The ranking method is what?

Any company needs to constantly monitor the accuracy and effectiveness of the accepted payment system and adjust the situation as necessary. If the state of affairs requires the development of a new scheme, then it must meet the organization's goals and objectives, its specific needs. At the same time, one should not forget about the satisfaction of the needs of the personnel, ensuring an equitable distribution of remuneration between the employees of the enterprise.

Features of choice

Until recently, it was assumed that the company had enough to use a single payment scheme. A universal system was developed, taking into account the capabilities and needs of the enterprise. For example, a company could choose a scheme with additional payments. At present, the management of most organizations has come to the conclusion that it is necessary to use the systems depending on the conditions in which the firm operates. In this case, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of the products, services or works performed. Of no small importance is the nature of production. In particular, we are talking about the necessary skills of personnel, technology, automation, the duration of the technological cycle, and so on. The characteristics of working resources are also taken into account: employee age, staff stability , turnover, absenteeism, etc. In addition, the choice of the payment system is influenced by other factors: the state of the labor market, the specifics of relations in the team.

Fairness of payment

One of the key functions of an enterprise or industry is the definition of the relationship between the work performed and the reward received for it. Most of the employees compare their salary with that received by others, especially colleagues. For many workers, the differentiated system is perfectly acceptable. However, the desire for equitable distribution of funds requires that the differences between the amounts received are regulated openly. To implement this task, special expert methods of differentiation have been developed. Let's consider them in detail.

Expert Methods: General Characteristics

There are different approaches to differentiating and justifying the differences in pay. All of them are divided into 4 large categories. The first includes methods for assessing work. They form a more systematic approach to solving the problem. Other options are developed individually for each specific case. They are called specialized. These approaches are based on local acts. When analyzing in such cases, first of all, the volume of funds allocated for the performance of a particular professional activity is examined. Then a differentiated payment scheme is built. It can satisfy employees or not meet their needs. In practice, the second situation usually occurs. It is accompanied by constant disputes and complaints from the staff to the management.

Rating of objects by the method of ranking

It involves the formation of a differentiation model for operations. Payment for an action is determined after the agreement. This approach is closely related to the content of the activity. When using it, the quality of the performed operations is assessed. At the same time, no particular performer or external factors of the market are taken into account. The quality assessment should be based on an objective analysis of activities. The starting point of the study is related to those activities whose payment is considered by all parties to a fair relationship, which have some similarities with other categories, so that they can be compared.

The simplest version

It is a method of direct ranking. Simple it is considered because the analysis is carried out by the distribution of activities depending on the value that they have for the enterprise. The ranking method is a way of comparing the content of an operation with the process taken as the original one. As a result of the analysis, the action refers to the corresponding position. Often a comparison of the two objects is carried out according to the job description. At the same time, an in-depth analysis of the content of operations is not carried out. The method of ranking is a method that is expedient for applying in small companies. In such enterprises, as a rule, a few different operations are performed. In large companies, this approach can be completely useless. In such firms, usually different types of activities with different content are carried out. These methods are suitable for the method of qualitative ordering. The assignment of operations to a category in such cases is carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. This is especially true when setting a large number of individual levels and rates of payment is completely unacceptable.

Pros and cons of the approach

The ranking method is one of the schemes that can be introduced very quickly into the practice of an enterprise. Its undoubted advantage is the economy in use. At the same time, the analysis can be performed on the basis of incomplete data and without taking into account a number of standards. Often there is insufficient skill level and lack of necessary knowledge among specialists using the method of ranking. This, in turn, indicates the superficial nature of the analysis and can lead to a gradation not so much of activities as their performers.

Alternative option

He is the method of classification. This method is widely used in determining the salaries of employees in institutions, differentiating skills of specialists in manufacturing. In contrast to the one discussed above, this option involves establishing a gradation structure and corresponding remuneration before performing a thorough investigation of certain operations. The number of levels is strictly defined, the functions are set. Accordingly, payments for each position are also understandable. The method of classification involves drawing up gradation descriptions in such a way that they reflect significant differences in duties, skills, requirements for professional activity.

Forming a table

Activities that are carried out under simple instructions with constant supervision are referred to the lowest position. At each next stage, a higher level of duties, skills, demands, and so on is reflected. Together with this, the degree of control is reduced. All activities are not broken up into components. It is considered as one whole. Grouping objects is as follows.

Advantages and disadvantages

The method considered above is also considered relatively simple, easily applicable and inexpensive. However, despite the fact that the results obtained during the analysis may well satisfy interested persons, the amount of remuneration for an activity may be dependent on the existing rates. Of the shortcomings, it should also be noted the great complexity of compiling the descriptions of the steps. This can be a real problem for large enterprises. Complexities often arise when a particular operation is directly attributed to a particular position. Often this is extremely problematic, as several types of activities may have similar characteristics. However, the analysis is not always sufficiently detailed for proper classification.

Comparison of factors

The first task in applying this method is to clearly describe the characteristics that will be used in the analysis. As a rule, they are requirements for education, training, including physical, conditions of work, responsibility, the availability of certain skills. Depending on the specifics of the enterprise, the list may be narrowed or expanded. For the analysis selected certain types of operations, which will act as key. With respect to them, job descriptions are compiled. Accordingly, the rates for each activity are also assigned. The peculiarity of this method is the use of existing tariffs of key operations to determine several fixed points on the scale for the indicators that are revealed during the analysis. Selected activities should have significant differences. They need to be described in detail. The number of key activities should be sufficient to fix the required number of reference points for comparing all operations: from the simplest to the most complex. Then the works are divided according to their significance in accordance with the chosen factors. Similarly, payments for certain characteristics for key types of transactions are established. Quantitative indicators are set proportionally to the factors used. For example, the activity of a toolmaker is conditionally characterized by 20 units. Accordingly, they can be broken down into the following quantitative indicators:

1. For skill and skills - 9.
2. For the requirement to the level of knowledge - 5.
3. For physical requirements - 2.
4. For working conditions - 1.
5. For responsibility - 3.

Next, the results of the distribution of activity on payment and factors are compared. The resulting inconsistencies can be eliminated by adjusting the rates or content of transactions. If this is not possible, the selected type of work can not be considered the key. At the last stage, all types of activities can be arranged on a scale in accordance with their relationship with the basic operations of the content. Each factor will be investigated separately, until new levels of payment rates for all works in the enterprise are formed. The essence of this method is that tariffs for key types of transactions are considered final and correct. Other activities are distributed according to each characteristic and adjusted to the main scale.

Positive and negative points

As the main advantage of the method discussed above, it should be noted that the factors by which the relative value of different types of operations are determined are taken into account. This method allows you to build a basic scale, which is expressed in monetary units. It can also be used to evaluate non-key operations. This approach is considered more flexible and accurate, unlike the previous two. However, more time is needed to implement and apply this method. In addition, it is problematic to explain to employees. With the use of this method, some injustice in payments may occur over time. It is caused by the inadequacy of existing rates or approaches, according to which the importance of an activity for an enterprise is considered. It is also worth noting that, despite the obvious scientific nature of the method, the proportional ranking of payment for various factors is still arbitrary. In this regard, at present, this method is not as popular as others.

Ball allocation

The method of determining the rating is based on the assumption that there are signs common to all types of operations. This method can contain a different number of factors - from 3 to 40. In one of the most common schemes today, the following rating objects are used:

1. Efforts.
2. Skills.
3. Terms of Business.
4. A responsibility.

They, in turn, can be divided into 10-15 subfactors. The requirements that are imposed on them afterwards can be differentiated into several levels. The number of points assigned to each factor can be different. This is due to the use of a weighted scoring distribution. The method of direct ranking assumes the same assignment of values to each factor.

The course of analysis

To determine the rank of an object, you must:

1. Select factors that will be considered common for all types of operations.
2. Determine the number of levels for each characteristic when comparing activity types.
3. Calculate the specific gravity for each factor.
4. Determine the value of each characteristic or level in points.

After this, the development of job descriptions for each type of activity begins. As a rule, they are compiled in accordance with the results of a systematic analysis of operations. Various works are evaluated according to the formed instructions, as well as on the totality of factors of each of them, or all types of activity on the first feature, then on the second, and so on. Typically, the second option is used, since it facilitates the analysis of the relative value of operations.

Pros and cons of the point distribution

The main advantage of this method is that it only calculates scores, but not the amount of payment. In this regard, its application does not significantly affect the current rates, in contrast to the previous three approaches. The method of scoring is considered more objective, since it is based on information on each type of operations received during their analysis. This allows us to give more justified explanations on the reliability of the data. At the same time, this version contains a large number of subjective and arbitrary components. In particular, they are manifested when:

1. The choice of the types and the number of levels and factors that will be used in the assessment.
2. The distribution of specific gravity or points by feature.

In practice, it is rather difficult to make decisions on these points. In these situations, subjective assessment is almost always manifested, since there are no objective indicators. Accordingly, as a result, the significance of certain operations can be exaggerated. To use this method, you need to have technical skills. This approach is not as flexible as the previous one. When using it, it is difficult to take into account changes in general economic conditions and other factors. The method of scoring is referred to by specialists, when they indicate that the analysis of activity, in fact, acts as a statistical operation, and it must be adapted to a dynamic situation. Meanwhile, the evaluation of the work can be used to collect information on changes in the content of the operation and transfer them to value values.

Conclusion

It must be said that all methods, regardless of complexity and scientific validity, are based primarily on arbitrary decisions, as well as subjective criteria. All of them largely depend on the current ratio of different types of professional activity. In many situations, the only way to prevent problems and conflicts related to the injustice of payments is the evaluation of works. However, the results of such an analysis can not be regarded as uncontested and absolutely correct. It may be useful in practice to periodically assess, regularly review factors and levels, draw up new scales, determine the significance of an activity, if this helps reduce tensions.