Companies post job descriptions at very high level and try to market it with attractive wordings. An example is IT consulting. The companies often uses big words to describe something mundane and routine. In some ways, it attracted alot of new people to join. Especially the ambitious young folks. They think consulting is some sort of glamorous life style but later to find out that all they do is project management administrative work or testing. They find out that the real job is not really challenging so turn over is extremely high.
Unless the write up has the purposes, goals, actions and statistics, it doesn't describe a whole lot does it? This is why many of us snort at the concept; the write ups are often vague (or just verbal understandings) and they often fail to reflect the reality of the situation.
Job descriptions and specifications are important tools for people management. However, a far more effective way is to set KRAs with your management. These are much more specific and actually track one's performance over a specific period of time instead of the broad range of responsibilities that constitute the Job descriptions!
According to me it's always better to have a job description. It's not like if we have job description then only there is a guarantee about the results. But to have the accountancy it's always better to divide the job into finite sections and to assign these to individuals as per the job description. This way the efficiency wll go up.
Yes, and time-saving too when one person moves on to another post in the organization or another one. Here then is the written reference for success which may be used by the one who inherits the post afterward. Otherwise, you end up with another concept I'll describe in future posts - developed traffic or dev-T.
I can see that. Actually having an individual put together their own hat pack would show initiative and it would also benefit the employer in that the employee would have ownership. It is much better for someone to say here is what I plan to do to succeed vs someone telling you here is what I need you to do. The former is much more productive and successful in the long run.
You're tracking in the right direction on this one. In fact the best "source" for a hat pack is the person who holds the post. There's actually two forms of hatting in the management system we use:
1. Instant Hatting - which covers the basics when someone new comes on board. Here's your work area. Here are your tools. There's the bathroom. Here's what we need to get done today. These are the basics just to get someone oriented.
2. Comprehensive Hatting - this is indeed the summary of the post (purposes, procedures, policies and statistics). And yes, a real self-starter who wants to own his post will take the initiative to put one together, or make one based on the reality of the scene he influences. Administrators at the senior levels don't necessarily have the detailed view at every level of the organization, so it's logical to have individuals author their own hat packs provided they are consistent with the intended products of their departments, divisions or organizations.
The "Hat Pack" is quite comprehensive and it would be fantastic if every new employee received all that information. Something tells me that if they are not even given clear job descriptions, they probably will not get a more comprehensive, descriptive content regarding the "world" around them. I agree that it would represent great leadership in their employer. Something tells me though that depending on the post in questions, the employer would argue that a self starter - want to succeed sort of emplyee, should take the initiative to find out all the information on their own and figure out the scope of the job (which is probably do whatever needs to be done) on their own. Cop out - sure - but it is the party line.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.