Introduction

Rank-in-job and rank-in-person are personnel ranking systems that can be used by public administrators to shape career paths and growth opportunities for their employees.  These two systems have distinctive philosophies, technical elements, and offer challenges for public organizations that use both of them.

Part 1- Compare and Contrast

Rank-in-job and rank-in-person are used to classify employees, and provide growth opportunities and raises in uniform and orderly manner. These systems provide employees with opportunities to move up in positions and pay based on factors such as performance and experience. These factors tend to affect the pay grade and classification that an employee is qualified for. The systems tend to be different on the way that they enhance promotions and career development in different ways within the organization.

Rank-in-person is a personnel system that tends to put more emphasis on the employee development by way of movement through ranks and closed systems. An employee is paid based on the rank regardless of the assignment involved. The system embraces an up-or-out philosophy; individual passed over for promotion are usually encouraged to leave the organization.

Under rank-in-job on the other hand, the salary and rank of an individual are determined by the job that the individual holds. Individuals have to move to better jobs either by reclassification or promotion in order to have higher status or substantial salary increase. It is uncommon to witness multiple promotions within the organization under this system.

Part 2- When Are Rank-in-Person Systems Used vs. Rank-in-Job

The rank-in-job system is the most commonly employed in the United States public administrative workplaces, while the rank-in-person system is usually used for military and academic workplaces.

For example, in the United States Army, there is a rank-in-person system, which is a closed system, and the person can only move upwards in rank one at a time, and that there is a rigid process of moving up in rank.  And that means the Army person who is moving up into the higher ranks can be expected to encounter the up-or-out philosophy if passed over for a promotion in rank.  The focus is on the individual person and the certain qualifications displayed to validate the reasoning for promoting that person in rank.   The rank-in-person systems can also be found in fire departments, police departments, and academic departments.  The impact on organizational culture has to be noted because of how the rigid and inflexible the system is.

Rank-in-job personnel systems are the more common system used in public administrative settings in the United States.   Unlike the rank-in-person system, this approach uses an open merit system and allows people from outside organizations to possibly be selected at times.   The focus is on getting work done, handling the job tasks, and dealing with the job demands.   This means that the system is grounded on focusing on people’s technical qualifications and technical skills to handle the job duties and job responsibilities.   Rank-in-job systems deal with grade levels, and they require persons to handle the job tasks at these new grade levels to have a chance at being promoted to a better paying, higher status job.

For example, an excellent illustration is these surveyors that are often seen looking through their devices preparing for a roadway project.  These surveyors are qualified by how they can expertly use these devices and comprehend how to calculate the necessary measurements.  They are unable to be promoted unless they qualify for the grade levels established for these higher paying jobs in this field.  As for the impact on organizational culture, this kind of system is more flexible and more open than the rank-in-person, and people from outside the system can be brought in if qualified and ready to assume these positions.   This provides some incentive for outsiders to try to qualify and get these jobs on occasion, even though promotions do often occur within the organization’s ranks.

Part 3- Challenges of Using Both Systems in Same Organization:

Some organizations tend to apply both rank-in-job and rank-in-person systems within the relevant framework. Combining both systems tends to bring about some challenges.

Among the challenges is that the combination brings complexity with regards to compensation and benefits. There would be an aspect of discrimination towards the employees since the organization would be forced to have different compensation and benefits package. It is quite difficult for the human resource to accommodate these differences.

Another challenge is writing job descriptions and distinguishing these employees from one another within the same organization.   For example, a dispatcher for the police department is going to be given a job description based on the rank-in-job system, as the police officers this dispatcher works with are given job descriptions based on the rank-in-person system.   It can be evident that some job tasks may overlap between the two sets of employees.  Yet, they are meant to be separate systems.  It means that in both systems, fresh thinking and fresh ideas may be lacking.  Everyone thinks in similar ways and that means the routines and rituals are entrenched with heavy resistance to any changes.   It can result in organizational stagnation and underperformance.

The organization will also have the challenge of executing promotions. This is because there will be a need for promoting employees within the same organization on different basis. This is something that is likely to affect job performance since some employees’ promotion is not dependent on performance while for others it is. The organization will deal with the problem of keeping employees motivated.

Conclusion

Rank-in-person and rank-in-job systems have varied differences. It is vital to understand the differences that exist between the systems in case someone was to encounter any or both of them in an organizational set-up. One of the common problems for both systems is the tradeoff between group loyalty and fresh thinking.  These systems require group loyalty, and that means the organizational cultures can be predictable, routine-oriented, and grow stagnant over time.

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?