4. Stage 3 - survey of organisations

4.1 Introduction

In my initial proposal for the scholarship, the aim of this stage of the research was to survey organisations that were considered best practice in the design and implementation of job descriptions. This proved a difficult task, as the available literature did not specify organisations that excelled in this area. However, the HR Best Practices in Australasian Companies: 1997 Report did specify organisations that were considered best practice in human resource management.

The aim of this survey (see appendix 5 for a copy of the survey) was to determine the following aspects of job descriptions within organisations other than libraries.

When were job descriptions reviewed?
What were job descriptions used for within the organisation?
Were performance standards included in the job description?

4.2 Methodology

Surveys were sent to organisations identified in the HR Best Practices in Australasian Companies: 1997 Report. As this resulted in a small number of organisations, additional surveys were sent to organisations that had been awarded the Australian Quality Award; Investors in People or were recommended to me for their usage and content of job descriptions. A wide range of organisations were included in the survey, for example, banks, councils, hotels, airlines, food production companies and manufacturing industry.

The survey also asked organisations to include a copy of their job description when they returned the survey. A reply paid address envelope was included with the survey.

4.3 Results

A total of 30 surveys were distributed. Seventeen were returned which represents a 57 percent response rate. appendix 6 outlines a summary of results.

All respondents to the organisation survey used job descriptions within their organisations.

Figure 7 illustrates when job descriptions are reviewed or updated. Results indicate that the main reasons for reviewing a job description are when a job becomes vacant (82 percent) or when a job is reclassified (59 percent). 29 percent of respondents reviewed jobs annually.

Figure 7: When Job Descriptions are reviewed - Organisation Survey

Figure 7: Histogram showing frequency of job description renewal from a survey of organisations.

Figure 8 indicates the uses of job descriptions. The main use of job descriptions is for selection and recruitment (100 percent). A large percentage (77 percent) also incorporated job descriptions into their performance appraisal system.

Figure 8: Uses of Job Descriptions - Organisation Survey

histogram showing job description uses - from a survey of organisations

47 percent of respondents included performance standards in their job descriptions.

Nine respondents (53 percent) included a copy of their organisation's job description.

Figure 9 illustrates the type of information included in job descriptions returned with the organisation surveys.

Figure 9: Information included in organisation survey respondents job descriptions

Job Description information	Percentage of job descriptions that included information
Purpose of position/Objectives	89 percent
Responsibility Areas/Key Result Areas/Key Accountabilities	78 percent
Knowledge/Qualifications/Experience	66 percent
Working Relationships/Reporting relationships, including organisational relationships	55 percent
Major challenges	22 percent
Performance Indicator/Standard	22 percent
Authority/Decision Making	11 percent
Position Size Dimensions	11 percent
Delegations	11 percent
Corporate goals	11 percent

4.4 Findings

Comparison of the results from the library technician survey and organisation survey is shown in Figure 10. These results indicate that organisations identified for their quality human resource practices make more extensive use of job descriptions within their organisations (especially in the areas of identifying training needs and performance appraisal) and review them more frequently. Results also indicate that more organisations (47 percent) are incorporating performance standards into their job descriptions than libraries (22 percent).

Figure 10 Comparison of results from Library Technician Survey and Organisational Survey

Question	percent result from Library Technician Survey	percent result from survey of other organisations
When are job descriptions reviewed in your organisation? Annually Every two years When jobs are reclassified When new duties are added When a job becomes vacant Not reviewed Other	15 percent 4 percent 30 percent 16 percent 45 percent 5 percent 14 percent	29 percent 12 percent 59 percent 53 percent 82 percent 0 percent 6 percent
What are job descriptions used for in your organisation? Selection and recruitment Induction/Orientation Performance Appraisals/Reviews Identifying Training Needs Other	74 percent 16 percent 55 percent 18 percent 0 percent	100 percent 41 percent 77 percent 53 percent 12 percent
Are performance standards included in the job description? Yes No	22 percent 78 percent	47 percent 53 percent

4.5 Discussion

From the findings of the Library Technician survey and the information contained in job descriptions returned with the survey it appears that many libraries are using outdated job descriptions that do not meet the needs of today's work environment. They focus on what a person is required to do, that is their duties, rather than on what the person is expected to achieve, that is major responsibilities and outcomes. It is interesting to note, in comparison, that the organisation job description examples (returned with the survey) focussed on responsibilities or key result areas rather than duties.

I found it interesting that the vast majority of descriptions (from both the library technician survey and the organisation survey) did not include the mission statement of the organisation, goals or an explanation of how the job fits into the overall objectives of the department, team or organisation. Again this information is important if the job description is to reflect the interdependence of the job within the organisation and how it contributes to the overall success of the organisation. Absence of this information makes the job description very individual in nature and makes it appear that the job is conducted in isolation. This encourages independent rather than team action (Dunn, 1993).

As mentioned in the literature, job descriptions are a useful tool that can be used for many human resource functions. Some libraries are using their job descriptions to serve several purposes. For example: The Australian Courts and Administration Authority Library states that their Job and Person Specifications serve the following functions:

when filling a vacant position, to provide both job applicants and the selection panel with information on the responsibilities and duties of a job, and the skills and knowledge that it requires; and assist in ensuring selection based on merit
to assist with induction and training
when reviewing an employee's performance, to provide a basis for discussion
when considering and refining organisational goals, to provide information on the relationship of the position to others within the organisation, and to the organisation's function
when considering job classification, to provide base information on the responsibilities and reporting relationships associated with the position

However this library appears to be in the minority, as findings suggest that libraries mainly use job descriptions as a selection and recruitment tool. In comparison, when examining the results of the organisation survey it is clear that many organisations are making extensive use of their job descriptions and using them for a variety of purposes.

The inclusion of performance standards in job descriptions is one area that libraries need to explore in the future. They allow the organisation to communicate expectations to the employee especially if the organisation has identified or articulated performance indicators or service standards. Results from the organisation survey suggest that organisations are moving in this direction and using job descriptions as a performance management tool.

Some organisations have moved to providing generic job descriptions for employees performing similar responsibilities. Jones (1996) argues that generic job descriptions provide flexibility because they address expectations and accountabilities rather than the details of how a task should be performed. While there has been a shift to focus on expectations and end results, I believe that generic job descriptions are not as effective as individual job descriptions as they do not encourage ownership or commitment and fail to demonstrate to the employee that their job, responsibilities and contribution are valued by the organisation. While many jobs are similar there may be one or two different areas of responsibility for a particular job.

A a