Also called the ranking method, it is applied to evaluate and classify the positions in small companies or in areas of the same when the positions to be evaluated are no more than eight or ten positions.
In this method, the charges are ordered by their importance in order to determine their economic value.
Point comparison technique
Each work is systematically compared with all the others, but instead of doing only a global comparison, points of difference are assigned between each one of the works, according to the good judgment of the evaluator.
Comparing the jobs of a kardista and a digitizer it can be deduced that the job of a digitizer is worth two points less than the job of a kardista, that the job of a secretary is worth three points less than the job of a digitizer. We proceed in the same way to make the comparison of the other works. The following table illustrates the entire procedure and the results obtained after all comparisons have been made.
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
1. The first step is to determine the importance of the first charge listed in the table (kardista) with respect to the other charges.
To do this, the importance of one position over another is specified, reading from left to right like this:
- The position of kardista is two points less important than the position of key clerk. The position of kardist is five points less important than the position of secretary. The position of kardist is 15 points less important than the position of chief of staff. kardista is eight points less important than the position of designer. The position of kardista is 4 points more important than the position of courier.
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
2. In the column of the first charge (kardista) are located the values that are in the row of the first charge (kardista) but with the opposite sign. It reads as follows:
- The position of key clerk is two points more important than the position of kardist. The position of secretary is five points more important than the position of kardist. The position of chief of staff is 15 points more important than the position of kardist. The position of Designer is eight points more important than the Kardist position. Courier position is four points less important than the Kardist position.
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
As the importance of all the charges has already been established with respect to only one, then we proceed to establish the points of difference between the other charges.
- The position of kardista is two points less important than the position of data entry clerk. The position of kardista is five points less important than the position of secretary.
This means that the position of secretary must be more important than the position of data entry clerk.
- Therefore, the typewriter position is (-5 - (- 2)) = -3; three points less important than the position of secretary. In the same way, the position of typist is (-15 - (- 2)) = -13; thirteen points less important than the position of chief of staff. The position of data entry clerk is (-8 - (- 2)) = -6; six points less important than the position of designer. The position of typewriter is (+4 - (- 2)) = +6; six points more important than the courier charge.
The results obtained are placed in the row for the typewriter position and then the values with the opposite sign are placed in the column for the typewriter position, as explained above.
The column of points is determined like this:
- For the position of kardista: -2-5-15-8 + 4 = -26 points For the position of data entry: + 2-3-13-6 + 6 = -14 points
The order will be made based on the points, that is, the position with the most points will be the most important (N ° 1), and so on.
If the calculations are well done, the sum of the points and the total will be equal to zero.
The following shows how the calculations were developed to complete the table.
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
Pairwise comparison technique
In order to facilitate the comparison of each position with everything else (comparison by pairs) and establish the importance, a double-entry table is constructed which will be filled out by each of the evaluators, as shown, as an example, in the next table:
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
When the committee has decided to use the pairwise comparison technique, the number of comparisons should be calculated according to the number of positions (N), since as these are increased, the comparisons will increase rapidly, which makes it difficult to do a logical ordering.
The formula to determine the number of comparisons is:
Number of Comparisons: n: (n - 1) / 2
If the number of charges is for example 8, the number of comparisons will be:
n: 8 * (8 - 1) / 2 = 28
Once the positions have been ranked in each of the areas, the committee will integrate the different hierarchies to obtain a global ranking for the company and then proceed to assign salaries by establishing a progression ratio (r), using the following formula.
r: (Higher salary-lower salary) / (n-1)
Where:
Higher salary: maximum salary (in monetary units) of the positions analyzed.
Lower salary: Minimum salary (in monetary units) of the positions analyzed.
n: number of charges.
It is convenient to clarify that the method assumes both the highest and the lowest salary must be considered fair both by the company and by the employee, and since the ratio becomes a constant, the difference between one position and the next will always be the same.
Preparation of the salary scale
To structure the salary scale in the ranking method, you must first determine whether the current minimum and maximum wages are appropriate to the level that the company wants to pay. Without are adequate and it is considered that the difference in relative importance between any job and the next is the same, this difference is determined by subtracting the lower salary from the higher salary and dividing the result by the number of positions minus one.
Assuming that the highest salary is 2,000,000 and the lowest is 300,000 and the number of positions is 6.
Ranking method for the evaluation of positions
