Publications

Research Series

home Publications Research Series
인쇄

SNS공유하기

해당 컨텐츠 트위터에 추가하기 해당 컨텐츠 페이스북에 추가하기

Developing Industry-level Job Evaluation Tools: Public Service and Social Welfare Service Industries
Developing Industry-level Job Evaluation Tools: Public Service and Social Welfare Service Industries
  • Table of Contents

    Chapter 1. Introduction (Kyetaik Oh)

    Chapter 2. Study Outline (Gyu Chang Yu, Hye-Jeong Lee)

    Chapter 3. Results of a Job Evaluation Tool Development for Public Service Industry (Hye-Jeong Lee, Gyu Chang Yu)

    Chapter 4. Results of a Job Evaluation Tool Development for Social Welfare Service Industry (Hye-Jeong Lee, Min-Kyung Ju, Mi-So Yoon)

    Chapter 5. Conclusion and Implications (Gyu Chang Yu)  

  • SUMMARY

    In job-based HR management, it is important to decide what the job involves and what relative value it holds. This decision process takes place through job evaluations. Job evaluation is a subjective process of assessing the relative value of a job itself based on certain criteria and inevitably involves the evaluator’s judgment. Therefore, it is imperative to have rational and valid criteria and tools. The absence of such appropriate criteria and tools for job evaluation in the Korean society is a significant obstacle against transition to job-based HR management. Also, the absence of such evaluation causes various forms of inequality and discrimination in the labor market since it is practically impossible to maintain the principle of equal pay for equal work without the appropriate job evaluation. In this research background, this study aims to develop industry-level job evaluation tools for the public sector following the development of tools for healthcare industry in 2015 and banking, hotel, and steel industry in 2016.

    This study’s focus on “industry-level” job evaluation allows development of a highly valid job evaluation tool for the following reasons. Firstly, in order to maximize the objectivity and validity of job evaluation, there must be a job evaluation tool that reflects the particular job structure and characteristics of each industry rather than one that can be used across many different industries. Secondly, industry-level job evaluation tools are required to set a standard wage level and resolve wage disparity of representative jobs in each industry.

    Therefore, objectives of this study can be summarized as follows. Firstly, it aims to promote the practice of job evaluation like the previous studies. This study provides a detailed description on the methodology of developing job evaluation tools so that individual organization can develop their own tools. Secondly, this study supplements and improves any inadequacies in previous studies in order to enhance the validity of development process as well as the convenience in future usage of the developed tools. The study actively incorporates the views of expert groups, provides detailed explanations about research objective and survey structure, and expresses scales with greater clarity. Public service industry and social welfare service industry were selected for this study because they are both industry areas that represent a publicness. First of all, public service industry was selected by considering the number of workers in the industry, representative publicness area, and the possibility of implementing job evaluations or job-based HR management. Social welfare service industry was also selected. It is similar to the public service industry in that social welfare is also a type of public service, but differs in terms of the subject of delivery and management system as well as the distinct nature of its jobs.

    The process of developing job evaluation tools for the two industries followed these steps. The first step, which was a preparatory step, involved reviewing job evaluation items to be included in the job evaluation tool and organizing industry-level expert groups. A range of items to be included in the tool were extracted and practices of relevant organizations were examined. Also, for each industry, expert groups were organized for a survey to extract items to be included in the job evaluation and set the right weight for each. In the case of public service industry, an organization that can represent the industry was selected and an expert group was organized with 4 HR managers and 3 union representatives in this organization, 2 consultants with relevant career history, and 1 scholar. For social welfare service industry, an expert group of 13 experts were organized, consisting of 2 workers in living facilities, 6 workers in facilities that provide social welfare, 2 consultants, and 3 scholars. A face-to-face interview or workshop was carried out with these expert groups to explain this study’s objective and survey structure, followed by a questionnaire survey to collect expert views on the industry characteristics, job characteristics, and others.  

Kyetaik Oh's other publications : 7
{Research Series} posts
No Title Author Date Attach
7 Policies for Workplace Innovation Kyetaik Oh, Seong-Jae Cho, Dongbae Kim, Yongjin Nho, Joohwan Lim, Moonho Lee, Seung Gook Jung December 28, 2018 Policies for Workplace Innovation
6 Development of Job Evaluation Tools by Industry: Analyzing Case Studies Kyetaik Oh, Gyu Chang Yu, Hye Jung Lee, Sang Hoon Lim December 28, 2018 Development of Job Evaluation Tools by Industry: Analyzing Case Studies
5 Study on a “Fair Wage System” in Korea’s Labor Market Kyetaik Oh, Jeongkoo Yoon, Donghoon Yang December 28, 2018 Study on a “Fair Wage System” in Korea’s Labor Market
4 Developing Industry-level Job Evaluation Tools: Public Service and Social Welfare Service Industries Kyetaik Oh, Gyu Chang Yu, Hye-Jeong Lee, Min-Kyung Ju, Mi-So Yoon December 29, 2017 Developing Industry-level Job Evaluation Tools: Public Service and Social Welfare Service Industries
3 HR Management Practices in Response to Changes in the Labor Market Environments such as Retirement Age Extension Kyetaik Oh, Dong-Gwan Jung, WooSung Park, Sangmin Lee December 30, 2016 HR Management Practices in Response to Changes in the Labor Market Environments such as Retirement Age Extension
12