General Hr, Mysap Erp Hcm,hays Job Evaluation,
Management Consultant

Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
Hi everybody
I am really awed at the way you response to queries
and its really worthwhile spending time on this forum as am an HR Executive
Pls help am asked to do that in my new company
love liz

From Australia, Adelaide
Overview of the Hay Method

The Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method of Position Evaluation is the most

widely used method of work measurement and role valuation in the world.

The system continues to evolve (as it always has), with client input,

in response to changes in the environment such as pay equity legislation,

the increasing use of technology in the workplace, and evolving ways of

organizing work. It is used to support organization analysis and role design

and to underpin grading and banding and can be customized to specific client

and work culture requirements. The basic, underlying concepts have stood the

test of time quite simply because they are so universal.

They provide a framework to sort positions in an equitable manner.

The focus of the job evaluation process using the Hay Method is on

the nature and the requirements of the job itself, not on the skills,

educational background, personal characteristics, or the current salary

of the person holding the job.

The Hay Method is based on the idea that jobs can be assessed in terms of

the knowledge required to do the job, the thinking needed to solve

the problems commonly faced the responsibilities assigned,

and the working conditions associated with the job.

The Hay Method is comprised of four "Guide Charts" which are used

to define each factor and to provide quantitative measures, which form

the basis for evaluation. The four factors used by Hay are as follows:

1. Know-How

This Guide Chart measures the total of every kind of knowledge and skill,

however acquired, needed for acceptable job performance.

It consists of three dimensions:

* practical procedures and knowledge, specialized techniques,

and learned skills;

* the real or conceptual planning, co-ordinating, directing, and

controlling of activities and resources associated with an organizational unit or function; and,

* Active, practicing, person-to-person skills in the area of human relationships.

2. Problem Solving

This Guide Chart measures the thinking required in the job by considering

two dimensions:

* the environment in which the thinking takes place; and,

* the challenge presented by the thinking to be done.

3. Accountability

This Guide Chart measures the relative degree to which the job,

performed competently, can affect the end results of the organization

or of a unit within the organization. It reflects the level of decision-making

and influence of the job through consideration, in the following order of importance, of:

* the nature of the controls that limit or extend the decision-making or influence of the job;

* the immediacy of the influence of the job on a unit or function of the organization; and,

* the magnitude of the unit or function most clearly affected by the job.

4. Working Conditions

This Guide Chart measures the conditions under which the job is

performed by considering:

* Physical Effort, which measures the degree of physical fatigue that,

results from the combination of intensity, duration, and frequency of

any kind of physical activity required in the job.

* Physical Environment, which measures the physical discomfort or

the risk of accident or ill health which results from the combination of

intensity, duration, and frequency of exposure, in the job, to unavoidable

physical and environmental factors.

* Sensory Attention, which measures the intensity, duration, and

frequency of the demand, in the job, for concentration using

one or more of the five senses.

* Mental Stress, which measures the degree of such things as tension or

anxiety which result from the combination of intensity, duration,

and frequency of exposure to factors, inherent in the work process

or environment, which would typically cause stress to someone

reasonably suited to the job.

By focussing on the important aspects of the content of each job,

the end results which each is expected to achieve, and the conditions

under which the work is performed, the Hay Method provides a vehicle

for systematically assessing the relationships among the various

positions and determining their relative value.


Hay compensation survey entails the analysis and comparison of employee pay in relation to job size. Comparisons are therefore guided by the actual job content, not the job title. The job evaluation is done using the elaborated and internationally widespread Hay Profile Guide Chart Method. As the outcome of using this method, each job is awarded a number of points. One of the benefits of this scheme is the possibility to compare various jobs

internally: comparing jobs within the same company; for example, the job of “Chief Accountant” with the one of “Sales Manager”, “Shop Assistant”, “Secretary” etc.

externally: i.e. with other companies; for example, the “Finance Director” of your company with the “Finance Director” in another organization

internationally: for example, the “Finance Director” of your company with the “Finance Director” in another country

Each of these comparisons plays an important role in the global reward strategy of an organization. Internal comparison forms a basis for the internal equity pay analysis in your company. Our experience shows that this aspect is often overlooked. An employee would rarely join another organization because they offer him by 10% more money then he has now. However, it is more likely that he will leave if he finds out that the salary of his colleague who does similar job and demonstrates similar performance is by 10% higher then his own.

External comparison says something about the organization’s competitiveness in relation to other companies on the market. It is important that our point rating technique permits comparisons of similar jobs regardless of their title, which can be misleading. For example, the highly competent accountant in the large organization is compared with the job function of the Finance Director of the smaller company due to the fact that both jobs are on the same level despite the differences in their job title. Other surveys do not permit such comparisons.






From India, Mumbai
Thanks Leo it was indeed a very helpful thing you have done
thanks a lot ..... i have searched a lot in the net and in the forum too but failed to find one appropriate answer to my query, i never thought someone so
Honored Member in this site will answer my query
Thanks & regards

From Australia, Adelaide
This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™