Name and briefly describe the three ranking techniques used to determine the relative worth of positions in the salary analysis process

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

ANS:
The three ranking methods are (1) simple ranking technique, (2) alternative ranking technique, and (3) paired comparison ranking technique. All three methods utilize 3 X 5 cards, each labeled with the name of a position within the district. There is a card for each position, and each policy maker has a complete set of cards. In the simple ranking technique, members of the policy group are instructed to work independently and to rank (in descending order) their set of cards according to a previously selected global criterion. After all have completed their ranking task, some discrepancies will more than likely surface. Group members should explain their rankings and question those of other group members. The process is repeated until a consensus is reached concerning the relative worth of all district positions. If no consensus can be reached, the alternative ranking method should be employed. In this technique, policy makers first select the most important position relative to the single global criterion; next they select the least important position relative to that criterion. The process is repeated until all positions have been ranked. Discrepancies among policy makers will most likely occur with midrange positions. When these positions lead to problems in establishing internal consistency, one other comparison process may be used. This technique is known as the paired comparison process. Each position is compared to all other positions. Target positions considered more important than the object position are awarded a plus sign, and target positions considered less important than the object position are awarded a minus sign. The organizational worth of any particular target position is determined by assessed net worth reflecting the difference between the pluses and minuses assigned to a particular position.