Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Point-factor job evaluation is a quantitative, analytical approach to job evaluation. It assesses jobs using predefined factors and levels, assigning points based on how closely a job’s requirements match each factor-level definition.
Each job is compared against these definitions, and points are awarded according to the relevant level.
The points assigned across all factors are added together to produce a total job score. This score can then be used to:
Rank jobs directly (job ranking), or
Translate scores into a grade structure (job grading)
In simple terms, the value of a job is determined by the requirements of its core duties, tasks and overall work demands — not by the individual performing the role.
In point-factor job ranking:
The job itself is evaluated, not the job holder
A set of standardised, generalised factors is applied
Each factor consists of multiple levels, each with assigned points
Evaluators compare job requirements to factor-level descriptions to determine the best fit. The total number of points represents the relative value of the job, allowing roles to be placed in rank order.
Typical Compensable Factors
Most point-factor systems include the following broad categories:
Skill / Qualifications
Responsibility
Effort
Working Conditions (less common in modern systems)
Objectivity and Judgement
While point-factor systems aim to improve objectivity, complete precision is difficult to achieve. Challenges include:
Defining factor levels clearly and consistently
Determining which job information is most relevant
Some systems — particularly those rooted in early “scientific management” approaches — imply a false sense of objectivity by assigning quantified jumps between levels (e.g. a 20% increase in communication requirements) without clearly explaining what those jumps represent.
Judgement is still required when scoring jobs. However, as evaluators gain experience with the factor plan and job documentation, consistency and accuracy typically improve.
Key Advantages
Greater objectivity and consistency than non-analytical methods
Clear, structured framework for evaluating jobs
Suitable as a defence in equal value and equal pay claims, provided the system is based on proper job analysis and is free from gender bias
Key Challenges
Can be complex to design and maintain
Scoring still depends on human judgement
Schemes can be difficult to amend as organisational needs change
Despite these limitations, point-factor methods remain the most widely used analytical job evaluation approach.
One of the most well-known examples is the International Labour Organization’s Scheme of Geneva (1950) — now largely outdated.
A more modern, weighted factor plan was published by the ILO in its 2009 brochure on gender-neutral job evaluation.
Factors
Number of Points
Weighting
Total: 1,000 points (100%)
Qualifications – 320 points (32%)
Job knowledge
Communication
Physical skills
Responsibility – 390 points (39%)
Financial responsibility
Responsibility for products
Responsibility for people
Effort – 190 points (19%)
Physical effort
Mental effort
Emotional effort
Working Conditions – 100 points (10%)
Psychological climate
Physical environment
Detailed factor-level definitions are typically provided in commercial job evaluation systems. However, these systems are often proprietary and can be difficult to interpret without specialist expertise, frequently requiring consultant support.
Compare ranking, classification, point-factor & grading - find the right approach.
Define grades, career paths & job families for a fair, transparent organization.
