Discussion 3

With the words "job analysis" being spoken so often these days (hopefully not as part of an expletive), I thought it high time for another job analysis discussion update.

*** New Member ***

This time around our newest member is Annette Roberts from Housing and Community Development (aroberts@hcd.ca.gov). Welcome Annette!

*** Information ***

1) I read an article recently that I thought people might find interesting. It doesn't necessarily have anything new to tell us, but it does give some applied examples where courts have held up selection decisions based on job-related criteria: http://www.ahipubs.com/singleissue/mlbnl3103.html 

2) There are several companies out there that produce job analysis instruments. One of the most famous is the PAQ (Position Analysis Questionnaire). The great thing about PAQ is that the company has a large database of jobs that they have already collected job analytic data on and they can produce reports for you for a reasonable fee ($25 I believe). This report has a good deal of detailed information and while it's fairly general, it can be a great addition to your information gathering stage. Check out a sample report at www.paq.com (click on PAQ on the left-side frame, then "PAQ reports" in the main section).

3) On the free side, O*NET (http://online.onetcenter.org/) has recently undergone a revision. The tables are now presented in HTML on a single page, the search is apparently improved, and the crosswalk (related occupations) enhanced. I'm not sure I like the new style, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

4) Several agencies have expressed interest in a "mini" form of job analysis, and some agencies are already practicing it (just don't tell Shelley). We here at DOJ recently met with some of colleagues from Mental Health on this issue, and we are interested in gathering information from other agencies. The basic motivation here is that while we can't do a full-blown job analysis (even the short method) for every exam, we can do SOMETHING. More on this in the coming months, and I'm sure this will come up at the ESF...(see below for more rambling on this topic)

5) WRIPAC, the organization whose job analysis method we employ, is having its Spring meeting in Old Sacramento this year. The first day is devoted to training sessions (one by our friend Mike Willihnganz, formerly of SPB at that point), the other two days are meetings and some kind of primal fire dance (confirmed through Mabel Miramon). For those of you who don't have April 30, May 1, and May 2 booked (all two of you), consider attending! More information at http://www.wripac.com/conference.htm 

*** Food for Thought ***

Have you ever thought, "The exams we get out of a job analysis are great [you're supposed to agree with that part], but how can we improve our other exams that we haven't had time to do a job analysis for?" I mentioned the "mini" job analysis above, but I think we need to, as a group, confront some challenging questions and situations in this arena. They include:

1) What can we do, or what we do already, to enhance the job relatedness of our other exams? For example, ensuring questions are based on specific KSAs rather than linking them to the class specs after they're developed (and not simply "Yeah, sure, this measures K4"). Or perhaps having SMEs rate KSAs listed on the spec. I have a feeling people out there are being creative...what's worked? What hasn't worked?

2) What standards are we required to meet? I mean this in two ways: a) Does the WRIPAC method need to be followed verbatim in order to hold water, and b) What standards will SPB hold us to? Will these be spelled out in the selection manual or will departments have some degree of latitude? What "other forms" of job analysis are acceptable?

3) What is the best way to introduce this new concept of job analysis to existing exam staff, many of whom have never done one, and may not be inclined to? (other than the 'ol, "Do it because I said so")

4) On a related note, what is the best way to introduce the concept of job analysis to SMEs? Resistance to these projects can be significant, and I'm embarrassed to admit that I've resorted to "Because SPB says we have to" which seems to work on a lot of people, but isn't the REAL reason we're doing this [also nod your head here].

5) What have been people's experience with writing task and KSA statements--are you following the WRIPAC method exactly? How difficult has this been? What about the dreaded linkages? Is locking SMEs in a room for 4 days straight doing task-KSA linkages cruel and unusual punishment? (One technique I employ is raising the criterion value when determining what tasks and KSAs "survive")

6) Last but not least, what's the best way to go from job analysis results to the exam? Which KSAs should we pick? Which KSAs are "constructs" and hence are not supportable by job analysis alone? How far can we bend the specs before they break?

I have a feeling that there's enough discussion here to fill not just an ESF meeting but probably an entire conference. With more and more departments devoting resources to this process, and many of us undoubtedly encountering the same challenges, we should do whatever we can to make lives easier for one another and learn from our mistakes and successes.

Until next time, take care!

Bryan Baldwin
Personnel Analyst
California Dept. of Justice
(916) 322-0934