the postholder carries the diary's recording effort. Busy days are often written up afterward, precisely when the most informative activity is occurring. Late entries rely on recall, weakening confidence in timing and detail. Use these methods for their strengths, while checking the omissions and reporting conditions they create.
Critical Incidents
Describe Behavior, Circumstances, and Consequences
The critical incident technique collects specific accounts, of behavior that markedly affected an outcome. The account identifies what the person did, the circumstances, and what happened as a result. Both positive and negative incidents can show actions, associated with different levels of performance. The material is particularly useful for distinguishing excellent work, from adequate or unacceptable responses. It describes observable behavior, rather than labeling the person with a trait or general impression. That makes it useful for behavior-based appraisal, developed later in the performance material. Collection has a high cost, requiring structured accounts from enough sources to build usable evidence. Its characteristic bias is the memorable event, which people recall more readily than ordinary competence. Routine work forms much of the job, yet can disappear from an incident-focused record. Combine the technique with methods covering everyday activity, rather than equating drama with importance. The resulting examples support specific behavioral indicators, while the wider analysis preserves the complete role.
Analysis Orientations
Trace Human Requirements to the Tasks
Task-oriented analysis describes what is done, including sequence, frequency, and the conditions surrounding each activity. Its output supports training design, work measurement, and the job documents examined earlier. Worker-oriented analysis describes the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics the job requires. It supports selection, and comparison between roles whose tasks differ but whose human demands overlap. Both orientations are usually needed, with every attribute traced to its required tasks. Without that link, unsupported specification requirements become much harder to identify and challenge. Competency modeling describes successful behaviors and capabilities, often across several roles. It supports development and succession, while providing common language tied to organizational priorities. The weakness arises when competencies remain abstract, such as strategic thinking or customer focus alone. Those labels cannot be observed consistently, without stating the behavioral indicators that would demonstrate them. A framework becomes assessable through those indicators, rather than its collection of appealing capability names.
Validity Practices
The Gap Between Design and Reality Is a Finding
Validity begins with multiple sources, because one incumbent describes only one version of the job. Other postholders can reveal differences in tasks, workarounds, and the circumstances they encounter. Supervisors add another perspective, which must still be checked against what the work actually involves. Have incumbents and supervisors check the output, correcting errors before subsequent decisions. Their review also makes the account clearer, by resolving disputed descriptions while evidence is available. Remember that incumbents describe the job as performed, rather than simply repeating its official design. They may absorb duties, create workarounds, or stop performing an official task. The gap reveals where reality and design diverged, making it a useful finding. Do not erase it merely to make the final document resemble the existing description. Record the difference, then examine why it arose and whether the formal arrangement needs revision. Actual work evidence gives decisions a defensible foundation, rather than an idealized account.
Build the Standard
Identify the Output, Indicator, and Acceptable Level
A performance standard states the level expected, in a defined aspect of the job. Actual performance can then be compared, with an expectation that has been made explicit. Building the standard begins with outputs, that genuinely matter to the work's purpose. The analyst next defines observable, measurable indicators, showing whether those outputs are achieved. The final step sets the level, which represents acceptable performance for that indicator. Each step requires evidence, rather than simply adopting the metric most convenient to report. The job analysis supplies the relationship, between the activity, its result, and the proposed indicator. An available count may be incidental, rather than measuring the contribution required. The chosen acceptable level also needs a basis, rather than an unexplained number inserted afterward. Specific expectations tell employee and manager, which comparison will later be made. The standard selects aspects of performance, rather than describing everything valuable. Test whether it is relevant, observable, attainable, and communicated in advance.
4 Requirements
A Fair Standard Needs More Than an Accurate Count
Job-relatedness means the standard measures something, which the job actually requires its postholder to do. An incidental measure can direct effort toward the wrong activity, making its apparent success misleading. Observability means two people assessing the evidence, can agree whether the expectation was met. Without it, ratings describe the appraiser's impression, rather than a consistently identified performance result. Attainability means acceptable performance is achievable, under the actual conditions in which the job operates. A level nobody meets stops functioning as a standard, becoming a formality that people ignore. It may then be revived selectively, rather than applied as a consistent expectation. Communicate the expectation before assessing performance, so the person knows what is required. Undisclosed requirements defeat fairness, making the performance process difficult to sustain. Metric accuracy cannot repair missing requirements; fair use raises a different question. Check all four conditions, before treating the standard as sufficient evidence for a consequential decision. Test the work connection and process, alongside the accuracy of the count.
Measurement Limits
The Countable Part Is Not the Whole Job
Research, advisory work, relationships, and professional practice often contain valuable activity that resists simple measurement. The system's available count tempts the manager, because it is convenient to report. Behavior can then move toward that part, and away from work the standard leaves unrecognized. Counting cases closed says nothing by itself, about whether those cases were closed correctly. Use several indicators, so success cannot be optimized through one narrow quantity alone. Combine quantitative information with structured judgment, instead of pretending judgment is absent from professional assessment. Explain the evidence used for that judgment, making it more than an unrecorded general impression. Also state which parts of the job, the selected standards do not cover. This boundary prevents the measured part, from masquerading as the person's whole contribution. Some valuable work may require a considered assessment, rather than conversion into another convenient count. The honest trade is more administrative effort, in exchange for a fuller account of performance. State what remains unmeasured, rather than hide that boundary from the assessment.
Downstream Dependence
A Weak Analysis Creates Several Problems Together
Three consequential processes depend directly on job analysis, creating cumulative exposure when its foundation is weak. Selection needs criteria connected to the work, with evidence supporting requirements that exclude applicants. Performance standards support pay, promotion, and continued employment, making their relevance and documentation important. Accommodation analysis examines essential functions, under the Americans with Disabilities Act of nineteen ninety. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces that employment framework, with individual circumstances requiring careful assessment. Weak analysis can therefore create problems in several places, rather than only one alternative risk. An accurate document begins with work evidence, instead of trying to repair every later process separately. Whether a particular criterion or decision is legally defensible, depends on the actual case. Contested issues require legal assessment, rather than HR declaring a result from a generic checklist. HR's contribution is rigorous analysis and preserved records, making the particular question possible to assess. The documentary foundation is practical evidence, supporting decisions rather than automatically guaranteeing their lawfulness.
Composite Case
Calder’s Closure Count Rewards the Silence
Marcus supervises technical support at fictional Calder Systems, and needs a standard he can apply consistently. He chooses tickets closed per day, using the team average to set the target. It is the only aspect the system counts, so the decision initially appears straightforward. Within two quarters, the closure measure improves, while three uncounted problems develop around it. Complex tickets wait, because closing one can cost an advisor several simpler closures. Internal notes disappear, because colleagues need them but writing them earns no credit in the count. The highest closer also closes cases that customers reopen, turning one failure into two recorded closures. The measure is not wrong about throughput; it is silent about the rest of the work. The agreed revision uses four indicators, starting with closure volume weighted by ticket complexity. Reopen rate adds resolution durability, rather than recording repeated failure as further success. A quarterly peer sample evaluates note quality, while a customer resolution measure adds the actual outcome. Mentoring between advisors is explicitly valued, through judgment rather than another artificial count. The arrangement costs more to administer, and is less clean to report than the original number. That trade is accepted to judge required contribution, including work the original standard left silent.
Reverse Problem and Chapter
Fair Expectations Start Before the Decision
The reverse exercise describes an overturned dismissal, based on a newly introduced standard. The standard arrived eleven months into employment, without written communication to the employee. The description predates the system, and no record explains the acceptable level. Trace those failures through analysis, documentation, indicator choice, level setting, and advance communication. The metric's accuracy does not answer those questions, because the problem is its basis and use. Missing communication matters particularly, when an employee never clearly received the expectation. The chapter began with management theories, identifying assumptions about tasks, authority, groups, and employee behavior. It then applied those assumptions to job characteristics, empowerment, incremental techniques, and radical process change. The final lessons documented jobs, evaluated relative worth, and established the analysis supporting both. Across that chain, every choice trades something away, including which work a measure recognizes. Explain the gain sought, and the contribution needing another form of assessment. Chapter four uses this foundation, to find, attract, and select the workforce.
About Human Resources Management at UPI Study
Human Resources Management (Business 306) is a self-paced online course of 91 video lessons in 12 chapters, from what HR does and how jobs are designed to hiring, training, performance reviews, pay and benefits, safety, employment law, unions, global staffing and remote work. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses
Why take it here
Why students take Human Resources Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Human Resources Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About How Job Analysis Helps Set Fair and Consistent Performance Standards
What is job analysis and why is it important?
What are the main methods of job analysis?
What is the difference between task-oriented and worker-oriented job analysis?
What makes a good performance standard?
About the Human Resources Management course
How many college credits is Human Resources Management?
How much does Human Resources Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Human Resources Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Human Resources Management.
91 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →