ICSC/69/CRP.7
26June 2009
ENGLISH ONLY
International Civil Service Commission
Sixty-ninth session
Montreal, 29 June – 10 July 2009
Item 6 of the provisional agenda[1]
Conditions of Service of the General Service
and otherlocally recruited staff:
Considerations related to reviewing the Job EvaluationStandards
for the General Service and related categories
Note by the secretariat of the International CivilService Commission
This paper is an addendum to document ICSC/69/R.9. It contains:
Annex I. Descriptions of the factors for the General Service Master Standard
Annex II. The Grade Level descriptors.
Annex III. The reports from two consultants who tested, respectively, 620 jobs
on the Master Standard and 200 jobs descriptions on the Grade Level
Descriptors (GLD)
Annex IV. The format for uniformed job description questionnaire, developed
in accordance with recommendation from one of the consultants.
1
Annex 1. Factor descriptions of GS Master Standard
Nature of work
Focus / Work involves completing routine tasks/activities which may require verification and some choice of action among well established alternatives. / Work involves completing standard support activities/processes requiring transformation & choice of action from several accepted alternatives. / Work involves delivering specialized support activities/processes requiring evaluation, comparison and choice of action from many different alternatives. / Work involves delivering specialised support activities/processes requiring evaluation, interpretation, adaptation and selection of courses of action from many open alternatives. / Work involves Leading and/or having responsibility for[2] the delivery of either highly specialised or a broad range of specialised support activities/processes requiring in-depth analysis, integration & their mastery.Deliverable / Task Execution / Process execution / Specialized support / Programme Support / Programme Implementation
Scope / Limited scope and depth.
Working environment normal. / Moderate scope or depth of treatment requiring some interpretation of the subject matter.
Or
Work involves moderate risks or discomfort typically requiring special safety precautions / Either:
1/ scope and depth moderate, or;
2/ scope limited and depth substantial, or;
3/ scope substantial and depth limited.
Issues require considerable interpretation of the subject matter.
Or
Exposure to potentially serious physical/health risks. / Either scope broad and depth moderate,
Or
Moderate scope and substantial depth.
Intricate, requiring substantial analysis and treatment of the subject matter.
Knowledge/Skills/Expertise / Knowledge of basic procedures. Work routines are well-defined or established, requiring no or limited related experience.
AND/OR
Skill to operate simple equipment or equipment that operates repetitively.
Competency can be reached with minimum job experience and little or no previous training. / Knowledge of commonly used rules, procedures and/or operations to perform a variety of repetitive tasks;
AND/OR
Work requires frequent application of standard equipment or proficiency in office tools.
Work requires some related experience or training. / Knowledge of the essential elements of a technical or administrative field of work and of work flow in the organizational unit.
AND/OR
Work requires basic operation of complex or specialized equipment.
Knowledge attained through considerable experience, training or self-study is required. Proficiency/experience in applying established elements of the discipline, including the required tools. / Thorough applied knowledge of all elements of the field of work and awareness of its relation to the organization broadly and/or other entities outside the immediate work unit.
Skill to carry out work involving the operation of specialized equipment, instrument, tools or devices requiring adjustment, calibration or adaptation.
Work requires specialized training and/or experience to resolve a wide variety of interrelated problems. / Knowledge of the basic principles, concepts, methodology/standard procedures of an administrative, commercial or technical occupation; and skill/proficiency in applying this knowledge in the provision of expert guidance in the delivery of highly skilled, technical services or performing such assignments as planning and organizing difficult, but well-precedented activities.
Formal technical or para-professional training is typically required supplemented by extensive, progressive responsible experience.
Working Environment
Organizational Context / Organizational context is structured with limited independence in assignment performance. Either work itself provides close control or regular reviews for accuracy/precision are characteristic of oversight. / Organizational context allows for some degree of independence and provides opportunities for the incumbent to identify and raises issues affecting efficient process delivery. / Organizational context empowers incumbent with opportunities to make proposals affecting both the design and delivery of specialized processes. Oversight concentrates on result delivery and integrating specialized process support with programme substance. / Organizational context allows for a high degree of freedom in designing and delivering services. Oversight is concentrated on overall support operations delivery.Managerial Guidance Received / Supervision received provides instruction, guidance and advice on the technical and procedural aspects of the work. / Supervision received provides developmental & technical support & focuses on quality of process execution. / Managerial guidance received focuses primarily on the facilitation of process delivery & process impact. / Managerial focus is primarily on facilitation and coordination.
TEAMWORK AND RELATIONSHIPS This factor measures the type and degree of interaction necessary within the team. The focus is on engagement and the type of counterparts.
Engagement / Work processes are well defined, requiring little or no engagement. The incumbent may be required to exchange straightforward, fact-oriented messages, not requiring discussion or elaboration. / Providing assistance involving the exchange of routine information and limited discussion. / Seeking mutual understanding of specialised activities or complex issues and enlisting support through the exchange of a variety of information, requiring discussion, clarification and discretion. / Discuss, negotiate or resolve often sensitive or controversial matters requiring a high degree of discretion and tact.Contacts / Colleagues, mainly in the same organizational unit. External contacts are infrequent or limited to the exchange of routine information. / Colleagues in the same organizational unit and associates and immediately served clients in other organizational units and/or outside of the organization. / A range of clients,associates, and/or stakeholders in various organizational units including several outside of the organization.
Language / Usage of 1 language / Usage of 2 languages / Usage of more than 2 languages
RESULTS
Impact of Actions / Affect the delivery of discrete[3] support activities/processes with impact generally on incumbent’s immediate organizational unit or immediate client served. / Affect delivery of discrete support services with work interrelated with that of others in the same organizational unit or occupation and affects the timely accurate completion of the processes or services provided by others inside and outside the immediate organizational unit. / Affect the delivery of several aspects of support services. Work directly influences the output of other organizational entities, impacting on the deliverables of other services. / Affect delivery of all aspects of the support services provided by the unit, impacting on a broad range of clients and the productivity and timely and accurate delivery of activities and operations.Team Roles / Participates as a team member in a collaborative environment within a diverse workforce. May explain or demonstrate work functions or processes to other employees who join the work group for a short period of time. / Plays a key role by regularly providing guidance and advice on technical or procedural aspects of the work and may act as lead hand for a workgroup or team. / Plays a lead role in the provision of specialized activities which may be performed independently or may involve leading and/or consolidating work performed by others. / Independently responsible for product/service quality, Incumbent may provide on-going substantive supervision of a team with responsibility to evaluate work processes and products and their impact on the business of the work unit.
Annex II.Grade Level Descriptors
G1 / G2 / G3 / G4 / G5 / G6 / G7Nature of Work / Manual / Repetitive / Task Oriented / Process Support / General Process Oriented / Process Complex/Specialized / Specialized Process Execution / Service Execution
This factor measures the substantive contribution required by the job; the scope, depth and difficulty of work; the knowledge requirements, and the nature of the work demands placed on the incumbent and the level of difficulty to be expected at each stage. / Contributes execution of clear, concise instructions on limited tasks that are controlled either by close supervision, or by nature of work itself. / Follows standard procedures to carry out a limited number of routine tasks requiring a rudimentary understanding of both. / Carries out a variety of routine tasks within defined standard policies or practices. A knowledge of procedures and policies, as well as of relevant equipment is required. / Completes general processes requiring full knowledge and understanding of a body of rules, practices or policies and procedures
OR provides administrative or technical support to specialized activities / Responsible for completion of specialized or complex processes or activities, requiring some interpretation of rules and practices, and an understanding of policies and programmes and recommends an appropriate course of action. / Typically responsible for a defined service encompassing severaladministrative or technical subject areas, OR specialized treatment of a specific area requiring in depth understanding of the programme. / Para-professional leadership of a specialized area of work, or managing specific support service(s), requiring applied knowledge of baseline principles, concepts, methodologies and/or standards applicable to the specialized field or programme
Working Environment / Structured / Technical Support / General Service Support / Targetted Service Support / Independent Service Support / Specialized Service Support / Integrated Service Support
This factor describes the enabling characteristics of the work environment in terms of organizational context and structure with respect to the degree of empowerment in the job. Assessment under this factor ranges from defining the role of the job in the team to the role of the job in facilitating other members within the team. Managerial guidance received is also assessed. / Environment provides either close supervision, or automatic reviews. Supervision focuses on task performance, and facilitation of learning. / Environment provides for clear instructions and standard procedures. Supervision received consists of close guidance and feedback as essential to facilitation of learning and possible expansion of assignment / Environment provides guidance enabling task completion, and exposure to related process tasks. Supervision received focuses on process contribution / Environment provides exposure to all phases of the process.Managerial guidance received focuses on the quality of process execution and also provides for learning opportunities facilitating development. / Environment provides for opportunities to lead and carry responsibility for process completion. Managerial guidance received focuses on quality of outputs. / Environment allows opportunity to recommend improvements to the design and delivery of specialized processes. Managerial guidance received focuses is on facilitating service delivery and collaboration with related services. / Environment empowers incumbent with the opportunity to formulate proposals for the design and delivery of specialized processes. Managerial guidance received focuses on coordinationand integration with related services.
Teamwork and Relationships / Contextually Aware / Situationally Reliable / Basic Information Exchange / Basic Service Delivery / Consistent Service Delivery / Specialized Service Delivery / Informed Delivery Impact
This factor measures the type and degree of interaction necessary within the team. The focus is on engagement and the type of counterparts. It measures the purpose, level and significance of work contacts. / Focus is on colleagues, or immediate supervisor, to exchange basic information and request instruction. / Engages with colleagues to clarify instructions, and with immediate clients served, exchanging basic information ensuring reliable contribution. / Focus is on exchange of information with colleagues or clients, primarily for clarification or guidance on completion of tasks. / The focus is on in service-provision. Interaction clarifies routine matters, or identifies issues requiring attention or further review by team or supervisor. / Client interface focuses on maintaining relationships and projecting the image of a credible and reliable service provider or partner. Interaction assesses issues/performance which promote/impede service delivery. / Working relationships focus on provision of defined service, and opportunities to improve by collaborating or integrating processes or activities. / Working relationships focus on comprehensive service provision, seeking opportunities for synergies and process improvements aiming at quality and cost-effectiveness.
Results / Limited Immediate / Immediate / Contained Process Impact / Focused Process Impact / Process Consistency / Process Integrity / Service Integrity
This factor measures the effect of action taken the organization and its constituents in terms of the impact of results. It also assesses the operative work role of the incumbent. / Actions reflect on incumbent. As a team member, may demonstrate tasks to short-term staff. / Actions affect incumbent and the immediate client served and may impact the widerwork unit / Experienced in the field of work, and proficient in various tools - actions reflect on the work unit and on the reputation of the team / Fully competent in required processes, the incumbent provides quality technical and/or procedural work. Actions reflect on the team reputation and are interlinked with other entities or specialized staff. / The incumbent plays a lead role in ensuring consistency and quality of work steps completed. Impact of the work reflects directly on the overall reputation of the team in terms of quality of process execution and responsiveness to client needs. Work is integrated with other specialists or entities. / Typically, the incumbent is knowledgeable in the overall service, and proficient in all aspects of the work. The incumbent may supervise or coordinate the work of a team. Actions impact not only on immediate work unit but also on other organizational units. / The incumbent integrates an overall support service exercising supervision and/or coordination with related service areas. Impact extends to broader related functions and multiple corporate activities which are dependent upon quality support.
1
Annex III. Reports from two Consultants
Consultant’s Report on Evaluations of GS positions / Master Standard
Terms of Reference
1.The Terms of Reference involve the evaluation of 500 General Service (GS) job descriptions using the new ICSC GS evaluation tool and identification from those evaluations of refinements needed for the evaluation tool as well as other issues relating to the consistent grading of GS jobs.
Work undertaken
2.A total of 562 job descriptions have been submitted, including 64 previously evaluated by the Working Group in New York. Of these a total of 17 jobs descriptions were not included in the final evaluations due to:
- The position descriptions were of such poor quality it was not possible to grade them
- Position descriptions were not readable
- Positions were standard or generic post descriptions with multiple grades for the same
duties (WFP)
3.The detailed evaluation results of the final sample of 545 positions are set out in the attached Excel spreadsheet with separate tabs for all positions rated in the order received, together with separate worksheets listing the evaluations of posts downgraded and upgraded. Also included are separate listings
by Agency, by Grade Level and by Field of Work. The breakdown of the evaluation sample is as follows:
Table I
Agency / No. / % ofsample / Grade / No. / % ofsampleUN / 110 / 20.1
FAO / 57 / 10.5 / G7 / 51 / 9.3
UNHCR / 56 / 10.3
UNICEF / 51 / 9.3 / G6 / 126 / 23.1
IAEA / 32 / 5.9
WHO / 31 / 5.7 / G5 / 149 / 27.3
WFP / 30 / 5.5
UNOV / 21 / 3.9 / G4 / 100 / 18.3
UNESCO / 21 / 3.9
IFAD / 20 / 3.7 / G3 / 68 / 12.5
UNIDO / 20 / 3.7
UNOPS / 20 / 3.7 / G2 / 39 / 7.3
ICAO / 19 / 3.4
ITU / 18 / 3.3 / G1 / 12 / 2.2
ILO / 17 / 3.1
UNFPA / 14 / 2.5
UPU / 8 / 1.5
Total / 545 / 100 / Total / 545 / 100.0
Summary of Results
(a)Overall Result
4.Overall there has been a confirmation rate of 82%, with 15% of jobs found to be over graded and 3% under graded.
Table II
Results / Total / Conf / Down / UpNumber / 545 / 444 / 84 / 17
Percentage / 100 / 81.5 / 15.4 / 3.1
5.This result represents a higher level of confirmation (82% versus 78%) in comparison to the original sample evaluated prior to the Rome meeting of the Working Group. This is due in part to the elimination of a number of WFP jobs (9 positions)which were multiple graded positions. A breakdown of the evaluations has been done by grade level and by agency. At this stage it has not been felt necessary to remove from the sample jobs whose post descriptions are of poor quality, as there were poor job descriptions which were both confirmed at their current grade as well as downgraded.
(b)Evaluations by Agency
Table III
Agency / No. / No. / % / No. / % / No. / %in sample / Down / Up / Confirmed / Confirmed
UPU / 8 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 8 / 100.0
UNHCR / 56 / 7 / 12.5 / 1 / 1.8 / 48 / 85.7
UNFPA / 14 / 2 / 14.3 / 0 / 0.0 / 12 / 85.7
UNIDO / 20 / 2 / 10.0 / 1 / 5.0 / 17 / 85.0
UNOPS / 20 / 3 / 15.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 17 / 85.0
IAEA / 32 / 5 / 15.6 / 0 / 0.0 / 27 / 84.4
UN / 110 / 14 / 16.7 / 4 / 3.4 / 92 / 83.6
ITU / 18 / 3 / 16.7 / 0 / 0.0 / 15 / 83.3
FAO / 57 / 5 / 8.8 / 5 / 9.0 / 47 / 82.5
ILO / 17 / 3 / 17.6 / 0 / 0.0 / 14 / 82.4
UNOV / 21 / 4 / 19.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 17 / 81.0
WHO / 31 / 4 / 12.9 / 2 / 6.5 / 25 / 80.6
IFAD / 20 / 4 / 20.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 16 / 80.0
UNICEF / 51 / 10 / 19.6 / 1 / 2.0 / 40 / 78.4
WFP / 30 / 5 / 16.7 / 2 / 6.7 / 23 / 76.7
UNESCO / 21 / 5 / 23.8 / 0 / 0.0 / 16 / 76.2
ICAO / 19 / 8 / 42.1 / 1 / 5.3 / 10 / 52.6
Total / 545 / 84 / 15.4 / 17 / 3.1 / 444 / 81.5
6.For some agencies, particularly those with a heavy relative concentration of G6 and G7 positions there is a need to examine further not only the quality of the job description documentation (particularly generic job descriptions) but also to review their current grading patterns relative to other UN agencies. This applies particularly to those agencies with downgrading levels over 18% or confirmation rates below 80%.
7.This issue is further discussed below with respect to inter-agency grading patterns.
(c)Break down of evaluations by grade level
Set out below in Table IV is a breakdown of the evaluation results by grade level.
Table IV
Grade / Total / Conf / Down / UpNo. / % / No. / % / No / %
G7 / 51 / 33 / 65 / 18 / 35 / - / -
G6 / 126 / 93 / 74 / 31 / 25 / 2 / 1
G5 / 149 / 136 / 91 / 13 / 9 / - / -
G4 / 100 / 84 / 84 / 10 / 10 / 6 / 6
G3 / 68 / 61 / 90 / 6 / 9 / 1 / 1
G2 / 39 / 28 / 69 / 6 / 18 / 5 / 13
G1 / 12 / 9 / 75 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 25
Total / 545 / 444 / 82 / 84 / 15 / 17 / 3
The results in boldindicatelower levels of confirmation at the top two (G6 and G7) and the bottom two (G1 and G2).
8.There is clearly a trend for the elimination of G1 (and to a lesser extent G2) positions with most office work (clerical and related functions) now commencing at the G3 level. This reflects in large measure a change in the nature of work with many manual and trades functions disappearing due to outsourcing (e.g. cleaners and maintenance workers) or to changes in technology (for example copy typists and typing pools have virtually disappeared).
Break down of evaluations by Field of Work
Table V
Field of Work / Number / % / Confirmed / % / Down / % / Up / %Evaluation/Investigation / 4 / 0.7 / 4 / 100.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0
Facilities / 3 / 0.6 / 3 / 100.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0
Miscellaneous Technical and Program Activities / 22 / 4.0 / 20 / 90.9 / 2 / 9.1 / 0 / 0.0
Procurement & related / 10 / 1.8 / 9 / 90.0 / 1 / 10.0 / 0 / 0.0
Travel / 9 / 1.7 / 8 / 88.9 / 1 / 11.1 / 0 / 0.0
Human Resource Management / 28 / 5.1 / 25 / 89.3 / 2 / 7.1 / 1 / 3.6
Research/Policy Support / 7 / 1.3 / 6 / 85.7 / 1 / 14.3 / 0 / 0.0
Cleaners and Manual workers / 28 / 2.8 / 24 / 85.7 / 4 / 14.3 / 0 / 0.0
Shipping, Logistics, Transport / 25 / 4.6 / 21 / 84.0 / 1 / 4.0 / 3 / 12.0
Field Support / 6 / 1.1 / 5 / 83.3 / 1 / 16.7 / 0 / 0.0
Office Assistant & related / 114 / 20.9 / 95 / 83.3 / 13 / 11.4 / 6 / 5.3
Finance / 48 / 8.8 / 38 / 79.2 / 10 / 20.8 / 0 / 0.0
Information Technology / 26 / 4.8 / 22 / 84.6 / 4 / 15.4 / 0 / 0.0
Statistical / 11 / 2.0 / 9 / 81.8 / 2 / 18.2 / 0 / 0.0
Messengers and Drivers / 45 / 8.3 / 36 / 80.0 / 8 / 17.8 / 1 / 2.2
Program Assistants / 38 / 7.0 / 30 / 78.9 / 7 / 18.4 / 1 / 2.6
Technical Trades / 17 / 3.1 / 13 / 76.5 / 3 / 17.6 / 1 / 5.9
Document Management & related / 19 / 3.5 / 14 / 73.7 / 5 / 26.3 / 0 / 0.0
Public Information, Publishing, PR & related / 70 / 12.8 / 52 / 74.3 / 17 / 24.3 / 1 / 1.4
Operations / 7 / 1.3 / 5 / 71.4 / 0 / 0.0 / 2 / 28.6
Security / 8 / 1.5 / 5 / 62.5 / 2 / 25.0 / 1 / 12.5
Totals/Average / 545 / 100.0 / 444 / 81.5 / 84 / 15.4 / 17 / 3.1
9.The majority of the fields of work included in the sample show acceptable confirmation rates. Four Fields of Work (in bold in Table V above) namely Technical Trades (telecom, electronics and laboratory technicians) Documents Management (registry, archives, mail clerks etc) Public Information specialists and Program Assistants show a less than acceptable confirmation rate.