Dunn and Wilson scholarship project 1997 Job Descriptions: improving their currency, accuracy and usefulness

2. Stage 1 - literature review

2.1 Introduction

The first stage of the research project consisted of a literature review. The review was limited to literature published between 1988 and 1998 as I was interested in examining job descriptions in today's work context rather than from a historical perspective.

LaRoory (1995) describes three main attitudes towards job descriptions. These are:

• the campaigners who believe up to date job descriptions are essential for the effective running of any organisation;
• the neutrals who are probably the largest group and are neither for nor against job descriptions. This group usually does not use job descriptions for managing their area of responsibility; and
• the contras who believe job descriptions are not necessary or desirable. They think that anything written down about a job is likely to be out of date by the next month, if not sooner.

This appears to be an accurate representation as I experienced all three attitudes when discussing job descriptions with staff from various organisations during the research project. People were either very enthusiastic, couldn't care less - 'yes we do have them but they are not used much' - or felt they were a waste of time, energy and money.

2.2 What is a job description?

Sahl, (1994. p.3) states 'well written job descriptions define the work of the organisation and its reasons for existence as an employer of human resources. More, they define and help quantify the relative importance of work, what each position contributes to a process and the organisation as a whole.' This definition illustrates an important point regarding job descriptions, used in today's work environment, by emphasising that they describe not only what the job is about but how the job contributes to the work of the organisation.

A job description must be accurate but not a minutely detailed list of an employees tasks and duties (DeLon, 1994). As Behn (1997, p. 60) states: 'it is impossible to list, in anything smaller than an encyclopedia, the multitude of tasks … that combine to produce the results desired from a particular job.' Job descriptions are meant to be a guide only 'staff must not interpret them rigidly or job descriptions become a barrier to success' (Degner, 1995, p. 17). Grant (1989) describes them as a 'map' that show direction. Job descriptions are not a description of how a job is to be done (Grant, 1989), a contract (DeLon, 1994) or set of rules, regulations or proper practices (Grant, 1989). They describe the nature of the work to be done by stating the purpose and main responsibilities. They may also include information on the type of person who is best suited to perform the job.

Grant (1988) describes job descriptions as a valuable resource. They have the potential to be a useful organisational tool, however, to realise their potential they must be properly prepared. Grant (1988, p. 53) believes many job descriptions do not reach their potential because they 'are too simplistic, they lack detail, they are out of date, they neglect many key structural elements of the job and they are unclearly written'.

There are two main types of job descriptions, the generic or general and the specific or individual. Generic job descriptions are written in broadly stated general terms without identifying specific responsibilities, requirements, purpose and relationships. Some organisations use generic job descriptions for the same level within an organisation. For particular positions an additional duty statement may be developed. Specific job descriptions provide information on all essential responsibilities assigned to the person performing the job, they are usually quite detailed and comprehensive. (How to write job descriptions the easy way, 1993)

2.3 Why are job descriptions important?

Ray and Hawthorne (1993, p i) state 'an accurate and detailed job description is an increasingly crucial component of the effective use of valuable human resources in libraries and other organisations.' The primary function of a job description is as a communication tool. They effectively communicate a great deal of information about a job, especially between the manager and employee (Giles, 1995; Grant, 1989). 'When employees have a road map to success they often perform much better - and that translates into continued business growth for you and your firm' (Consulting Task Force, 1991). Information may include reporting relationships; skill requirements; major responsibilities; where the job fits into the organisation and what is required of the position. This information is presented in a completely objective and impersonal way (How to write job descriptions the easy way, 1993) which allows the job description to be used in relation to many human resource functions such as recruitment, induction, training and performance management.

Well written job descriptions also provide information to prospective employees about organisational expectations of a particular job (Carlopio, 1996). This aids in retaining staff as the more a prospective employee knows about the culture of an organisation and what is expected of them, the quicker they will settle into the organisation. Unclear job descriptions, which do not describe organisational information and expectations, may mislead a new employee. 'A major barrier to the formation of organisational commitment is a large gap between what people expect and what the realities turn out to be' (Carlopio, 1986, p.58).

2.4 What are Job descriptions used for?

Job descriptions have the potential to be used for a number of human resource functions. The main purposes reported in the literature include the following (see appendix 1 for a list of purposes of job descriptions and literature references). Again the emphasis is on well written job descriptions.

• Selection and recruitment. Job descriptions may be used to advertise jobs, screen applicants, develop questions for the job interview and identify essential and desirable criteria.
• Induction and orientation. Job descriptions provide a good introduction and overview of the job which enables the employee to understand what the organisation expects of them.
• Understanding the employee's role in the organisation. Job descriptions allow the employee to see where they fit into the big picture of the organisation, and how their job contributes to the organisation. They may also reflect organisational goals and objectives.
• Identifying training requirements. Job descriptions may identify initial training requirements for a new employee. If they are included in a performance management system they may be used as an aid in identifing training to improve performance or additional training needed as a result of changing responsibilities.
• Performance management. Job descriptions are the foundation of an effective performance management system (Meng, 1992) and are used in conducting performance reviews or job evaluations. They may also be used to develop performance measures (Russell, 1996). However, it is important to note that job descriptions are only one component of an effective performance management system. Such a system includes other processes and documentation. For example, an organisation may have induction policies and program, identified roles and responsibilities of various levels of staff, a rewards and recognition program and performance appraisal system.
• Career development. A study of job descriptions can help employees determine what qualifications, experience and skills are needed to apply for different positions within the organisation. This information can then be used in career planning or development.

Other purposes listed in the literature include:

• orienting new supervisors on what their subordinates and bosses do (Grant 1989)
• analysing work flows and methods (Plachy and Plachy, 1993)
• mentoring (DeLon, 1994)
• industrial relations (Drummond, 1994)
• job restructuring (Drummond, 1994)
• determining what kinds of assignments are given to employees (Bust 1990, Lemos, 1994)
• organisational and personal goal setting (Giles, 1995)
• conducting an organisational audit (Drummond, 1994)
• defining or reviewing organisational structure (Plachy and Plachy, 1993)
• measuring accurate salary administration (Russell, 1996)
• preparing and analysising job descriptions help assure jobs are well designed and that all sections work together to achieve the organisational aims (Grant, 1989)
• quickly preparing substitute workers or temporary help (Grant, 1989)

2.5 What is Included in a Job Description?

The content of the job description varies widely from organisation to organisation and the purpose of the job description will influence what is included. The following list outlines the most commonly referred to components of a job description (apart from the job title, identifying code, grade/level, department, name of company, physical location, job status, date and name of incumbent) described in the literature reviewed (see appendix 2 for a list of literature references):

• job function or purpose which explains the general purpose of the job and why it exists. It also provides the reader with a concise overview of the job.
• duties or tasks includes a precise specific list of what the employee does and is expected to do.
• responsibilities are a summary of the main responsibilities required of the position. Other terms used include Critical Success Factors (Herman and Herman, 1995) or work functions.
• accountabilities outline the major results expected from the job.
• organisational relationships outline how the job fits into the organisation and the structure of the organisation.
• working environment identifies the physical and social contexts in which the job is performed. It may also include working conditions.
• personal contacts refer to the people the employee will interact with while performing the job.
• reporting relationships include whom the employee reports to and what supervision the employee exercises.
• authority identifies what decisions the employee can make and resources they can commit.
• performance standards identify specific standards which can be used to determine whether the job is being performed satisfactorily. Other titles used include outcomes, measures of accomplishment or expected outputs.
• skills including competencies, knowledge and abilities required to perform the job.
• education or qualifications refers to qualifications needed for the job. This may also include training requirements.
• experience refers to the type and nature of experience needed to perform the job.

Other components discussed in the literature include:

• managers expectations (Osbourne, 1992)
• career mobility (DeLapa, 1989)
• position(s) previously held (DeLapa, 1989)
• meetings to attend/reports to be completed (DeLapa, 1989)
• management information required to be passed out from the job (Drummond, 1994)
• time percentages (Grant, 1996)
• scope and impact of the job (Sattler, 1993)

2.6 Format of job descriptions

The layout and format of the job description is very important as a clear format will aid in understanding the document. Before deciding on a format, the organisation firstly needs to consider what the job description will be used for (Grant, 1989). Once a format is decided it needs to be standardised across the organisation (Osborne, 1992; DeLon, 1994). Present tense should be used (Kramer, 1997) as the job description refers to what the person is doing, not what they have done.

The literature varies on the recommended length of job descriptions. DeLapa (1989) suggests 1-3 pages whereas Giles (1995) recommends no longer than two pages.

2.7 Different approaches to job descriptions

Moravec and Tucker (1992) describes how British Petroleum replaced job descriptions with a matrix reflecting skills and behaviours. This matrix focuses on skills and behavious rather than individual jobs. Each skill matrix describes steps in the career ladder, from the lowest to the highest, along the vertical axis. The horizontal axis describes the skills and competencies that are required for each step. Moravec and Tucker (1992, p. 43) argue that 'skill matrices differ significantly from job descriptions, they specify roles and levels of performance rather than jobs in a box.' Through this system managers know what to expect of their employees and employees know what the organisation expects of them.

La Roory (1995) discusses a different approach to job descriptions by defining jobs in terms of a 'contribution matrix' (p.47). This matrix identifies team outputs and contributions made by each member within a team. Agreed outputs are written along the vertical and team members' names along the horizontal. Under each output the processes and contributions made by each team member are listed. The output is then assigned to the person who has the overall responsibility. La Roory (1995) argues that some of the advantages of this approach is that it focuses on the whole department rather than the individual job, incorporates team involvement, can be used to show use of resources and is a good vehicle to identify improvement opportunities.

2.8 Trends in the Literature

Figure 1 identifies the main developmental trends of job descriptions identified through the literature review. While this project did not aim to identify historical trends it became clear while reviewing the literature, that even though the basic format and style of the job description has not changed greatly, the focus of the job description has changed over the last 10-15 years. Job descriptions that suited the work environment in the 1980's are referred to as traditional job descriptions. It is important to note that many authors and organisations still focus on the traditional job description format in today's work environment.

Figure 1: Traditional job descriptions vs. job descriptions today

A noticeable shift, outlined in the literature, is that job descriptions today focus on major responsibility areas rather than duties. Duties represent the methods by which the responsibility areas are accomplished. Responsibilities are like mini-jobs that must be done to get the total job successfully completed. In a fast changing work environment, responsibility areas generally remain constant whereas, duties change constantly with advances in technology and improvements to processes (Segall, 1989). Focusing on duties make it difficult to keep a job description current and does not represent the true nature of the job to be performed. When focusing on responsibilities it is important that these relate to meeting organisational objectives (DeLapa,1989).

The following quote illustrates this point:

'The duty statement is an anachronism left over from the days of rigid bureaucracies with pyramid hierarchies. But in these days of multiskilled people working in self managing teams, the traditional job description has all the value of a parachute that opens on the second bounce.' (Job descriptions? Burn the bloody things, 1995)

In addition, job descriptions have moved from focusing on what a person is required to do (that is, their duties) to focusing on the results or outputs the person is required to achieve. 'An employee can perform duties endlessly without ever accomplishing anything of value. To be truly effective job descriptions must specify what results are to be achieved.' (Plachy, 1991, p. 8) This perspective of focusing on what the person is required to do implies looking at the job from an inside out approach. However, when focusing on the end results it implies looking at the job from an outside-in approach. (Job descriptions? Burn the bloody things, 1995). Focusing on end results helps employees understand why the work is important. Knowing the results also allows employees to discover new ways to accomplish results (Plachy and Plachy, 1993) thus encouraging initiative and creativity.

In the past, the Human Resource department wrote job descriptions with little or no input from the employee actually doing the job. Today's job descriptions are usually written by the affected employee and manager (Langdon, 1996) or by the team that the job is a part of. The Human Resource department now provides a consulting role in the development of job descriptions and their job is to show managers how to define jobs (Langdon, 1996). This approach provides a more accurate job description as it is the employee and manager who have the best insight into the job and are aware of the responsibilities and results expected. Employee involvement also creates ownership (Degner, 1995).

As mentioned, job descriptions are not meant to list every duty an employee performs. However, in the past many job descriptions included statements such as 'and other duties and responsibilities that may be required on either a temporary or permanent basis' (Consulting Task Force, 1991). This allowed managers to change duties or add duties without discussing this with employees. In today's organisation job descriptions are marketed differently in that they are promoted to staff as a job profile outlining the main responsibilities, not all the duties that need to be performed. Changes to these responsibilities are discussed between the manager and employee.

If job descriptions are to be used as a career development tool they need to be available for all staff within an organisation. Some organisations make them available on-line through their intranet. This often was not the case in the past where job descriptions were only available to the person doing the job, their manager and senior management.

Traditional job descriptions were often described in a way that implied complete independence from other positions within the organisation and were very individualistic in nature. When reading this type of job descriptions it is unclear what role the job has in the organisation or how it is related to other positions and processes within the organisation. This type of description encourages independent rather than group action (Dunn, 1993). Job descriptions today need to reflect the interdependence of processes and people within the organisation. If the organisation is based on teams and employees are expected to work together to accomplish objectives and goals, this needs to be reflected in the job description.

Job descriptions were often only reviewed when a job became vacant or new duties were added. In today's work environment job descriptions are incorporated into the organisations performance management system in order to ensure they are reviewed regularly with the employee (Carlopio, 1996). This maintains currency, accuracy, relevance and usefulness of the job description.

Grant (1989, p.5) stated that job descriptions 'are not a work schedule', however, in the past many indicated how much time is spent on different tasks. In today's work environment time percentages or frequency have been replaced with performance measures or indicators which provide a clearer indication of what is expected from the job.

Gilliland (1997, p.42) outlines the traditional components of a job description as:

• job title
• main purpose of the job
• who the individual reports to
• main tasks or areas of responsibility

For a more focussed job description he suggests the following be added:

• a summary of the organisation's goals and targets
• key result areas flowing from the goals and targets
• the basic competencies needed to achieve these goals and targets
• performance criteria

2.9 Criticisms of job descriptions

Throughout the literature there are a number of criticisms of job descriptions. Sullivan (1996, p.1) states that there is no evidence that they 'work', may be loved by HR people, but are seldom loved by anyone else. However, many of the criticisms directed at job descriptions can be overcome if we focus on 'well written' job descriptions that meet the needs of today's work environment as the following examples show.

• 'In a fast changing environment by the time they are written they are out of date' (Sullivan, 1996, p. 1). This is the case with job descriptions that focus on duties. Job descriptions that focus on responsibilities and key result areas do not change frequently which means that they do remain current for long periods.
• 'They force individuals into job/your job conflicts and inhibits thinking outside the box creativity' (Sullivan, 1996, p. 1). Again this is true of job descriptions that look at the job in terms of duties. Job descriptions that look at the results the person is required to achieve do not prescribe what the person is required to do, they provide direction. As Plachy (1993) points out, focussing on results can encourage initiative and creativity. A quote by General George Patton illustrates this point: ' Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity' (Sacher and Sacher, 1998)
• 'They are often done by HR people who know little about the technical aspects of the job' (Sullivan, 1996, p. 1). Job descriptions for today's organisations are written by the people involved in the job such as the employee doing their job, their manager and/or members of the team that the job belongs.
• 'They can (and should) be replaced by weekly/monthly measurable (and incented) performance goals drawn up between the employee and the team' (Sullivan, 1996, p.1). It needs to be remembered that job descriptions are only one component of a human resource management system, performance measures may form part of the job description or form a separate document.