Reconceptualize Job Descriptions

Simplify both the template and the process to transform job descriptions into living documents that drive stakeholder value.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Situation

• Creating and updating job descriptions can be tedious, time consuming, and inaccurately viewed as a necessary evil.
• Accordingly, such work is often neglected, resulting in outdated and unusable job descriptions.
• 82% of organizations take a reactive approach to updating job descriptions, indicating that job descriptions are not living documents.

Complication

• The high level of detail in job descriptions and lengthy approval processes are incongruent with today’s dynamic environment.
• The evolving nature of work requires autonomy and challenges traditional approaches to job descriptions.
• Out-of-date, incomplete, or vague job descriptions lead to confusion, employee disengagement, and increased risk in labor litigation.

Resolution

• Use McLean & Company’s process to select and tailor the right type of template(s) for your organization.
• Simplify the process to ease the burden of creating, updating, and maintaining job descriptions for all stakeholders.
• Turn job descriptions into living documents that managers, HR, and employees find value in.

Key Insight

There’s a catch-22 surrounding job descriptions: they’re not used because they’re out of date, but they’re out of date because no one uses them.

If we consider how job descriptions can be used more regularly (and not merely stored) and simplify both the templates and the process, people will turn to them more often. Job descriptions will then be used for multiple purposes, not merely for creating job ads, transforming them into living documents.

MCLEAN & COMPANY OFFERS VARIOUS LEVELS OF SUPPORT TO BEST SUIT YOUR NEEDS

DIY TOOLKIT

“Our team has already made this critical project a priority, and we have the time and capability, but some guidance along the way would be helpful.”

GUIDED IMPLEMENTATION

“Our team knows that we need to fix a process, but we need assistance to determine where to focus. Some check-ins along the way would help keep us on track.”

WORKSHOP

“We need to hit the ground running and get this project kicked off immediately. Our team has the ability to take this over once we get a framework and strategy in place.”

CONSULTING

“Our team does not have the time or the knowledge to take this project on. We need assistance through the entirety of this project.”

Diagnostics and consistent frameworks used throughout all four options

Clarify the difference between a job description and job ad

The terms job description and job ad are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing.

A job description is an internal document that includes general job information, main responsibilities, key relationships, qualifications, and competencies. It communicates job expectations to incumbents and feeds key job data to HR programs.

A job ad is an externally facing document that advertises a position with the intent of attracting job applicants. It contains key elements from job descriptions, as well as information on the organization and its EVP.

McLean & Company insight

A job description informs a job ad, but it doesn’t replace it. Don’t be tempted to use a job description as a posting when there’s a time crunch to fill a position – it may save time at the outset, but it will likely result in a longer time to fill, a reduced quality of hire, or both.

Due to the differences in purpose and audience, it’s crucial that job descriptions are not used as job ads. For guidance on transforming a job description into a job ad, see McLean & Company’s Job Ad Guide.

Note: This is an excellent resource to pass along to your Talent Acquisition team.

All too often, job descriptions are viewed as a necessary evil

Creating and updating detailed and cumbersome job descriptions (JD) can be seen as a tedious, pointless, and time-consuming task for both managers and HR.

As a result, maintenance is often neglected resulting in inaccurate and unusable JDs.

Factors limiting the effectiveness of JDs:

• Lack of perceived purpose or value.
• Inaccuracy, incompleteness, or vagueness.
• Overly detailed or unnecessarily complex.
• Lack of integration into core HR functions (i.e. they are never actually used or referenced).
• Inflation of content in order to “game” the system for increased recognition, compensation, or job evaluation results.
• Lengthy approval processes leave JDs out of date by the time they’re documented, which doesn’t keep pace with rapidly changing environments.
• Inefficient storage and accessibility results in duplication and lack of awareness.

Don’t despair! JDs don’t have to be this way. This blueprint will help you make impactful changes.

Complacency around JDs drives organizational risk

Too many organizations take a reactive approach to maintaining JDs, with 82% updating them only in response to significant job changes or as part of the job evaluation process. This indicates that JDs are not living documents. While it may not seem like it, neglecting JDs can have negative effects that far outweigh the efforts needed to maintain and improve them.

(WorldatWork, 2015)

Over and above Total Rewards, JDs are inputs and/or outputs in a variety of HR functions:

• HR Strategy
• Talent Acquisition
• Talent Management
• Learning & Development

McLean & Company insight

It’s tempting to abandon JDs, but in almost all cases this is impossible or imprudent. Their breadth of use means that JDs aren’t going away, and the potential for problems can spread quickly if they are inaccurate, incomplete, or unclear.

Neglecting JDs can be a costly approach

Out-of-date, incomplete, or vague JDs can be used against employers in labor litigation cases.

While up-to-date JDs will not necessarily protect organizations, poor ones can certainly be a liability.

According to a recent report, only 28% of respondents reviewed JDs to proactively mitigate risks of costly labor misclassification litigation (Littler Mendelson, 2016).

Poor JDs can lead to confusion and employee disengagement regarding role requirements.

This impacts employee performance, retention, and productivity, and consequently organizational success.

Ceridian’s 2014 Pulse of Talent Survey found that replacement costs for disengaged employees is $5B annually.

JDs can also have a significant impact on an organization’s hiring process:

80% of hiring managers indicate a well-written job description is important to finding and hiring a good employee (Mighty Recruiter, 2016).

• Average cost of a bad hire can be up to $24,000 (CareerBuilder, 2016).
• 67% of employers believe retention rates would be higher if candidates had a clearer picture of what to expect about working at the company before taking the job (Harris Interactive Survey for Glassdoor, 2014).

Increasing uncertainty and constant change make JDs harder to maintain

Organizations today must adapt to a number of environmental trends. Two, in particular, challenge traditional approaches to JDs:

Promote clear job expectations via effective JDs to reap significant benefits

JDs that meet actual needs and are actually used will not seem burdensome and can actually drive key benefits such as employee engagement and intent to stay.

"An effective job description establishes a base so that an employee can clearly understand what they need to develop personally, and contribute to your organization. Develop job descriptions to provide employees with a compass and clear direction."

– Susan Heathfield

There is a strong positive correlation between clear job expectations and both employee engagement and commitment. Going from 0% to 100% job clarity is correlated with engagement and commitment scores that are 2x higher.

Think outside the box when identifying how to simplify JDs

There is hope!

The tedium associated with JDs may actually result from unchallenged assumptions about what they should be.

Common assumptions:

• JDs must be exhaustive to capture the entire role and fulfill the need of every stakeholder.
• HR owns JDs, and managers/employees can request to review as needed.
• JDs should be tailored to each employee’s role and specific tasks.

"It’s often surprising how poorly job descriptions have been written and used, and yet they are the staple of organizational activity."

– Tim Baker, Managing Director, WINNERS-at-WORK, Author

The two main complaints for JDs are that they are too lengthy and they are inaccurate. Tackle these enduring challenges by updating:

Template & Process

Balance conciseness, requisite information, and multiple stakeholder needs.

Improvements can be achieved through simpler templates, simpler processes, or both.

McLean & Company insight

Both managers and HR dread the JD process. To prevent it from being a futile exercise, rethink what needs to be included, the processes put in place to maintain them, and how they can provide value to those involved.