Subjectivity of Classification of Particular

¶ … Subjectivity of Classification

Of particular importance to author N. Joseph Cayer in his non-fictional account, Public Personnel Administration, is the degree of equity involved in the determining of classification for the positions of civil personnel in the workforce. The author takes pains to introduce the history of the classification system, as well as to cite the fact that its inception was directly in response to the system of spoils that previously accounted for job ranking and compensation around the turn of the 20th century. As such, the attempts to streamline and in some instances, even quantify the hierarchy of positions, is admirable, while the consideration of factors such as knowledge, skills, and abilities utilized during the performance of a position's tasks certainly aids in creating a comprehensive profile which may be easily compared to similar occupations.

However, as Cayer himself freely admits, there are a number of variables with which any such analysis of a position's worth hinge upon which are not so easily regulated or determined on a broad, unified scale. The initial step of classification, job analysis, which provides the essential information for the position description of an occupation, suggests some of these varying components which may foster a lack of congruity in properly judging a position's worth. Cayer recommends input from employees, their supervisors, as well as from a job analyst's observation of employees in their differing duties, all of which have weaknesses or potential for aberration from the actual performance of the job -- which is why a composite of these approaches is recommended, although there is still room for variation from the true nature of an occupation by combining these methods.

Similarly, the degree in which individual subjectivity may influence the classification of a position exists throughout the stage of position description once an analysis has been constructed. This is the stage in which classifiers stratify (often in terms of importance or ability) the several job factors which comprise a position's description -- all of which contains a fair degree of subjectivity based on the classifier's own personal opinions. The solution, naturally, would be to assign a numeric value to each of these job factors and to come up with a quantitative point-factor comparison method, but as Cayer points out, this approach merely transfers the subjectivity to the numbers assigned to each job factor.

The apex of subjectivity for the classification process, however, exists in the tendency of managers, laborers, and employers to "overclassify" themselves and their positions in order to improve their ranking as well as their remuneration and benefits. The determining of adequate compensation on an equitable scale to all is one of the primary objectives of classification, which any number of workers may exploit for their own personal, ulterior motives. The combination of overclassification with the subjective means of assigning importance to job factors as well as the subjectivity of the initial job analysis makes the system of classification, no matter how noble in its initial intent, somewhat dubious.