Executive Group Position Evaluation Plan - September 2005

Appendix B - Guide Charts

Government of Canada Executive Group

Guide Chart for Evaluating Know-How

Definition

Know-How is the sum total of Every kind of knowledge and skill, However Acquired, needed for Competent Job Performance.

Know How has three components, the requirements for:

Note: Each of the components is marked with a certain number of dots. The number of dots corresponds to a section on the Guide Chart for Evaluating Know-How.

• Practical, Technical, Specialized Know-How: Varied applied skills, including those relating to human relations, knowledge of the position's environment and clientele (e.g., the public, industry, special interest groups, other governments, etc.), practical procedures, specialized techniques and/or scientific/professional disciplines.
••Managerial and Operational Know-How: The Know-How and skill involved in guiding and integrating the resources associated with an organizational unit or function in order to produce the expected results. The knowledge and skills may be exercised executively ("acting as a manager") or consultatively ("thinking as a manager"). Involved is some combination of planning, organizing, integrating, coordinating, directing, motivating and developing human resources, controlling, evaluating, and checking. This Know-How may be required in providing service to the client/customer and/or advice to others, and becomes more critical as the conflicting demands and priorities of clients/customers increase.
••• Criticality of Human Relations: This is a measure of how relatively crucial, critical, and difficult are the various interpersonal relationships which positions must establish and maintain in order to achieve the objectives.

Measuring Practical, Technical, Specialized Know-How

This type of knowledge and skill may be characterized by breadth (variety), or depth (complexity), or both. Jobs may require some combination of: various skills; some knowledge about many things; a good deal of knowledge about a few things. Thus, to measure this kind of Know-How, the evaluator has to understand what skills are needed and how much knowledge is needed about how many things and how complex each of them is.

Function

A group of diverse activities which, because of common objectives, similar skill requirements, and strategic importance to an organization, are usually directed by a member of top management.

Subfunction

A major activity which is part of, and more homogeneous than, a function.

Element

A part of a subfunction; usually very specialized in nature and restricted in scope or impact.

			II. Operation of a unit with activities that are relatively similar in nature and objective, OR guidance of a sub-function(s) or several significant elements across several units.			III. Operation of a large unit with activities that are noticeably different in objectives and the nature of the end results, OR guidance of a function(s) which affects all of the organization.			IV. Operation of a major unit with activities which are significantly different and divergent with respect to objectives and end results, OR guidance of a strategic function(s) which significantly affects the organization's planning and operation.			V. Management of all units and functions of a large organization, OR total management of the major segment of a very large organization.
			••Managerial and Operational Know-How
•••Human Relations^{Table 1 - Footnote †}			1	2	3	1	2	3	1	2	3	1	2	3
Notes * Most commonly used when evaluating a work description Return to Table 1 - Footnote * referrer † Criticality of Human Relations: 1 1. Common courtesy must be employed, and an appropriate working relationship established and maintained with subordinates, colleagues and superiors in order to accomplish the position's objectives; 2 2. It is necessary to establish and maintain the kind of relationships in dealings with subordinates, colleagues and superiors, and in the course of some contact with clients inside AND/OR outside government, that will facilitate the acceptance and utilization of the position's conclusions, recommendations and advice; and 3 3. Successful achievement of the position's programme AND/OR service AND/OR advisory objectives HINGES on the establishment and maintenance of appropriate interpersonal relationships in dealings with subordinates, colleagues, and superiors, and in ensuring the provision of service through substantive contact with clients inside AND/OR outside government. Return to Table 1 - Footnote † referrer
•Practical, Technical, Specialized Know-How	E. A sound understanding of and skill in several activities which involve a variety of practices and precedents with respect to the organization's processes, operation and clientele, OR a grasp of a scientific or similar discipline's theory and principles, OR both.	Low	200	230	264	264	304	350	350	400	460	460	528	608
		Medium	230	264	304	304	350	400	400	460	528	528	608	700
		High	264	304	350	350	400	460	460	528	608	608	700	800
	F. Extensive knowledge and skill gained through a wide and/or deep exposure to the involved and/or diverse practices, processes, and issues relating to the organization and its clients, OR command of complex scientific theory, principles, and practices, OR both.	Low	264^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	304^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	350^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	350^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460	528	608	608	700	800
		Medium	304^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	350^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528	608	700	700	800	920
		High	350^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608	700	800	800	920	1056
	G. Mastery of theories, principles, and techniques, or the cumulative equivalent command, of the interrelationships, variables, and competing demands of the organization and its clients, and related programmes and other issues necessary to advise AND/OR implement programmes at the executive management or executive policy levels of the organization.	Low	350^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	700^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	800^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	800	920	1056
		Medium	400^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	700^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	700^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	800^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	920^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	920	1056	1216
		High	460^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	528^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	608^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	700^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	800^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	800^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	920^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	1056^{Table 1 - Footnote *}	1056	1216	1400
	H. Externally recognized mastery and expertise in a complex scientific field or other learned discipline.	Low	460	528	608	608	700	800	800	920	1056	1056	1216	1400
		Medium	528	608	700	700	800	920	920	1056	1216	1216	1400	1600
		High	608	700	800	800	920	1056	1056	1216	1400	1400	1600	1840

Guide Chart for Evaluating Know-How (PDF Document – 119 KB)

Guide Chart for Evaluating Problem Solving / Thinking

Definition:

Problem Solving/Thinking is the original, self starting thinking required by the job to: (1) identify, (2) define, and (3) resolve a problem. "You think with what you know" - this is true of even the most creative work. The raw material of any thinking is knowledge of facts, principles and means. Ideas are put together from something already there. Therefore, Thinking is treated as a percentage utilization of Know How.

There are two components :

Note: Each of the two components is marked with a certain number of dots. The number of dots corresponds to a section on the Guide Chart for Evaluating Problem Solving / Thinking.

• The Thinking Environment:: The extent to which assistance or guidance is available from others or from past practice or precedents and the degree to which the position is required to identify situations where direction or precedents are not applicable. How well/poorly defined is the problem, issue, etc.?
• • The Thinking Challenge:: The novelty and complexity of the thinking to be done and the time pressures within which the thinking must be done.

Measuring Problem Soving / Thinking:

Problem Solving/Thinking measures the intensity of the mental process which employs Know How in analyzing, evaluating, creating, reasoning, arriving at and making conclusions. To the extent that Problem Solving/Thinking is circumscribed by standards, covered by precedents, or referred to others, the scope of the Problem Solving/Thinking is diminished, and the emphasis correspondingly is on Know How.

N.B.

The evaluation of PROBLEM SOLVING/THINKING should be made without reference to the job's freedom to make decisions or take action; the scope and nature of the job's decisions are measured on the ACCOUNTABILITY/DECISION MAKING Chart.

			3. Differing situations requiring search for solutions within the area of known things. Appropriate action selected based on experience. Some use of judgement required.	4. Variable situations requiring analytical, interpretative, evaluative, and/or constructive thinking, often on short notice.	5. Novel or non recurring, path finding situations in complex administrative or research situations requiring the development of new concepts and imaginative approaches, usually under some pressure.
			••Thinking Challenge
•Thinking Environment	D. Thinking within clear but substantially diversified procedures; precedents covering many situations, and/or access to assistance.	Low	29%	38%	50%
		High	33%	43%	57%
	E. Thinking within a well defined frame of reference and towards specific objectives, in situations characterized by specific policies, practices, and precedents.	Low	33%	43%	57%
		High	38%	50%	66%
	F. Thinking within a general frame of reference toward objectives, in situations with some nebulous, intangible, or unstructured aspects.	Low	38%	50%	66%
		High	43%	57%	76%
	G. Thinking within concepts, principles, and broad guidelines toward the organization's objectives or goals; many nebulous, intangible, or unstructured aspects to the environment.	Low	43%	57%	76%
		High	50%	66%	87%
	H. Thinking within organization philosophy and/or natural laws and/or principles governing human affairs.	Low	50%	66%	87%
		High	57%	76%	87%

Guide Chart for Evaluating Problem Solving / Thinking (PDF Document – 113 KB)

Guide Chart for Evaluating Accountability/Decision Making

General

Accountability/Decision Making is the measurement of the degree to which a job is responsible for achieving results and the importance of those results to the organization.

There are three components in the following order of importance:

• Freedom to Act: The degree to which a job, through delegation or empowerment, acts independently to achieve end results before seeking advice or direction as defined in the left‑hand column of the next page.
•• Impact: As defined.
••• Magnitude: The size, relative to the whole Public Service, of the unit or function most clearly affected by the decisions AND/OR recommendations of the job. The process for determining Magnitude is described in Measuring Accountability / Decision Making.

N.B.

Magnitude and Impact must fit together; neither can be final or meaningful without being related to the other.

Impact

The degree to which the job affects or brings about the results expected of the unit or function being considered.

Indirect (I)

Supportive and ancillary services, where activities are noticeably removed from final decisions and assistance is modified or merged with other support before the end result stage.

Contributory (C)

Interpretative, advisory or facilitating services, for use by others in taking action, which are influential and closely related to action or decisions by others OR measurable contribution, as a member of a team, in achieving end results.

Shared (S)

Equal, joint, and significant control, with (usually only one) another position(s) (except own subordinates and superior), over the activities and resources which produce the results, OR control of what are clearly many (but not all) of the significant variables in determining results.

Primary (P)

Controlling Impact—The position has effective control over the significant activities and resources which produce the results, and is the sole position (at its level of Freedom to Act) which must answer for the results.

•••Magnitude (Constant Dollars)			1. Very Small (under $100K)				2. Small ($100K to $1 Million)				3. Medium ($1 to $10 Million)				4. Medium–Large ($10 to $100 Million)				5. Large ($100 Million to $1 Billion)				6. Very Large ($1 to $10 Billion)				7. Largest (over $10 Billion)
••Impact			I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}	I^{Table 3 - Footnote *}	C^{Table 3 - Footnote **}	S^{Table 3 - Footnote †}	P^{Table 3 - Footnote ††}
Legend Footnote I INDIRECT (I) Supportive and ancillary services, where activities are noticeably removed from final decisions and assistance is modified or merged with other support before the end result stage. Return to Table 3 - Footnote * referrer Footnote C CONTRIBUTORY (C) Interpretative, advisory or facilitating services, for use by others in taking action, which are influential and closely related to action or decisions by others OR measurable contribution, as a member of a team, in achieving end results. Return to Table 3 - Footnote referrer Footnote S SHARED (S) Equal, joint, and significant control, with (usually only one) another position(s) (except own subordinates and superior), over the activities and resources which produce the results, OR control of what are clearly many (but not all) of the significant variables in determining results. Return to Table 3 - Footnote † referrer Footnote P PRIMARY (P)** Controlling Impact — The position has effective control over the significant activities and resources which produce the results, and is the sole position (at its level of Freedom to Act) which must answer for the results. Return to Table 3 - Footnote †† referrer
•Freedom to Act	D. These jobs are subject, wholly or in part, to practices and procedures covered by precedents or well-defined policies; supervisory review, usually after the fact.	Low	38	50	66	87	50	66	87	115	66	87	115	152	87	115	152	200	115	152	200	264	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460
		Medium	43	57	76	100	57	76	100	132	76	100	132	175	100	132	175	230	132	175	230	304	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528
		High	50	66	87	115	66	87	115	152	87	115	152	200	115	152	200	264	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460	264	350	460	608
	E. These jobs, by their nature or size, are subject to broad practices and procedures covered by functional precedents and policies; achievement of a circumscribed operational activity; direction from well-defined objectives.	Low	57	76	100	132	76	100	132	175	100	132	175	230	132	175	230	304	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528	304	400	528	700
		Medium	66	87	115	152	87	115	152	200	115	152	200	264	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460	264	350	460	608	350	460	608	800
		High	76	100	132	175	100	132	175	230	132	175	230	304	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528	304	400	528	700	400	528	700	920
	F. These jobs, by their nature or size, are broadly subject to functional policies and goals; managerial direction of a general nature.	Low	87	115	152	200	115	152	200	264	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460	264	350	460	608	350	460	608	800	460	608	800	1056
		Medium	100	132	175	230	132	175	230	304	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528	304	400	528	700	400	528	700	920	528	700	920	1216
		High	115	152	200	264	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460	264	350	460	608	350	460	608	800	460	608	800	1056	608	800	1056	1400
	G. These jobs, by reason of their size, independent complexity and high degree of effect on department results, are subject only to general guidance from top-most management.	Low	132	175	230	304	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528	304	400	528	700	400	528	700	920	528	700	920	1216	700	920	1216	1600
		Medium	152	200	264	350	200	264	350	460	264	350	460	608	350	460	608	800	460	608	800	1056	608	800	1056	1400	800	1056	1400	1840
		High	175	230	304	400	230	304	400	528	304	400	528	700	400	528	700	920	528	700	920	1216	700	920	1216	1600	920	1216	1600	2112

Guide Chart for Evaluating Accountability/Decision Making (PDF Document – 119 KB)

Date modified:: 2016-05-11

Language selection

Search and menus

Search

Executive Group Position Evaluation Plan - September 2005

Appendix B - Guide Charts

Government of Canada Executive Group

Guide Chart for Evaluating Know-How

Guide Chart for Evaluating Problem Solving / Thinking

Guide Chart for Evaluating Accountability/Decision Making

We are currently moving our web services and information to Canada.ca.

Executive Group Position Evaluation Plan - September 2005

Appendix B - Guide Charts

Government of Canada Executive Group