Q1. What is the difference between Job Analysis and Job Evaluation?

Which are the different methods of Job evaluation?

Job analysis
Job analysis is a part of any job evaluation program but actually precedes job evaluation. Job analysis is vital to rank it in a hierarchy of jobs which is what job evaluation aims it. Job analysis is the process of gathering all information and data about a job so as to be able to successfully indulge in job description and its specification. Job analysis is important from the point of view of prospective employees as well. A job analysis gives in detail the skills required to perform a job, the qualifications, physical and mental demands, education, experience, various responsibilities associated with the job (such as responsibility towards machines and equipments as well as responsibility towards safety of other around), and working conditions with the hazards associated with the job.

Job Evaluation
There are many jobs inside an organization and they are ranked in terms of their relative importance. The point to remember is that it is jobs according to their content and not those who are holding them that are ranked in job evaluation. Objectives of any job evaluation program should be well documented so that there is no untoward bias while evaluating jobs. The program finally ends with deciding the wages and perks associated with different jobs in an organization.

Difference between Job Evaluation and Job Analysis Despite being a part of the broader job evaluation process, job analysis is an important program in itself. While job evaluation aims at finding the net worth of different jobs in an organization with the aim of finding salaries and wage differentials, job analysis tries to find out everything about a specific job including the role, responsibility, working conditions, skills required, demands and hazards associated with a job. Management of any organization always endeavors to make the salaries and wages associated with jobs attractive so as to able to compete with other companies in luring better talent.

Various Job Evaluation Methods are:1) There are 4 basic and traditional methods of job evaluation The Ranking method Job Classification or Grading method Factor Comparison method Point method

Ranking method:
Raters examine the description of each job being evaluated and arrange the jobs in order according to their value to the company. This method requires a committee typically composed of both management and employee representative to arrange job in a simple rank order from highest to lowest. No attempts are made to break down the jobs by specific weighted criteria. The committee members merely compare two jobs and judge which one is more important, or more difficult to perform. Then they compare the other job with the first two, and so on until all the jobs have been evaluated and ranked.

The most obvious limitation to the ranking method is its sheer inability to be managed when there are a large number of jobs. Other drawbacks to be considered are the subjectivity of the method- there are no definite or consistent standards by which to justify the rankings- and the fact that because jobs are only ranked in terms of order, we have no knowledge of the distance between the ranks. Classification method: A job evaluation method by which a number of classes or grades are defined to describe a group of jobs is known as Classification method. The classifications are created by identifying some common denominator skills, knowledge, responsibilities with the desired goal being the criterion of a number of distinct classes or grades of jobs. Once the classifications are established, they are ranked in an overall order of importance according to the criteria chosen, and each job is placed in its appropriate classification. This later action is generally done by comparing each positions job description against the classification description and benchmarked jobs. The classification method shares most of the disadvantages of the ranking approach, plus the difficulty of writing classification descriptions, judging which jobs go where, and dealing with jobs that appear to fall into more than one classification. Factor comparison method: Raters need not keep the entire job in mind as they evaluate; instead, they make decisions on separate aspects, or factors, of the job. A basic underlying assumption is that there are five universal job factors: (1) Mental Requirements, (2) Skills, (3) Physical Requirements, (4) Responsibilities, and (5) Working Conditions. The committee first rank each of the selected benchmark jobs on the relative degree of difficulty for each of the five factors. Then, the committee allocates the total pay rates for each job to each factor based on the importance of the respective factor to the job. A job comparison scale, reflecting rankings and money allocations, is developed next. The raters compare each job, factor by factor, with those appearing on the job comparison scale. Then, they place the jobs on the chart in an appropriate position. Point method: Raters assign numerical values to specific job components, and the sum of these values provides a quantitative assessment of a jobs relative worth. The point method requires selection of job factors according to the nature of the specific group of jobs being evaluated. After determining the group of jobs to be studied, analysts conduct job analysis and write job descriptions. Next, the analysts select and define the factors to be used in measuring job value and which become the standards used for the evaluation of jobs. Education, experience, job knowledge, mental effort, physical effort, responsibility, and working conditions are examples of factors typically used. The committee establishes factor weights according to their relative importance in the jobs being evaluated, and then determines the total number of points to be used in the plan. A distribution of the point values to job factor degrees is made, with the next step being the preparation of a job evaluation manual.

2) NON-CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES OF JOB-EVALUATION

The important among the non-conventional techniques of job evaluation are: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) Time-span of discretion theory Decision-banding Direct consensus method Guide-chart profile method Problem solving compensable factor Guide line method Profile method

Q.3) Explain ADDIE model of training?

The ADDIE model is the generic process traditionally used by instructional designers and training developers. The five phasesAnalysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluationrepresent a dynamic, flexible guideline for building effective training and performance support tools. It is an Instructional Systems Design (ISD) model. Most of the current instructional design models are variations of the ADDIE process This is the idea of receiving continual or formative feedback while instructional materials are being created. This model attempts to save time and money by catching problems while they are still easy to fix.

Phases of ADDIE
Analysis Phase
This first step in our ISD process is to find out as much as we can about the issues you are trying to address. The goal is to define the gap between your current and desired performance states, identify objectives and define how any subsequent intervention will be evaluated.
The Analysis Process:

Determine if training can fix the problem. Establish training program goals and objectives. Find out more about our team and/or channel partners. This process will helps to identify the audience. Determine which type of training and delivery system will best address your objectives. Find out more about your resources. These include staff, SMEs, existing training programs, print materials, videos, facilities, budget, etc Identify program constraints. What hurdles are we going to have to overcome? These often include deadlines, decentralized participants, cultural influences, language, and many other internal and external factors.

Design Phase
The output of this phase of the project is a complete blueprint for the new training initiative. The blueprint, or working map of the project identifies all of the moving parts and the resources needed to successfully complete the project. The Design Process:

Define and develop all instructional objectives. Define evaluation techniques, tools and plan. Develop course structure and sequence. Define all course and support materials. Prepare a program development map indicating individual projects, workload distribution, and resources.

 Development Phase
The development or construction phase of the project involves the creation of all student and facilitator materials. This, in addition to pilot testing, results in a complete package including all deliverables.
The Development Process:

All student and facilitator materials are developed. All materials are reviewed by the stakeholders, SMEs and facilitators for accuracy. Revisions are made based on this process. All materials are pilot tested with a small focus group. The output of this process is further revisions regarding content and timeline. Facilitators are prepared to present training if applicable. The program is packaged and distributed.

Implementation Phase
Your program is ready to see the light of day and the content is delivered. The initial release of the program is carefully evaluated and again modified if necessary to ensure that learners meet objectives and that facilitators or delivery technologies are working properly.
Level 1 Program Evaluation

Input from participants through direct contact and appraisal tools. Facilitator program evaluation. Modification of design and materials as warranted.

Evaluation Phase
The evaluation process identifies the level of program success. Four specific areas are evaluated through various means. Initially data is gathered during the training initiative to determine program reaction and to gauge the level of increased knowledge or intellectual capacity. Post training evaluation determines the level of change in behaviour and the impact on the business environment.
The Evaluation Process:

Reaction Evaluation - Gauge participant reaction to the training initiative. Learning Evaluation - Determine if learning objectives have been accomplished. Did the participants learn what was intended? Behaviour Evaluation To what extent are participants applying their new knowledge and what change in behaviour is evident? Results Evaluation Did the training initiative have the desired effect on the business environment?