Job Analysis Report Analysis Report ... Specializing in Equal Employment Opportunity, ... promotion, and assignments and transfers to 75 jobs. Over the

Job Analysis Report

for the Position of

Customer Assistance Representative For

Southern Power Company

May 21, 2011

Addresses the Job Analysis requirements of Sections 14C and 15C of the federal Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. Includes information necessary

for the development and content-related validation of Written Tests, Structured Interviews, and other selection devices

Report Prepared by

193 Blue Ravine Rd., Suite 270, Folsom, CA 95630

800-999-0438 www.biddle.com

Specializing in Equal Employment Opportunity, Affirmative Action, and Personnel

Selection Consulting and Software since 1974

Copyright © 2011 Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. ii

Table of Contents

♦ Introduction and Purpose of the Study � The Purpose ….............................………………………………. 1 � Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. …………………………………. 1 � Laws, Regulations, and Professional Standards ………………... 3 � Job Analysis Facilitator ……………………………………..……4

♦ Job Analysis Process � Job Analysis: Content of the Job ………………………………. 5

♦ Participants and Locations � Participating Incumbent Employees.................................………. 7 � Experience of Subject-Matter Experts ..............................……... 7 � Gender of Subject-Matter Experts ...................................………. 7 � Ethnicity of Subject-Matter Experts ................................………. 7 � Age of Subject-Matter Experts ...................................………….. 8 � Location of Job Analysis Workshops ...............................……… 8

♦ The Job Analysis � Work Setting. …………………………………………………… 9 � Job Analysis Workshop ………………………………………… 9 � Investigation of Job Duties, KSAPCs and Physical Abilities

………………………………………………………….…… 9 � Relationship of Duties to Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAPCs)

……………………… …………...........................……………. 12

♦ Other Test Related Information � Potential Limitations ...................................................…………... 14 � Contact Person ..........................................................……………. 14 � Accuracy and Completeness .........................................………… 14

♦ References .........................................................................………………… 15 ♦ Attachments Table of Contents ..........................................……………….. 16

Copyright © 2011 Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. 1

Introduction and Purpose of the Study

The Purpose of the Job Analysis

The purpose of this study was to conduct a job analysis for the position of Customer

Assistance Representative (CAR) of Southern Power Company [Section 14C]1 Based upon

information obtained during the current study; it was found that, generally, CAR employees

work in an indoor office environment around and with others frequently. [Section 14C(4)] CAR

employees generally:

• Assist customers as they call in and provide customer service in an expedited manner.

• Respond to customer correspondence by calling or writing.

• Constantly multi-tasking and/or switching between multiple tasks.

Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. and Firefighter Selection, Inc.

Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. (BCG) is affiliated with Biddle & Associates, Inc. (B&A).

Biddle & Associates started in 1974 and was incorporated in 1977, and BCG was incorporated in

2001. BCG’s consulting division specializes in Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), litigation

support, software development, and Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) technical support and has

assisted over 1,000 employers in these areas. Our OPAC® (Office Proficiency Assessment and

Certification) division has several thousand clients with automated test sales. Our CritiCall®

Pre-Employment Testing Software is used by hundreds of public-safety agencies from around

the United States and Canada for the selection of dispatchers and calltakers. And finally, we have

a sister corporation called Fire and Police Selection, Inc. (FPSI), which specializes in tests for

firefighter/police selection and promotion procedures.

Since 1977, B&A/BCG has assisted attorneys in litigation support as consultants or

experts in over one hundred EEO cases involving statistics and/or job-relatedness analyses. We

have conducted sensitive statistical EEO audit analyses for employers prior to a suit to minimize

the likelihood of suit. We have developed or validated selection devices in hundreds of

situations, have licensed occupational census data from the 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 census to

hundreds of clients, have licensed our test scoring and analysis, EEO/AAP analysis, and job

1 References in brackets throughout this report refer to sections of the federal Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection Procedures (1978) being addressed.


analysis software to hundreds of clients, have trained clients on AAP development in hundreds

of workshops, have developed AAPs for more than a hundred clients, have developed and

licensed our tests to numerous cities and counties, and we have distributed self-administered and

automatically scored word-processing and other administrative tests to more than a 3,000

employers and schools.

While most of our litigation support has been for defense attorneys, we have worked on

the plaintiff side in more than a dozen cases and served as the class expert monitor in a complex

case involving statistical effects and validation of practices, procedures, and custom developed

tests used for entry-level selection, promotion, and assignments and transfers to 75 jobs. Over the

past few years, several courts have supported our statistical analyses or our job analysis and job-

relatedness work products: our reading ability test for firefighters was supported as job related in

United States of America v. City of Torrance, [No. 93-4142-MRP, DC CA]; our statistical

analyses and job-relatedness analyses for written tests, oral interviews, and assessments of

promotability were supported for three classifications in Simmons v. The City of Kansas City,

Kansas, [No. 88-2603-0, DC KA]; our job-relatedness work involving a test was supported in

Sanchez v. City of Santa Ana, [No. CV-79-1818-KN, DC CA]; our statistical analyses were

supported in Wunderly v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., [828 F. Supp 801 (DC OR)], Shelton v.

SCPIE, [No. BC 088821, 098887], and Kelley v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, [No.

BC 104734]. On the plaintiff side, our statistical work was supported in Paige v. California

Highway Patrol, [No. CV-94-0083 CBM(Ctx), DC CA] and Bouman v. Baca, 940 F2d 1211 (9th

Cir. 1991), cert. denied 12-9-91.

During the past several years, we have had professional articles published in the

Personnel Journal, The Human Resources Professional, Public Personnel Journal, Public

Personnel Management, California Labor & Employment Law Quarterly, and Labor Law

Journal. These articles deal with statistics, disparate impact, and job-relatedness.

Some of the sensitive statistical analyses we have conducted for employers have included

the effects by sex, race, ethnic origin, and age groups of possible layoff actions, performance

evaluations, forced distribution ratings, pay, overtime, bonuses, raises, promotions, hiring,

transfers, plant closures, mergers, false arrests claims, vice arrests, cigarette smoking and

asbestos exposure, PCBs, and contracts let to minority and female owned businesses.


A substantial part of our practice is the determination of job relatedness (i.e., validation

of selection devices) such as written tests, skills tests, oral interviews, and performance

appraisals. Establishing job-related cutoffs for tests and combining several test results into an

overall list are other important components of our validation work. We also evaluate skill, effort,

responsibility, and working conditions in exemption cases.

BCG also offers a variety of AAP development options ranging from AutoAAP®

affirmative-action planning software to affirmative action plan outsourcing with a team of

tenured consultants that can develop an organization's entire set of affirmative action plans and

more.

Laws, Regulations, and Professional Standards

Biddle & Associates/Biddle Consulting Group has performed job analyses and developed

numerous pre-employment selection tests during the past 30 years, and is aware that these need

to address federal laws and regulations including, but not limited to, the

• Civil Rights Act of 1964 (CRA 1964; Title VII)

• Civil Rights Act of 1991 (CRA 1991)

• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

• Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)

• Federal Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection Procedure

• OFCCP Federal Contractor Requirements and Regulations

We are also aware that job analyses and selection tests should also address the professional

standards, including, but not limited to, the

• Principles for Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures of the Society for

Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2003)

• American Educational Research Association /American Psychological Association’s

Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999)

The job analysis was designed to address the relevant laws, regulations, guidelines, and

professional standards.


Job Analysis Facilitator

BCG Principal Consultant, Jim Kuthy, Ph.D., was the primary Job Analysis facilitator.

His resume is included as Attachment A.


Job Analysis Process

Job Analysis: Content of the Job [Section 14C(2) and 15C(3)]

The job analysis was conducted using BCG’s proprietary GOJA® (Guidelines Oriented

Job Analysis®) System. The GOJA System is a comprehensive job analysis and selection

planning system that has been used by hundreds of employers since its original development in

the mid 1970s. Based on the requirements of the federal Guidelines (1978), the Principles for the

Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (2003), and the 1991 Americans with

Disabilities Act, the GOJA System is designed to help build customized job analysis and

selection components that are fair, valid, effective, and defensible.

The GOJA System is more than a job analysis method. It is a methodology for

developing content valid employment selection tools including job analyses, selection plans, job-

specific supplemental application forms, assessments of promotability, structured interviews, and

job-related performance appraisals to address the requirements of the Guidelines and other

relevant standards. Many of the technical requirements of the Guidelines are addressed just by

using the GOJA System. GOJA provides the format to be used for the linking process called for

by the Guidelines with content validity, and, through its design is tailored to address the

technical requirements of Sections 14C(1)-(4), (6)-(9) of the Guidelines.

Work products developed with the GOJA System have been challenged in court and the

employer has won in each of the following cases:

• Calderon v. Imperial County (a consent decree that specifically exempts the County from

initiating a stringent selective certification procedure for all classifications that have been

validated under the “GOJA” System).

• Forsberg v. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone [840 F2d 1409, CA-9 1988] for

maintenance administrators and test desk technicians.

• Gilbert v. East Bay Municipal Utility District [DC CA, 19 EPD 9061, 1979] for customer

accounting service supervisor.

• Martinez v. City of Salinas [DC CA, No. C-78-2608 SW (S.J.)] for firefighter.


• Parks v. City of Long Beach [DC CA, No. 84-1611 DWW (Px)] for fire engineer and

captain.

• Sanchez v. City of Santa Ana [DC CA, No. CV-79-1818 KN] for sergeant.

• Simmons v. City of Kansas City [DC KS, No. 88-2603-0] for detective, sergeant, and

lieutenant.

• United States v. City of Torrance [DC CA, No. 93-4142-MRP (RMCx)] for firefighter.

GOJA has been discussed in several articles and textbooks used in universities throughout the

United States:

• Buford, J. A. (1991) Personnel Management and Human Resources in Local

Government. Center for Governmental Services, Auburn University.

• Gatewood, R. S. & Field, H. S. (1986). Human Resource Selection. Drydan Press.

• Buford, J. A. (1985). Recruiting and Selection: Concepts and Techniques for Local

Government. Alabama Cooperative Extension Service, Auburn University.

• Schuler, R. S. Personnel and Human Resource Management. West Publishing Company.

• Bemis, S. E., Belenky, A. H., & Soder, D. A. Job Analysis: An Effective Management

Tool. Bureau of National Affairs: Washington D.C.

• Campbell, T. (July, 1982). Entry-Level Exam Examined in Court. The Western Fire

Journal.

• Sturn, R. D. (September, 1979). Mass Validation: The Key to Effectively Analyzing an

Employer's Job Classifications. Public Personnel Management.


Job Analysis Participants and Location

Participating Incumbent Employees [Section 14C(4)]

Data and information from 18 incumbent CAR employees who have performed the

functions of a CAR employee are included in these analyses. The following will demonstrate that

the Subject-Matter Experts (SMEs) who participated in this study are diverse in age and

ethnicity.

How many Job Experts are necessary to include in the job analysis process to produce

reliable results? Some courts have relied on as few as seven to ten Job Experts for providing

judgments and ratings about job and selection procedure characteristics (e.g., Contreras v. City

of Los Angeles, 656 F.2d 1267. 9th Cir. 1981; US v. South Carolina, 434 US 1026, 1978). The

number of Job Experts that initially participated in the current study exceeds the seven to ten

experts allowed under those decisions.

Experience of Subject-Matter Experts

1-4 years 5-9 years 10-19 years 20 or more years

5 8 5 0

Gender of Subject-Matter Experts

The vast majority of those who hold CAR positions are women. The number of each

gender of the SMEs that participated in the current study was:

Male Female

6 12 It is noted that the CAR position is staffed by more than twice as many women as men. Ethnicity of Subject-Matter Experts

The number of each ethnic background of the SMEs that participated in the current study

was:


White Black/African

American Hispanic/Latino

Asian / Pacific

Islander

Native

American /

Alaska Native

7 4 7 0 0

Age of Subject-Matter Experts

The ages of the SMEs that participated in the current study was:

Less than

20 years of

age

20 – 29

years of age

30 – 39

years of age

40 – 49

years of age

50 or more

years of age

0 3 5 9 1

Location of Job Analysis Workshop/Data-Collection Site [Section 15C(1)]

The Job Analysis workshop was held at Southern Power Company Office, 1234 Pine

Mountain Road, Los Angeles, CA.


The Job Analysis Process

Work Setting [Section 14C(4) and Section 15C(3)]

During the Job Analysis workshop the SMEs discussed and arrived at a consensus to

describe a typical CAR’s work situation, including the setting in which work behaviors are

performed.

♦ The work situation, including the setting in which work behaviors are performed, can be

found in Attachment B.

Job Analysis Workshop

During the job analysis workshop, the SMEs individually documented the duties

performed by incumbents on the job. They also individually documented the KSAPCs needed to

perform the CAR position at Public Utility.

After writing down this information, the SMEs collectively reviewed the duties and the

KSAPCs, and the following modifications were made based on a consensus:

1. The descriptions of the duties and the KSAPCs were modified to most accurately

represent the duties and KSAPCs used by incumbents at all locations.

2. The wording of several duties/KSAPCs was modified to make the duties/KSAPCs

more understandable (e.g., removed vernacular that might be unfamiliar to others).

3. Skills and abilities were operationally defined in terms of observable aspects of work

behavior of the job.

Investigation of Job Duties, KSAPCs and Physical Abilities

The resulting lists of duties (including work behaviors, associated tasks, and if the

behavior results in a work product, a description of the work products), knowledge, skills,

abilities, and personal characteristics from the workshop were formed into a Job Analysis Survey

(JAS). All 18 of the SMEs were asked to individually rate the duties, KSAPCs (including

physical abilities) that they identified during the job analysis. For each duty, SMEs rated:


• The FREQUENCY with which the duty was performed (listed as daily to weekly,

monthly to quarterly, quarterly to yearly, less than yearly, and not performed). SMEs

identified one of the above selections.

• The IMPORTANCE level of the duty. A scale of 1 - 5 (1 = not required / 5 =

extremely critical) was used. [Section 14C(4) & 15C(3)]

In addition to rating the two criteria listed above, five senior-level SMEs also rated those

portions of the survey that are typically reserved for supervisors2:

• Whether the above-minimum performance of this duty denotes the BEST WORKER

or is PERFORMANCE DIFFERENTIATING of employees’ job performance. A

scale of 1 – 5 (1 = no difference / 5 – a very significant difference) was used. [Section

14C(9)]

• Whether the duty is FUNDAMENTAL. A dichotomous scale (N = NO - this duty

should not be considered “fundamental” / Y = YES – this duty should be considered

“fundamental”) was used. [Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990]

• If the duty could be readily ASSIGNABLE to other employees in order to

accommodate persons with disabilities who cannot perform them. A dichotomous

scale (N = NO – it is NOT reasonable to assign this duty to another employee / Y =

YES – it is reasonable to assign this duty to another employee) was used. [Americans

with Disabilities Act, 1990]

For those duties that are not observable, those aspects of the behaviors (i.e., KSAPCs

required to perform the job duty) that can be observed and the observed work products were

identified and analyzed. [Section 14C(2)]

All 18 of the SMEs also rated:

• The FREQUENCY with which the KSAPC was applied (listed as daily to weekly,

monthly to quarterly, quarterly to yearly, less than yearly, and not performed). SMEs

identified one of the above selections.

2 There were no supervisors “per se” that participated in the workshop. For that reason, the rating tasks that are normally assigned to supervisory personnel during the GOJA process were made by very experienced, senior-level job incumbents.


• The IMPORTANCE level of the KSAPC. A scale of 1 - 5 (1 = not required / 5 =

extremely critical) was used. [Section 14C(4)]

In addition to rating the three criteria listed above, five senior-level CAR job incumbents also

rated:

• If possessing above-minimum levels of the KSAPC denotes the BEST WORKER or

is PERFORMANCE DIFFERENTIATING of employees’ job performance. A scale

of 1 – 5 (1 = no difference / 5 – a very significant difference) was used. [Section

14C(9)]

• Whether the KSAPC is a HELPFUL OR MINIMUM QUALIFICATION. Minimum

Qualifications are those KSAPCs that an applicant or candidate must have prior to

entry to the position. A dichotomous scale (HQ / MQ) was used.

• What level of the KSAPC is needed upon entry to the job. (LEVEL NEEDED UPON

ENTRY). A scale of 1 – 4 (1 = none or very little / 4 = all or almost all) was used.

[Section 14C(1) and 14C(6)]

• Also, the LEVEL NEEDED FOR SUCCESS (this rating was given for knowledge

items only) was identified. A scale of 1 (Low) to 4 (Mastery) was used.

All 18 of the SMEs rated each Physical Ability for:

• The FREQUENCY with which the Physical Ability is performed (listed as daily to

weekly, monthly to quarterly, quarterly to yearly, less than yearly, and not

performed). SMEs identified one of the above selections.

• The IMPORTANCE level of the Physical Ability. A scale of 1 - 5 (1 = not required /

5 = extremely critical) was used. [Section 14C(4)]

In addition to rating the three criteria listed above, five senior-level CAR job incumbents

also rated:

• Whether the Physical Ability is a HELPFUL OR MINIMUM QUALIFICATION.

Minimum Qualifications are those Physical Abilities that an applicant or candidate

must perform to gain entry to the position. A dichotomous scale (HQ / MQ) was used.


• If possessing above-minimum levels of this Physical Ability denotes the BEST

WORKER or is PERFORMANCE DIFFERENTIATING of employees’ job

performance. A scale of 1 – 5 (1 = no difference / 5 – a very significant difference)

was used. [Section 14C(9)]

• Possessing this Physical Ability is needed upon entry to the job. (LEVEL NEEDED

UPON ENTRY). A scale of 1 – 4 (1 = none or very little / 4 = all or almost all) was

used. [Section 14C(1) and 14C(6)]

Relationship of Duties to KSAPCs [Section 15C(3)]

The federal Guidelines require in Section 14C(4) that “for any selection procedure

measuring a knowledge, skill, or ability the user should show that… (b) [the] knowledge, skill,

or ability is used in and is a necessary prerequisite to performance of critical or important work

behavior(s).” One way this can be accomplished is by showing that the KSAPCs are related to

the duties performed on the job.

During the end of the first day of the workshop, SMEs linked each of the KSAPCs to one or

more job duties. Two or more SMEs had to agree on a proposed linkage for that linkage to be

identified as being appropriate for selection purposes. In addition, KSAPCs deemed appropriate

for assessment must have received an average importance rating of important or higher (i.e., a

rating of 3, 4, or 5) and also must have received an average level needed upon entry rating that

indicated that most or all of a KSAPC/Physical Ability would be needed at the time of entry to

the job (i.e., a rating of 3 or 4).

♦ The KSAPC to duty linkage results can be found in Attachment C.

The following attachments are documents that were used in, or are derivative products of, the

Customer Account Representative Job Analysis process:

♦ A full explanation of the rating scales used during the Job Analysis process can be found

in the Instructions in Attachment D.


♦ The averages/summaries of the SMEs’ duty ratings can be found in Attachment E. The

numbers shown in this attachment were calculated after the ratings of any SMEs who

provided an extreme rating for a particular duty were eliminated (outliers).3

♦ The averages/summaries of the SMEs’ ratings of the KSAPCs can be found in

Attachment F. Once again, the numbers shown in this attachment were calculated after

the ratings of any SMEs who provided an extreme rating for a particular KSAPC were

eliminated (outliers). KSAPCs that did not achieve an importance rating of important

higher, or which did not receive a level needed upon entry rating that most or all of a

KSAPC would be needed at the time of entry to the job, are shaded grey in Attachment I

to identify that they did not meet the court-supported criteria used by Biddle Consulting

Group, Inc. for inclusion in a pre-employment selection process.

♦ The averages/summaries of the SME ratings of the Physical Abilities can be found in

Attachment G. Once again, the numbers shown in this attachment were calculated after

the ratings of any SMEs who provided an extreme rating for a particular Physical Ability

were eliminated (outliers).

3 An outlier was defined as a rating greater than or less than 1.645 standard deviations above/below the mean.


Other Related Information

Potential Limitations

The Job Analysis, to the best of its ability, identified the job duties and KSAPCs that are

common for the majority of CAR positions across multiple locations. However, even with the

great care taken to achieve this goal, it is possible that some of the KSAPCs identified during this

study are not required of all CAR employees in every location. It is therefore recommended that

the results of this Job Analysis be applied with discretion. A periodic review of this position is

also encouraged to identify whether the duties performed by CAR employees or the KSAPCs

required to perform those tasks change over time.

Contact Person [Section 15C(8)]

To receive further information about this validity study, contact:

Biddle Consulting Group, Inc.

Attention: James E. Kuthy, Ph.D.

193 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 270

Folsom, CA. 95630

Voice (916) 294-4250· Fax (916) 294-4255

Accuracy and Completeness [Section 15C(9)]

Trained BCG human resource consultants conducted the job analysis workshop and

collected the data. The data collected was entered by administrative staff employees and then

independently checked for accuracy by BCG employees. Analyses were also independently

double-checked and verified. Finally, a Principal Consultant reviewed the final Content Validity

Report. We invite any comments you might have about this report.


References

American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, & the

National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and

psychological testing. American Educational Research Association: Washington, DC.

Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology (SIOP) (2003). Principles for the validation

and use of personnel selection procedures. (Fourth edition) College Park, MD: Author.

Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. (1978). Federal Register, 43, 38290-

38315.


ATTACHMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Job Analysis Facilitator’s Resume……………………………………… Attachment A

Work Situation……………………………………………………………Attachment B

Knowledge, Skill, & Ability Ratings to Duty Linkages………………...Attachment C

Explanation of GOJA Job Analysis Rating Scales……………………...Attachment D

Average Job Duty Ratings……………………………………………….Attachment E

Average Knowledge, Skill, & Ability Ratings…………………………..Attachment F

Average Physical Ability Ratings………………………………………..Attachment G


ATTACHMENT A

Job Analysis Facilitator’s Resume


Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. 193 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 270, Folsom, CA 95630

(916) 294-4250 Fax: (916) 294-4255 __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

James E. Kuthy, Ph.D.

Senior Consultant and Director of Product Development

Experienced consultant in Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) field, specializing in the areas of: ♦ Selection/Promotion Plan Development ♦ Test Development and Validation (including overseeing computerized test development) ♦ Question Item Writing and Item Analysis ♦ Job Analysis ♦ Public Safety Practices and Procedures ♦ Litigation Support ♦ Performance Evaluation ♦ Industrial and Organizational Development and Research

Selection Plan Development Experience with multiple aspects of selection plan development, including the professional and legal aspects of designing, implementing, and reviewing selection plan components. Conceived of, designed the test development process for, conducted the job analysis of, and validated the nation’s first computerized professional selection testing battery for public safety dispatchers and calltakers (9-1-1 Operators). Promotion Plan Development Experience with multiple aspects of promotion plan development, including the professional and legal aspects of designing, implementing, and reviewing promotion plan components, including plans for law enforcement agencies and a large labor union. Test Development/Validation Experience in developing tests and conducting job analyses, with an emphasis in the public safety area, including written and physical ability testing. Written Tests Wrote, reviewed, and/or revised thousands of test items for multiple-choice ability tests. Wrote, reviewed, and revised materials and test items for numerous in-basket exercises. Areas of written test development include police, fire, and industrial classifications. Performed readability studies on job materials and test items, item response analyses, and other statistical and research evaluations of written tests. Tests developed for use by some of the largest United States’ cities


including a major metropolitan public-transit police agency with jurisdiction in two states and one district. Physical Ability Tests Assisted in the development of physical ability testing used for screening candidates for entry-level public safety positions and municipal electrical workers. This work includes developing cutoff times, administration methodology, and modifications. Lead Administrator of peace officer physical ability testing for a major mid-western city. Other Selection Devices or Test Development Assistance Development of various entry-level selection tests, revision of structured oral interviews, and rated hundreds of oral briefing exercises. Conceived of and authored an automated professional testing battery for public safety dispatchers. Trained a county police department in job analysis and multiple-choice item writing to develop their own content-related job knowledge tests for four different positions. Instructed test item writing at a three-day training session sponsored by an international nonprofit public safety organization. Created an item-writing guide for an international nonprofit public safety organization that is now an official publication distributed by that organization. Validation/Reliability Application of content and criterion oriented approaches for validating numerous tests including knowledge tests, physical ability tests, personality assessment, in-basket and oral briefing measures. Authored the reliability and validation report for a computerized public-safety dispatcher selection test. Conduct reliability studies (test/retest, internal consistency) of selection tests, including work sample and personality tests. Job Analysis Conducted job analyses for a diverse variety of classifications including public-safety and public transportation positions, customer service representatives, and Longshore Foremen. Conducted job analysis workshops, including the collection of data from over forty-five different organizations during a single project in order to create a unified content-validation report. Responsible for working with subject matter experts and management in identifying duties, importance ratings, duty statements, degrees of importance, consequence of errors, knowledge, skills, abilities, physical and other characteristics, and link-up studies between job analyses and tests. Conducted individual and group critical incident interviews to determine job tasks and the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed to perform those tasks. Conducted on-site job observations of job-related activities.


Litigation Support Statistical and methodological research in response to federal court cases involving entry-level and promotional examinations and transfer practices. Was the lead entry-level selection monitor for a large law enforcement agency under a federal court mandate. Educational Background Ph.D. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: The University of Akron, OH M.A. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: The University of Akron, OH B.A. Robert F. Kennedy Program for Public Security and Administration: King’s College, PA. Membership American Psychological Association (APA) Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Recent Work History Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. Biddle & Associates, Inc. Senior Consultant/Director of Test Development 1999-present Organizational consulting, selection planning, test development, job analysis, item writing, human-resource related training, and test/item reviewer. Lead entry-level selection monitor for a large county sheriff’s office under a federal Court’s mandate. Performed statistical and database manipulation and/or analyses of data and information. Instructed selection and validation seminars. Conceived of, designed, and validated the nation’s first and only computerized 9-1-1 communications operator test. Act as the national spokesperson for Biddle Consulting Group in the public safety communications area. Create, and direct the programming and implementation of, new and updated tests for both OPAC® (Office Skills Proficiency and Certification) software and CritiCall® Personnel Selection software. Manage the company’s customer service division. Independent Consultant International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc., Alexandria, VA (Exclusive Client) 1997-1999 Law Enforcement promotion test development. Contributing author of certification test items for the organization’s certification/training modules. Instructed test item-writing at the 1999 IACP Conference on Assessment Centers and Selection Issues. Assisted in a unique pilot project where I instructed police supervisors on how to develop their own content-valid written tests. Barrett and Associates, Inc., Akron, OH Associate 1993-1996 Test planning, development, job analysis, rating, and item-writing for a wide variety of classifications with an emphasis on public safety. Lead administrator for public safety testing.


Primary developer for all phases of test development, including job analysis and item writing, for several job classifications of a regional rapid transit agency. Rated hundreds of oral-briefing exercises for a major police department’s sergeant and lieutenant promotion testing. The University of Akron , Akron, OH University Faculty and Graduate Teaching Assistant 1994-1998 Instructed “Human Behavior at Work” as a part-time faculty member. Instructed “Introduction to Psychology” classes and directed the laboratory portion of “Experimental Psychology” classes as a graduate teaching assistant. Caesar’s Tahoe, Lake Tahoe, NV Lead Stage Technician/Stage Technician 1984-1993 Acted as a Reserve Deputy Constable (Peace Officer) for the Lake Tahoe, Nevada, Justice Court concurrent with this position. Douglas County Sheriff’s Office, Minden and Lake Tahoe, NV Criminal Investigator/Detective, Crime Lab Supervision, Crime Scene Analyst, Traffic Accident Investigation, Certified Latent Fingerprint Examiner, Traffic Enforcement Specialist, Patrol Officer. Concurrently coordinated the county’s search and rescue functions for two years. 1978-1984 El Dorado County Sheriff’s Office, South Lake Tahoe, CA Reserve and full-time seasonal Deputy Sheriff assigned to the patrol division. Full-time Summer 1977, Part-time Reserve 1976-1978 Recent Publications and Presentations

Kuthy, J. E. (1998). Senior Police Officer and Senior Detective test development and training. Two-day session presented for the International Association of Chiefs of Police to the Chesterfield County, VA Police Department.

Kuthy, J. E. (1999). Item writing for job knowledge testing. Presented at the International Association of Chiefs of Police Annual Assessment Center and Selection Issues conference, San Diego, CA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2000, May/June). Establishing Dispatcher Selection Testing. 9-1-1 Magazine, pages 19 - 20.

Kuthy, J. E. (2000, October). Selecting the Best Applicant for Today’s Computerized Communications Workplace. Presented at the APCO Canada (Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials, Inc.) conference, Ottawa, Canada.

Kuthy, J. E. (2000, March). Computerized Testing for Pre-Employment Dispatcher/Call-Taker Selection. Presented at the APCO (Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials, Inc.) Western Regional conference, Portland, OR.


Kuthy, J. E. (2000, April). Selecting the Best Applicant Using Pre-Employment Testing. Presented at the APCO (Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials, Inc.) North Central Regional conference, Columbus, OH.

Kuthy, J. E. (2000). National Dispatcher/Call-taker Job Analysis and CritiCall Content Validity Study. Sacramento, CA: Biddle Consulting Group.

Kuthy, J. E. (2001). Reducing Employee Turnover. Presented at the Montana State APCO Conference.

Kuthy, J. E. (2001). Update to the CritiCall Job Analysis Report: Test-Retest Reliability Study. Sacramento, CA: Biddle Consulting Group.

Kuthy, J. E. (2001). Reduce Employee Turnover. Presented at the NENA National Conference, Orlando, FL.

Kuthy, J. E. (2001). Computerized selection testing. Presented at the Southern California Personnel Management Association, San Diego, CA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002). Selecting the Best Employee for the Computerized Communications Workplace. Presented at the Western Regional APCO-NENA Conference, Phoenix, AZ.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002; April). Should we be pre-employment testing for computer-related skills? A report on the national dispatcher/call-taker job analysis study. Presented at the Navigator Conference (National Academy of Emergency Dispatch), St. Petersburg, FL.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002; April). Written Test Item Analysis Study for a California County Sheriff’s Office. Sacramento, CA: Biddle Consulting Group. [Proprietary document, not for publication]

Kuthy, J. E. (2002; June). Update to the CritiCall Content Validity and Reliability Report. Sacramento, CA: Biddle Consulting Group.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002). Conducting interviews that work. Presented at the Annual Conference of the National Number Association, Indianapolis, IN.

Makiney, J., Fulp, J., & Kuthy, J. (2002; June/July). Using computerized testing to streamline hiring and certification processes. Presented at the International Personnel Management Assessment Council’s Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002; August). Advances in Calltaker and Dispatcher Screening. Presented at the APCO National Conference, Nashville, TN.

Kuthy, J. E. (2002; October). Personnel Selection Management using CritiCall. Presented at the Atlantic Chapter APCO Conference, Manchester, NH.


Kuthy, J. E., (2003; February). Bilingual (English/Spanish) telecommunicator certification job analysis and test development. Presented at the Western Regional APCO Conference, Las Vegas, NV.

Kuthy, J. E., & Mateo, D. (April; 2003). What have we here? Assessing dispatcher competency, skills, and language abilities. Presented at the Navigator (National Academy of Emergency Dispatching) Conference, Anaheim, CA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2003; May). Test your job applicants using a telephone. Public Safety Communications, pages 44-46.

Kuthy, J. E. (2003; May). Bilingual (English/Spanish) telecommunicator certification job analysis and test development. Presented at the East Coast Regional Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) conference, Cape Cod, MA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2003; June). Bilingual (English/Spanish) telecommunicator testing and certification. 9-1-1 Magazine, pages 28-29.

Kuthy, J. E. (2003, June). Bilingual 9-1-1 operator certification. Presented at the International Personnel Management Association’s Assessment Council Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD.

Biddle, D. A., Kuthy, J. E., & Nooren, P. (2003). Protecting your agency against EEO litigation related to selection and promotion practices. Law Enforcement Executive Forum, 5(3), pages 5 - 14.

Kuthy, J. E. (2004). Multitasking: The reason why computer skill testing of telecommunicator job applicants is necessary. National Journal of Emergency Dispatch, 6(1).

Kuthy, J. E. (2004, March). It’s not fair! How employees’ perceptions of unfairness fuel the staffing crisis. Presented at the Western Regional Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) conference, Spokane, WA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2004, June). It’s not fair! How employees’ perceptions of unfairness fuel the staffing crisis. Presented at the NENA National Annual Conference, Tampa, FL.

Kuthy, J. E. (2005, April). Selecting employees who can efficiently do two or more things at once. Presented at the North-Central APCO Annual Conference, Kansas City, MO.

Kuthy, J. E. (2005, June). Invited speaker. Presented an all-day session on human resource-related issues at the Royal Canadian Mounted Police National Divisional Representative Conference, Ottawa, ON.

Kuthy, J. E. (2005, August). Increasing the effectiveness of your training and assessment.

Presented at the APCO International Conference, Denver, CO.


Kuthy, J. E. (2005, October). Selecting employees who can do two (or more) things at once: It’s harder than it looks. Presented at the APCO Canada Conference, Vancouver, BC.

Kuthy, J. E. (2006, March). Hiring great employees who can also multitask: It’s harder

than it looks. Presented at the Western Regional APCO Conference, Portland, OR. Kuthy, J. E. (2006, March). Developing and conducting effective, fair, and valid

employment interviews. Presented at the Personnel Testing Council of Northern California’s 20th Annual Conference, Berkeley, CA.

Kuthy, J. E. (2006, in press). Introduction. In D. Biddle (Ed.), A practitioner’s guide to

valid and defensible employment testing. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing Company. Meloun, J. M., & Kuthy, J. E. (submitted for publication). Helping trainees to succeed by

having them “think aloud.”

Selected Technical Reports and Case Consultation International Longshore Workers Union, Local 94/Pacific Maritime Association Foreman/Walking Boss Position

• Conducted job analysis. • Authored job analysis report. • Supervised development and implementation of a selection plan for this position. • Written job knowledge test and structured interview developed and validated. • Supervised implementation and rating of over 200 panel interviews

Seattle City Lights

• As part of a team, created a selection plan for three industrial-job classifications. • Conducted and interpreted reliability and validity statistical analyses. • Created electrical and mechanical written test items. • Developed physical ability and work-skills tests. • Developed selection interview guide and behavioral characteristic measures.

Burns v. County of San Mateo, U.S. District Court

o Submitted declaration as expert concerning public-safety calltaker task training and employee discipline/discharge procedures

Humetrics, Inc.

• Statistical evaluation of personality characteristic measures for customer service position.

• Conducted and interpreted criterion-related validity analyses. • Conducted and interpreted test reliability analyses. • Authored confirmatory/cross-validation criterion-related validity study.


Ultramar Diamond Shamrock

• Conducted job analysis of customer service position for this national company. • Authored job analysis report. • Conducted a concurrent criterion validity study of non-cognitive pre-employment

selection test.

CritiCall Personnel Selection Software

• Conducted nationwide job analysis study of public-safety telecommunication positions (including more than 45 public-safety agencies).

• Authored and developed test content, including 22 different test modules. • Conducted content-related validity study of the CritiCall selection test. • Conducted follow-up validation studies of test. • Authored validation report and its four updates. • Collected and statistically analyzed test score data from over 5,000 test takers and

recommended cutoff score data from over 300 job experts. • Determined appropriate time limits for testing for five of the CritiCall test

modules. Major mid-western Regional Rapid Transit Authority (agency name withheld at request of client)

• As part of a team, developed job analyses and selection plans for motor-coach diesel mechanic and electrician positions.

• The sole author of written test items for job knowledge testing for both positions. • Made recommendations for additional types of testing.

Bouman v. Pritchess, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

• Provided services pertaining to validation, statistics, and EEO/AA laws and regulations including preparation of exhibits and declarations to the court.

• Statistical analyses of adverse impact for entry level and promotional selection. • Qualitative analyses of potential “alternate employment practices” which may

have lower adverse impact. • Review of test validation procedures for numerous positions within the

organization. Public Utility, Las Vegas, NV

o Conducted job analysis study of a Customer Assistance Representative position. o Developed a list of tasks performed, and the knowledge, skills, abilities, and

personal characteristics needed to perform those tasks. o Created a report of job analysis findings.

Paige v. California Highway Patrol, Federal District Court

• Validity/fairness review of entry level written tests. • Disparate impact theory application and analysis. • Drafted documents submitted to the court.


Stallworth/Kemp v. County of Alameda Sheriff’s Department

• Conducted a content-validation study of a written promotional examination. • Authored validation report and made recommendations to client.


ATTACHMENT B

Work Situation


WORK SITUATION

The work situation for the Customer Assistance Representative position, including the

setting in which work behaviors are performed, was examined during the workshop. The

following is a synopsis of the findings from that examination.

• Employees are typically assigned to work five days a week.

• Employees are typically assigned to work only Monday through Friday.

• The typical work shift is eight-hours per day.

• Employees are sometimes asked to work extended work hours.

• Employees work indoors in an office-style environment.

• Employees typically do not work irregular hours or days outside of their normally

assigned shifts.

• Employees are not typically “on-call.”

• Employees typically do not work at more than one site or location.

• Employees do not typically travel on the job. However, some travel may be

required for job-related functions, such as participating in the Job Analysis

workshop.

• All employees must comply with a “business casual” company grooming/attire

standard.

• Employees work under consistent, but moderate, time pressure.

• Employees must be able to focus for long periods of time on many different tasks

at once, with frequent interruptions.


ATTACHMENT C

Knowledge, Skill and Ability to Job Duty Linkages

Notes

Those KSAPCs that are shaded in the following table did not meet the court-supported criteria used by Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. for inclusion in a pre-employment selection process.

Job Duty numbers can be found in Attachment E.


KSAPCs

LINK TO DUTIES (Numbers indicate

duties associated with this KSAPC)

1 The ability to read and comprehend information and ideas written in English. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

2 The ability to take notes and compose effective written communication in English using a keyboard and/or by hand.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

3 The ability to perform basic math such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division using a calculator.

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21

4 The skill to choose the right mathematical methods or formulas to solve a problem.

1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21

5 The ability to work closely with others and to be an effective member of a team in order to achieve goals; including an ability and willingness to help others, as needed.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21

6

The ability to speak clearly and effectively when communicating with others so that others will understand, both in person and by telephone. Effectively communicate at the appropriate level (e.g., elderly, confused, intoxicated, lacking education)

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 21

7

The ability to listen and understand the spoken word by being attentive and properly interpreting and/or responding to verbal communication, understanding the points being made, asking questions as appropriate, and not interrupting at inappropriate times. Stay focused and not be distracted. Ability to maintain control of the call.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21


KSAPCs



8 The ability to quickly and accurately solve problems and/or make decisions. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to apply general rules to specific problems to produce answers that make sense.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

9 The ability to tell when something is wrong or is likely to go wrong, knowing what the appropriate next step is, and following through to resolution.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

10 The ability to use logic and reasoning to identify the strengths and weaknesses of alternative solutions, conclusions or approaches to problems.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

11 The ability to learn and retain information to be used at a later time. Includes both long-term learning and the ability to recall bits of information, such as telephone numbers, names, addresses from memory for short periods of time.

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

12 The ability and willingness to learn and use new techniques or procedures in a timely fashion. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to adapt to change without incurring overwhelming stress.

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

13 The ability to convey the value of options or programs. May require the ability to convince others to take or not take action.

1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21

14

The ability to identify and prioritize things or actions in a certain order or pattern according to a specific rule, set of rules (e.g., patterns of numbers, letters, words, pictures, mathematical operations), or routine (moving from one computer screen to another).

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

21


KSAPCs



15 The ability to file and/or retrieve information stored using alphabetical and/or numerical filing systems.

1, 2, 3, 10

16

The ability to combine pieces of information to form conclusions (includes finding a relationship among seemingly unrelated events). Follow up or pursue additional information when information provided is not sufficient or does not make sense.

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18 ,19 ,21

17

The ability to handle stressful situations while maintaining a high level of performance and professionalism (such as maintaining appropriate use of words). Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to appropriately use emotions; being stable and level-headed under stressful situations (not overreacting), help others regain their composure or defuse situation.

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19 , 21

18 The ability to make fast, simple, repeated movements of the fingers, hands, and wrists.

2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 19

19 The ability to use a mouse and keyboard associated with a personal computer without having to concentrate or focus on those behaviors.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21

20 The ability to simultaneously perform two or more job-related tasks (e.g., speak with client on telephone while entering information using a keyboard; work reports while speaking on the phone).

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

21

21 The ability to filter out or minimize distractions that might potentially interfere with job performance. Includes the ability to focus on a single source of sound in the presence of other distracting sounds.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21


KSAPCs



22 The ability to be honest in work and in relationship to others, including being truthful, straightforward, and consistent. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to appropriately maintain the security and/or privacy of information.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

23 The ability to monitor/assess your own performance and manage one’s own time, to make improvements or take corrective action. Includes the ability to have self discipline to adjust work pace and/or take initiative when appropriate.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

24 The ability to understand the implications of new information for both current and future problem-solving and decision-making.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 21

25

Skill at accurately recording information, such as entering data into a computer and/or by hand. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to focus on essential portions of conversation or communication and enter that information into a computer while engaged in that communication.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

26 Knowledge of principles and processes for providing customer services. This includes customer needs assessment, meeting quality standards for services, perform services in a tactful manner.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

27 Knowledge of the structure and content of the English language including the meaning and spelling of words, rules of composition, and grammar.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ,15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

28 Knowledge of administrative and clerical procedures and systems such as word processing, managing files and records, and other office procedures and terminology.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

21


KSAPCs



29 Knowledge of arithmetic and its applications. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 16,

18, 19, 20

30 Knowledge of principles and methods for promoting services. This includes a well-rounded knowledge of company programs, products (e.g., natural gas), web site (resources tools on web site).

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 21

31 The ability and willingness to take appropriate precautions in various settings to address safety standards. Includes the ability and willingness to help others to do the same.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 , 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

32 The ability to take responsibility for one’s own actions, as well as the consequences of inaction. Includes the ability to take appropriate action when necessary without external prompting and standing by decisions appropriately.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

33 The ability to behave in a way that is consistent with societal and legal guidelines in work-related situations and also avoids conflicts of interest. Being tactful with customers.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

34 The ability and willingness to appear to work on time and ready to work. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to work diligently throughout entire day. The ability to use company time wisely.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

35 The ability to encourage and/or direct others toward the achievement of goals. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21


KSAPCs



36 The ability to treat people fairly and with dignity and respect, including, but not limited to, those who may be different. Includes the ability to interact harmoniously with others, including those who may be different.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

37 Ability to take and learn from constructive feedback in a positive way. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

38 The ability to paraphrase information. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13,

14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21

39 Ability to be respectful of the property of the company and of others. 2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 19,

21

40 Ability to organize information and resources in a systematic way to maximize its use. Includes keeping a work area organized and easily accessible.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

41 Ability to know where to get information. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

42 Ability to be aware of issues or actions that may affect others in a negative way. Includes being aware of your surroundings and acting appropriately.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21


KSAPCs



43 Ability to project a positive image of the company and its employees at all times.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

44 Ability to show initiative. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

45 Ability to motivate others. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

46 Ability to share knowledge with others. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

47 Knowledge of computer programs: CSS, WMIS, TTS, Vista Plus, One Step, OLTE, CAS, Walker, Mobile Services, Oracle.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21

48 Knowledge of tariffs (i.e. codified rules and regulations of public utilities commission) (Note: different tariffs for different states) and statements of rates.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,

21

49 Ability to dress and groom, including personal hygiene, according to company policies.

1, 14, 19


KSAPCs



50 Ability to use Internet, Infonet (internal internet), and Groupwise software. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21

51 Knowledge of Company Jargon (vernacular). 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

18, 19, 20, 21


ATTACHMENT D

Explanation of GOJA Job Analysis Rating Scales


The following instructions were provided to the SMEs during the Job Analysis workshop. Rating scales for job duties to be completed by all SMEs Frequency

Give each duty a Frequency Rating to show how often, in general, you perform it. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Annually or less often 2 – Semi-Annually (approx. 2 times/year) 3 – Quarterly (approx. 4 times/year) 4 – Monthly (approx. 1 time/month) 5 – Bi-Weekly (approx. every 2 weeks) 6 – Weekly (approx. 1 time/week) 7 – Semi-Weekly (approx. 2 to 6 times/week) 8 – Daily/Infrequently (approx. 1 to 6 times/day) 9 – Daily/Frequently (approx. 7 or more times/day)

Importance Give each duty an Importance Rating to show how important the duty is to successful job performance–to achieving the purpose of the job. Consider how often the duty is performed, the amount of time spent on the duty, and how serious the consequences are if the duty is not performed or not performed properly. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Not Important: Minor significance to the performance of the job. 2 – Of Some Importance: Somewhat useful and/or meaningful to the performance of

the job. • Improper performance may result in slight negative consequences 3 – Important: Useful and/or meaningful to the performance of the job. • Improper performance may result in moderate negative consequences

4 – Critical: Necessary for the performance of the job. • Improper performance may result in serious negative consequences 5 – Very Critical: Necessary for the performance of the job, and with more extreme

consequences. • Improper performance may result in very serious negative consequences

Additional rating scales for job duties to be completed by Supervisor SMEs Best Worker This question is asked because it helps in rank ordering applicants on the basis of job-related qualifications and in evaluating current job-holder’s job performance. Complete the following statement using the rating scale provided. Above-minimum performance of this duty makes (Select one option from below) difference in overall performance of the job.

1 – no 2 – little 3 – some


4 – significant 5 – very significant

Fundamental (Fundamental Duty): We need to be able to distinguish fundamental job duties from those that are not fundamental to the purpose of the job. Answer “Yes” if the duty is a fundamental duty; answer “No” if it is not. All the duties of some jobs may be fundamental duties; for other jobs some, but not all, of the duties may be fundamental. A duty is considered fundamental to the job in any of the following ways:

• The duty is frequently performed (check the Frequency rating) and/or the proportion of work time spent on it is significant (check the Percentage of Time), or

• The consequence to the purpose of the job is severe if the duty is not performed or if it is performed poorly (check the Importance rating), or

• Removing the duty would fundamentally change the job. In other words, the duty is fundamental because the reason the job exists is to perform the duty, or

• There are a limited number of employees available among whom the performance of this duty can be distributed, or

• The duty is so highly specialized that the current job-holder was placed in the job because of his/her expertise or ability to perform this particular duty.

Assignable (Assignable to Others): This section is necessary to identify those duties that can be readily assumed by other employees in order to accommodate persons with disabilities who cannot perform them. Duties that are frequently performed and/or take up a large proportion of work time and are important or critical probably are not easily assigned to others. A “No” answer might be appropriate in this case. Duties that occur infrequently and/or that require a small percentage of work time can sometimes be assumed by others, regardless of how important or unimportant they are. A “Yes” answer might be appropriate in this case.

Rating scales for KSAPCs to be completed by all SMEs Frequency Give each KSAPC a Frequency Rating to show how often, in general, you use it. Before deciding on a frequency rating, review the duties which you have listed as requiring the KSA. The frequency rating of the KSAPC can be less often, more often, or the same as the frequency rating of any duty to which it is linked. For example, a KSAPC can be linked to five duties, each of which is performed weekly (one on each day of the week), so the frequency of the KSAPC could be daily even though each duty it is linked to is performed weekly. Or if the duties are performed daily, but the KSAPC is needed only every two weeks to do a part of the duties, then its frequency is bi-weekly. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Annually or less often 2 – Semi-Annually (approx. 2 times/year) 3 – Quarterly (approx. 4 times/year) 4 – Monthly (approx. 1 time/month) 5 – Bi-Weekly (approx. every 2 weeks) 6 – Weekly (approx. 1 time/week) 7 – Semi-Weekly (approx. 2 to 6 times/week)


8 – Daily/Infrequently (approx. 1 to 6 times/day) 9 – Daily/Frequently (approx. 7 or more times/day)

Importance Give each KSAPC an Importance Rating. How important is the KSAPC to successful job performance or to achieving the purpose of the job? Consider the importance rating of the duties for which the KSAPC is needed. Typically, a KSAPC’s importance rating will be the same as the most important duty for which it is needed – but not always. Therefore, don’t just automatically select the importance of the most important duty; evaluate what the importance rating of each KSAPC should be. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Not Important: Minor significance to the performance of the job. 2 – Of Some Importance: Somewhat useful and/or meaningful to the performance of

the job. • Improper performance may result in slight negative consequences 3 – Important: Useful and/or meaningful to the performance of the job. • Improper performance may result in moderate negative consequences



Rating scales for KSAPCs to be completed by Supervisor SMEs

Level Needed Upon Entry Having Supervisors identify the minimum amount of a KSAPC or Physical Abilities that are necessary upon entry to the job provides direction on which KSAPCs and Physical Abilities to screen in a selection process. Supervisors are asked to complete the following statement to gather this data: Possessing (Select one option from below) of this KSAPC/Physical Abilities is needed upon entry to the job.

1 – None or very little 2 – Some (less than half) 3 – Most (more than half) 4 – All or almost all

The Guidelines state, “Content validity is also not an appropriate strategy when the selection procedure involves knowledge, skills, or abilities which an employee will be expected to learn on the job” (Section 14C[1]). To address this requirement, we suggest using an average rating of 3.0 as a minimum threshold for determining which KSAPCs or Physical Abilities to include in a selection process.


Best Worker This question is asked because it helps in rank ordering applicants on the basis of job-related qualifications and in evaluating current job-holder’s job performance. Complete the following statement using the rating scale provided. Above-minimum performance of this duty makes (Select one option from below) difference in overall performance of the job.

1 – no 2 – little 3 – some 4 – a significant 5 – a very significant

Minimum v. Helpful Qualifications Supervisors provide this rating to determine which KSAPCs and Physical Abilities to include in a selection process. Supervisors provide a rating of “MQ ” to indicate that the KSAPC or Physical Abilities is a minimum qualification (i.e., requirement), and “HQ” to indicate that it is only helpful:

MQ – Minimum Qualification

HQ – Helpful Qualification

Minimum qualifications are those that the applicant or candidate must have prior to entry into the position; helpful qualifications can still be included in the selection process, but are not absolute necessities prior to entry.

Level Needed for Success Supervisors provide these ratings to indicate the minimum amount of a job knowledge that is necessary for successful performance. The following scale is used to gather these ratings: This level of job knowledge held must be at a (Select one option from below) level for successful job performance.

1 – Low: none or only a few general concepts or specifics available in memory in none or only a few circumstances without referencing materials or asking questions.

2 – Familiarity: have some general concepts and some specifics available in memory in some circumstances without referencing materials or asking questions.

3 – Working knowledge: have most general concepts and most specifics available in memory in most circumstances without referencing materials or asking questions.

4 – Mastery: have almost all general concepts and almost all specifics available in memory in almost all circumstances without referencing materials or asking questions.

The data from these ratings are useful for choosing the job knowledge that should be included in a written job knowledge test. We suggest only including job knowledge that have average ratings of 3.0 or higher on written job knowledge tests. See Section 14C(4) of the Guidelines for specific requirements about measuring job knowledge in a testing process.


Rating scales for Physical Abilities to be completed by all SMEs Frequency Rating Give a Frequency Rating to show how often, in general, you use each Physical Abilities. Before deciding on a frequency rating, review the duties which you have listed for the Physical Abilities. The frequency rating of the Physical Abilities can be less often, more often, or the same as the frequency rating of any duty it is linked to. For example, a Physical Abilities can be linked to five duties, each of which is performed weekly (one on each day of the week), so the frequency of the Physical Abilities could be daily even though each duty to which it is linked is performed weekly. Or if the duties are performed daily, but the Physical Abilities is needed only every two weeks to do a part of the duties, then its frequency is bi-weekly even though the duties are performed daily. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Annually or less often 2 – Semi-Annually (approx. 2 times/year) 3 – Quarterly (approx. 4 times/year) 4 – Monthly (approx. 1 time/month) 5 – Bi-Weekly (approx. every 2 weeks) 6 – Weekly (approx. 1 time/week) 7 – Semi-Weekly (approx. 2 to 6 times/week) 8 – Daily/Infrequently (approx. 1 to 6 times/day) 9 – Daily/Frequently (approx. 7 or more times/day)

Importance Rating How important is the Physical Abilities to successful job performance or to achieving the purpose of the job? A Physical Abilities’ importance rating may or may not be the same as the most important duty for which it is needed. Therefore, don’t just automatically select the importance of the most important duty. Decide what the importance rating of each Physical Abilities should be. Choose one of the following options:

1 – Not Important: Minor significance to the performance of the job. 2 – Of Some Importance: Somewhat useful and/or meaningful to the performance

of the job. • Improper performance may result in slight negative consequences 3 – Important: Useful and/or meaningful to the performance of the job. • Improper performance may result in moderate negative consequences




Rating scales for Physical Abilities to be completed by supervisor SMEs

Minimum v. Helpful Qualifications : Identify whether the Physical Abilities is a minimum or helpful qualification. Minimum qualifications are those that the applicant or candidate must have prior to entry into the position.

Best Worker: This question is asked because it helps in rank ordering applicants on the basis of job-related qualifications and in evaluating current job-holder job performance. Complete the following statement using the rating scale provided. Possessing above-minimum levels of this Physical Abilities makes (Select one option from below) difference in overall performance of the job. 1 – no 2 – little 3 – some 4 – a significant 5 – a very significant

Level Needed Upon Entry: When Physical Abilities are required on the job is used to address Section 5F and 14C(1) of the Guidelines (not measuring KSAPCs that are learned in a brief orientation or trained on the job). It should be a supervisor rating. Complete the following statement using the rating scale provided.

Possessing (Select one option from below) of this Physical Abilities is needed upon entry to the job. 1 - None or very little 2 – Some (less than half) 3 – Most (more than half)

4 – All or almost all


ATTACHMENT E

Average/Summaries for SME Duty Ratings


JOB DUTY: If applicable, include domain (area within the job to which the duty is

related; for example, client contact, personnel, etc.)

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

FU

ND

AM

EN

TA

L

AS

SIG

NA

BLE

1.

Effectively converse with a wide variety of people, including internal/external customers, by telephone or in person. This may be done to quickly communicate information about products and services, to take orders or cancel accounts, or to obtain details of complaints and compliments; or for other reasons, with a high volume of diverse calls.

9.00 4.72 4.60 Y N

2.

Use a computer and/or handwriting to make records of customer interactions and transactions, recording details of inquiries, complaints, and comments, as well as actions taken. Navigating on a computer to frequently access, view, enter information or take handwritten notes while performing other activities, such as conversing on the telephone.

9.00 4.73 4.60 Y N

3.

Resolve customers' service or billing complaints by performing activities such as refunding money and adjusting bills (e.g., late payment charges or bill collection fees). Includes calculating appropriate numbers and amounts.

8.11 3.89 4.60 Y N

4. Check to ensure that appropriate changes are made to resolve customers' problems. 7.94 3.88 4.20 Y Y

5.

Based upon a call, research unresolved customer grievances or queries with designated departments and follow-up. May transfer call to appropriate department for resolution.

7.44 3.33 5.00 Y Y

6.

Determine charges for services requested, collect deposits or payments, and/or arrange for billing or payment arrangements. Make decisions based on customer’s needs and status (e.g., new or disconnected customer).

9.00 4.31 4.40 Y N




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

FU

ND

AM

EN

TA

L

AS

SIG

NA

BLE

7.

Complete forms, prepare change of address records, and issue service discontinuance orders, emergency orders, using computers and/or by hand when computer systems are down.

8.82 5.00 5.00 Y N

8.

Obtain and examine all relevant information in order to assess validity of complaints and/or determine possible causes, such as extreme weather conditions or contextual factors that could increase utility bills.

8.00 4.00 4.40 Y N

9.

Educate and/or persuade others to take action, such as utilizing gas efficiently, upgrading to more efficient products, increase insulation or do an energy audit. Educate customer about other resources, including internal/community resources that may be available.

8.25 3.00 3.40 Y N

10. File and/or retrieve information stored using alphabetical and/or numerical listing using either an electronic or paper filing systems.

6.88 3.13 3.40 Y Y

11. Maintain the security and privacy of company and customer information. 9.00 5.00 4.75 Y N

12.

Help customers to maintain a safe environment, such as recognizing when unsafe conditions are likely to exist or whether safety-related issues might arise if appropriate action is not taken. Instruct customers about emergency procedures.

8.11 5.00 4.60 Y N

13.

Learn work-related basics and then actively continue to expand knowledge of work-related activities, including learning and using new methods or techniques.

7.33 3.67 4.00 Y N




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

FU

ND

AM

EN

TA

L

AS

SIG

NA

BLE

14.

Work as part of a team, proactively assisting others as needed. Also work as an individual and use your level of empowerment (selecting from a number of appropriate solutions).

8.81 3.73 3.80 Y N

15. Answering call for volunteers and/or are assigned to help educate peers. 4.44 2.50 3.40 Y N

16. Quickly and accurately make decisions or solve problems, as needed with minimal supervision within company guidelines.

8.75 4.35 4.60 Y N

17.

Effectively communicate with others, both in writing and verbally, as needed. Includes, but is not limited to, the use of proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, and phrasing.

8.87 4.50 4.60 Y N

18.

Deal with more than one situation at a time, while being focused and aware of geographical areas (e.g., setting up accounts, dealing with more than one phone conversation at a time, going from one program to another).

8.76 4.06 4.60 Y N

19.

Perform all the duties of a customer assistant representative in addition to the duties performed by cashiers such as; compile bank deposits, collect payments, make change, balance the drawer and perform face to face duties of a cashier, while using a computer.

6.61 4.59 4.40 Y Y

20. Maintains statistical information such as call volume and attendance. 7.00 3.88 4.40 Y N




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

FU

ND

AM

EN

TA

L

AS

SIG

NA

BLE

21.

Contact internal/external customers about a wide variety of issues, such as responding to inquiries or to notifying them of account investigation results and any planned adjustments.

6.91 3.60 4.00 Y N


ATTACHMENT F

Average/Summaries for KSAPC Ratings


NOTE: Those KSAPCs that are shaded did not meet the court-supported criteria used by Biddle Consulting Group, Inc. for inclusion in a pre-employment selection process.

KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

1. The ability to read and comprehend information and ideas written in English. 9.00 5.00 MQ 5.00 4.00

2. The ability to take notes and compose effective written communication in English using a keyboard and/or by hand.

9.00 5.00 MQ 5.00 4.00

3. The ability to perform basic math such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division using a calculator.

8.69 4.53 MQ 5.00 4.00

4. The skill to choose the right mathematical methods or formulas to solve a problem.

8.38 4.24 MQ 4.60 3.60

5.

The ability to work closely with others and to be an effective member of a team in order to achieve goals; including an ability and willingness to help others, as needed.

8.69 4.00 MQ 4.40 3.60

6.

The ability to speak clearly and effectively when communicating with others so that others will understand, both in person and by telephone. Effectively communicate at the appropriate level (e.g., elderly, confused, intoxicated, lacking education)

9.00 4.59 MQ 5.00 4.00


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

7.

The ability to listen and understand the spoken word by being attentive and properly interpreting and/or responding to verbal communication, understanding the points being made, asking questions as appropriate, and not interrupting at inappropriate times. Stay focused and not be distracted. Ability to maintain control of the call.

9.00 4.53 MQ 5.00 4.00

8.

The ability to quickly and accurately solve problems and/or make decisions. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to apply general rules to specific problems to produce answers that make sense.

9.00 4.56 MQ 4.40 3.60

9. The ability to tell when something is wrong or is likely to go wrong, knowing what the appropriate next step is, and following through to resolution.

8.40 4.57 MQ 4.60 3.40

10. The ability to use logic and reasoning to identify the strengths and weaknesses of alternative solutions, conclusions or approaches to problems.

8.44 4.06 MQ 4.40 3.60

11.

The ability to learn and retain information to be used at a later time. Includes both long-term learning and the ability to recall bits of information, such as telephone numbers, names, addresses from memory for short periods of time.

8.71 3.94 MQ 4.20 3.40

12.

The ability and willingness to learn and use new techniques or procedures in a timely fashion. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to adapt to change without incurring overwhelming stress.

7.56 4.13 MQ 5.00 3.60


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

13. The ability to convey the value of options or programs. May require the ability to convince others to take or not take action.

7.94 3.88 HQ 3.40 3.00

14.

The ability to identify and prioritize things or actions in a certain order or pattern according to a specific rule, set of rules (e.g., patterns of numbers, letters, words, pictures, mathematical operations), or routine (moving from one computer screen to another).

8.79 4.38 MQ 4.00 3.40

15. The ability to file and/or retrieve information stored using alphabetical and/or numerical filing systems.

7.80 3.07 HQ 4.00 3.60

16.

The ability to combine pieces of information to form conclusions (includes finding a relationship among seemingly unrelated events). Follow up or pursue additional information when information provided is not sufficient or does not make sense.

8.12 3.94 MQ 4.40 3.60

17.

The ability to handle stressful situations while maintaining a high level of performance and professionalism (such as maintaining appropriate use of words). Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to appropriately use emotions; being stable and level-headed under stressful situations (not overreacting), help others regain their composure or defuse situation.

8.65 4.81 MQ 5.00 4.00

18. The ability to make fast, simple, repeated movements of the fingers, hands, and wrists.

8.81 4.00 HQ 4.00 3.40


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

19.

The ability to use a mouse and keyboard associated with a personal computer without having to concentrate or focus on those behaviors.

9.00 4.38 MQ 4.60 3.60

20.

The ability to simultaneously perform two or more job-related tasks (e.g., speak with client on telephone while entering information using a keyboard; work reports while speaking on the phone).

8.71 4.00 MQ 4.40 3.60

21.

The ability to filter out or minimize distractions that might potentially interfere with job performance. Includes the ability to focus on a single source of sound in the presence of other distracting sounds.

9.00 3.94 MQ 4.40 3.40

22.

The ability to be honest in work and in relationship to others, including being truthful, straightforward, and consistent. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to appropriately maintain the security and/or privacy of information.

9.00 4.80 MQ 5.00 4.00

23.

The ability to monitor/assess your own performance and manage one’s own time, to make improvements or take corrective action. Includes the ability to have self discipline to adjust work pace and/or take initiative when appropriate.

9.00 4.31 MQ 4.40 4.00

24. The ability to understand the implications of new information for both current and future problem-solving and decision-making.

8.25 4.31 MQ 4.40 3.40

25.

Skill at accurately recording information, such as entering data into a computer and/or by hand. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to focus on essential portions of conversation or communication and enter that information into a computer while engaged in that communication.

9.00 4.88 MQ 4.60 4.00


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

26.

Knowledge of principles and processes for providing customer services. This includes customer needs assessment, meeting quality standards for services, perform services in a tactful manner.

8.94 4.69 MQ 4.60 3.40 3.00

27.

Knowledge of the structure and content of the English language including the meaning and spelling of words, rules of composition, and grammar.

9.00 4.64 MQ 5.00 4.00 4.00

28.

Knowledge of administrative and clerical procedures and systems such as word processing, managing files and records, and other office procedures and terminology.

8.60 3.82 MQ 4.20 3.40 3.00

29. Knowledge of arithmetic and its applications. 8.53 3.94 MQ 5.00 4.00 4.00

30.

Knowledge of principles and methods for promoting services. This includes a well-rounded knowledge of company programs, products (e.g., natural gas), web site (resources tools on web site).

9.00 4.00 MQ 4.40 3.60 2.80

31.

The ability and willingness to take appropriate precautions in various settings to address safety standards. Includes the ability and willingness to help others to do the same.

8.35 4.80 MQ 5.00 4.00

32.

The ability to take responsibility for one’s own actions, as well as the consequences of inaction. Includes the ability to take appropriate action when necessary without external prompting and standing by decisions appropriately.

8.81 4.12 MQ 4.60 4.00


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

33.

The ability to behave in a way that is consistent with societal and legal guidelines in work-related situations and also avoids conflicts of interest. Being tactful with customers.

9.00 5.00 MQ 4.60 4.00

34.

The ability and willingness to appear to work on time and ready to work. Includes, but is not limited to, the ability to work diligently throughout entire day. The ability to use company time wisely.

9.00 5.00 MQ 5.00 4.00

35. The ability to encourage and/or direct others toward the achievement of goals.

7.47 3.60 MQ 4.00 2.80

36.

The ability to treat people fairly and with dignity and respect, including, but not limited to, those who may be different. Includes the ability to interact harmoniously with others, including those who may be different.

9.00 4.69 MQ 5.00 4.00

37. Ability to take and learn from constructive feedback in a positive way.

6.94 3.94 MQ 4.40 3.40

38. The ability to paraphrase information. 8.75 4.13 HQ 4.00 2.80

39. Ability to be respectful of the property of the company and of others. 8.75 4.29 MQ 5.00 4.00


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

40.

Ability to organize information and resources in a systematic way to maximize its use. Includes keeping a work area organized and easily accessible.

8.60 3.94 MQ 4.40 3.20

41 Ability to know where to get information. 8.88 4.24 MQ 4.40 3.20

42.

Ability to be aware of issues or actions that may affect others in a negative way. Includes being aware of your surroundings and acting appropriately.

8.63 4.13 MQ 5.00 4.00

43. Ability to project a positive image of the company and its employees at all times. 9.00 4.57 MQ 5.00 4.00

44. Ability to show initiative. 8.73 3.94 MQ 4.60 3.20

45. Ability to motivate others. 8.23 3.92 MQ 4.20 3.40

46. Ability to share knowledge with others. 8.62 3.79 MQ 4.20 3.20


KSAPC’s

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M vs.

HE

LPF

UL

QU

ALIF

ICA

TIO

N

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D F

OR

S

UC

CE

SS

(knowledge

only)

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D

UP

ON

EN

TR

Y

47. Knowledge of computer programs: CSS, WMIS, TTS, Vista Plus, One Step, OLTE, CAS, Walker, Mobile Services, Oracle.

9.00 4.88 HQ 4.40 3.60 2.40

48.

Knowledge of tariffs (i.e. codified rules and regulations of public utilities commission) (Note: different tariffs for different states) and statements of rates.

8.24 4.69 HQ 4.20 3.60 2.20

49. Ability to dress and groom, including personal hygiene, according to company policies. 9.00 3.69 MQ 4.00 4.00

50. Ability to use Internet, Infonet (internal internet), and Groupwise.

9.00 4.53 MQ 4.20 2.60

51. Knowledge of Company Jargon (vernacular). 9.00 4.13 HQ 4.20 3.40 2.20


ATTACHMENT G

Average/Summaries for Physical Abilities Ratings


FOR ALL JOB EXPERTS FOR SUPERVISORS ONLY

PHYSICAL ABILITIES DESCRIBE

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M v. H

ELP

FU

L Q

UA

LIFIC

AT

ION

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D U

PO

N E

NT

RY

1a. SEE/TYPICAL (e.g., see standard printed material and basic colors)

Looking at a computer screen, memos, emergency instructions, and reader boards (10-50 feet away), documents that customers bring into the office (leases or drivers licenses).

9.00 4.72 MQ 4.20 4.00

1b. SEE/MAXIMUM (e.g., see small objects in far distance, fine print, distinguish shades of color)

Looking at smaller print on training PowerPoint presentations.

6.47 3.29 MQ 4.00 3.40

2a. HEAR/TYPICAL (e.g., hear ordinary in-person and telephone conversation)

Telephone conversations with a headset. Compensate for bad phone connections. Filter out background noises. Understanding different dialects.

8.94 4.65 MQ 4.20 4.00

2b. HEAR/MAXIMUM (e.g., hear conversation above other noises, hear devices like alarms)

Hearing the internal paging system and fire alarms.

5.44 3.83 MQ 4.00 3.60

3a. SPEAK/TYPICAL (e.g., ordinary in-person and telephone conversation)

Clearly, concisely, slowly with minimal company jargon. Must use proper English no slang.

9.00 4.39 MQ 4.20 4.00




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M v. H

ELP

FU

L Q

UA

LIFIC

AT

ION

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D U

PO

N E

NT

RY

3b. SPEAK/MAXIMUM (e.g., converse above other noises; shout instructions)

Evaluated volume of voice for hearing impaired customers.

8.12 4.11 HQ 4.20 4.00

4a. SIT/TYPICAL HOW LONG?

7 1/2 – 8 hours a day.

9.00 4.59 MQ 4.60 4.00

4b. SIT/MAXIMUM HOW LONG?

Overtime as long as 10 hours a day.

6.82 3.65 MQ 4.20 3.20

5a. STAND/TYPICAL HOW LONG?

If performing the cashier job 3-4 hours a day.

5.00 2.33 HQ 3.20 2.60

5b. STAND/MAXIMUM HOW LONG

As a cashier could be as long as 8 hours.

3.40 2.94 HQ 3.40 2.80




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M v. H

ELP

FU

L Q

UA

LIFIC

AT

ION

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D U

PO

N E

NT

RY

6. WALK/TYPICAL

HOW FAR? Minimal walking required (To the fax machine/copy machine) HOW FAST? WHAT SURFACE? Carpet

7.12 2.33 HQ 2.40 1.80

7. PUSH (WITH HELP):

TYPICAL

PUSH WHAT? Boxes of files or correspondences. Office supplies. Chairs. WEIGHT? HOW FAR? WHAT HELP?

3.13 1.53 HQ 2.50 2.00

8. PUSH (WITHOUT HELP):

TYPICAL

PUSH WHAT? Boxes of files or correspondences. Office supplies. Chairs WEIGHT? 10-15 lbs HOW FAR? 10-20 ft.

3.11 1.71 HQ 2.40 1.25

9. LIFT AND CARRY (WITHOUT HELP): MAXIMUM

LIFT WHAT? Storage boxes WEIGHT? 5-20 lbs HOW FAR? 25-50 ft.

2.23 1.23 HQ 2.33 1.33




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M v. H

ELP

FU

L Q

UA

LIFIC

AT

ION

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D U

PO

N E

NT

RY

10. CLIMB: TYPICAL (e.g., stairs, ladders, scaffolding, hills)

WHAT – Climb stairs in parking garage. HOW FAR? 2 flights of stairs

2.31 1.14 HQ 1.60 1.60

11. REACH: TYPICAL

REACH WHAT? Arms length – for office supplies or desk items. HOW FAR/ HIGH/LOW?

8.44 3.00 HQ 3.20 2.60

12a.

WORK IN AWKWARD POSITIONS: TYPICAL (e.g., stoop, bend, twist, crawl, kneel, squat)

When performing the cashier position, twist to get from cash drawer to customer.

5.18 2.94 HQ 2.60 2.00

12b.

WORK IN AWKWARD POSITIONS: MAXIMUM (e.g., bend, twist, crawl, kneel, squat, stoop)

4.40 2.80 3.00 2.50




FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

IMP

OR

TA

NC

E

MIN

IMU

M v. H

ELP

FU

L Q

UA

LIFIC

AT

ION

BE

ST

WO

RK

ER

LEV

EL N

EE

DE

D U

PO

N E

NT

RY

13. USE HANDS AND FINGERS: TYPICAL

Use of typing on keyboard, dialing phone numbers, using calculators, writing (obtaining customer information, correspondence) and filing, coping and faxing.

9.00 5.00 MQ 4.60 4.00

Documents

Job Analysis Report Analysis Report ... Specializing in Equal Employment Opportunity, ... promotion, and assignments and transfers to 75 jobs. Over the