- Sensory Effort
- Physical Effort
- Psychological Work Environment
- Physical Work Environment
Notes to raters
The notes to raters describe how the job evaluation plan works, guide interpretation, and facilitate accurate, fair, and consistent application across the core public administration.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks are provided as reference tools to exemplify the various levels of work found in the IT Occupational Group. Each benchmark consists of a list of key activities and information specific to the elements used in this job evaluation plan. These benchmarks are an integral part of the job evaluation standard and provide examples of work at the various element degrees.
Use of the job evaluation standard
This IT job evaluation plan must be used in conjunction with the notes to raters and the benchmarks. There are five steps in the application of this job evaluation standard:
- The subject position job description is studied, including all supporting organizational information, to ensure full understanding of the work as a whole including work context. The relationship of the subject position to other positions within the organization is important.
- Allocation of the position to the occupational group is decided by referring to the occupational group definition and description of inclusions and exclusions.
- Tentative degrees for each element are determined by comparing the subject position with the degree descriptors in the rating scales and referring to the notes to raters. The job description is compared with the benchmarks illustrating the degree tentatively selected, and comparisons are also made with the benchmarks for the degrees above and below the degree tentatively selected, as a check on the validity of the selection.
- The point values for all elements are added to determine the total point rating and resulting level.
- The position being rated is compared, as a whole, to a benchmark with a similar rating pattern and comparable total points as a check on the validity of the level selected.
Overview of the job evaluation standard
The IT Job Evaluation Standard is designed around five levels of work, reflecting business, organization design, work design and workforce management realities as described by key business and functional leaders charged with the design and management of IT organizations and work. While there are a variety of distinct technology disciplines and areas of expertise within the IT Occupational Group, the broad workforce structure looks as follows:
Point rating plan
This IT Job Evaluation Standard is a point rating plan, meaning an analytical, quantitative method of determining the relative value of jobs. The relative value of each element measured in the job evaluation plan is mathematically expressed as a percentage weight relative to all other elements in the plan – the sum of the weights of all elements therefore equals 100%. The total value for each job classified under the plan is determined by the sum of the point values assigned by the evaluators.
IT Group weighting model
The table below shows the distribution of weight allocated to each element.
Element point-rating scales
The table below shows the distribution of points allocated within each element.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6a | 6b | 7a | 7b | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degree | Critical Thinking and Analysis | Maximum Point Value | Technical Knowledge | Management Knowledge | Communication and Interaction | Sensory Effort | Physical Effort | Psychological Work Environment | Physical Work Environment |
| 1 | 30 | 14 | 40 | 12 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 70 | 30 | 80 | 42 | 30 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 3 | 145 | 60 | 165 | 82 | 50 | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| 4 | 245 | 110 | 265 | 120 | 95 | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| 5 | 300 | 140 | 300 | n/a | 120 | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| % Total | 30.0% | 14.0% | 30.0% | 12.0% | 12.0% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% |
Point ranges
The objective of using point ranges in the job evaluation standard is to group the most meaningful clusters of total point values together to reflect similar overall job value. These clusters are reflected as point ranges and become the classification levels in the job evaluation plan. Jobs with total point values within a given point range are deemed to be of equivalent value and will have the same classification level.
The following table shows the five classification levels in the IT job evaluation plan and the associated minimum and maximum points in the range for each level.
| Level | Minimum Point Range | Maximum Point Range |
|---|---|---|
| IT-01 | 112 | 200 |
| IT-02 | 201 | 350 |
| IT-03 | 351 | 600 |
| IT-04 | 601 | 850 |
| IT-05 | 851 | 1,000 |
Glossary of terms
The glossary of terms contains various terms, definitions and abbreviations used in the standard. The selection aims to assist evaluators in using this standard.
Functional management: the management of financial, human and materiel resources in accordance with the relevant policies, directives, and legislation. Information system: an information system is generally composed of data, computing platforms, communications networks, business applications, people, and processes organized for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information. LAN/MAN/WAN: Local area network/metropolitan area network/wide area network. These are groups of computers and network devices connected together within a particular area. Operational management: the management of IT operations to accomplish the organization’s mandate. Organizational nomenclature: the terms for the various levels of organizational structure used in this standard to provide a reference for comparison with the wide variety of terms for similar structures used in departments and agencies. Figure 2 depicts the organizational nomenclature. Please note that the figure is illustrative not prescriptive. Project: For the purposes of this standard, a project is an activity or series of activities that has a beginning and an end. A project is required to produce defined outputs and realize specific outcomes in support of an information technology objective, within a clear schedule and resource plan. A project is undertaken within specific time, cost and performance parameters and delivered in accordance with the relevant policies, directives, and legislation. Project Management: The systematic planning, organizing and control of allocated resources to accomplish identified project objectives and outcomes. Project management is normally reserved for focused, non-repetitive, time-limited activities with some degree of risk, and for activities beyond the usual scope of program (operational) activities. System Development Lifecycle:
The successive stages through which information systems are brought into service. The lifecycle includes the phases: 1) stakeholder engagement, 2) concept, 3) planning, 4) requirements analysis, 5) high-level design, 6) detailed design, 7) development, 8) integration and testing and 9) installation.
Team: A team is made up of individual contributors with a formal reporting relationship to a team lead (IT-03). The team may be augmented by temporary resources. Unit: A unit is made up of multiple subordinate teams with formal reporting relationships to a manager (IT-04). The unit may be augmented by temporary resources. Organization: An organization is made up of multiple subordinate units with formal reporting relationships to a director (IT-05) or an executive position.
General notes to raters
General remarks on rating the elements
This section provides general and specific notes to raters for each of the seven elements in the IT job evaluation plan. Each element leads with guidelines for understanding and applying the element, then finally the rating table with degree descriptors, associated points, and benchmark references.
All elements in this job evaluation plan are structured as cumulative progressions. A rating at a higher degree subsumes the degree descriptions of all lower degrees. The full degree description must apply to the subject position, not just a selection of specific phrases or words. In addition, note that degree guidelines refer to the work within the IT Group only and when an aspect of work is described as being of “relatively low complexity”, it means that it is relative to other work in this group, and not that the work is of low complexity in absolute terms. Similarly, the highest degree of leadership and planning is relative within the IT Group and not the highest degree in absolute terms.
When using all components of this job evaluation tool (for example, degree descriptors, benchmarks, and notes to raters), as well as when reviewing and understanding job descriptions, the context surrounding the subject position is critical. Words, phrases, and work examples should never be interpreted in isolation of their overall context.
In selecting the most appropriate degree, the following key principles must be applied:
- Do not consider an individual incumbent’s performance or achievements in the job evaluation process. In other words, evaluate the work required of the subject position and not an incumbent’s ability to perform the work.
- Consider only typical, ongoing job responsibilities of the assigned work. Do not consider exceptional, one-time circumstances or developmental opportunities beyond the substantive job.
- Select the statement that best describes the highest level of responsibility at which the job is typically expected to work and that best represents a significant part of the ongoing responsibilities of the job.
- Evaluate regional jobs in the same manner as headquarters jobs.
- Designate a degree for each element (that is, no element can receive zero points).
Progression of work in the IT Group
This job evaluation standard is designed to reflect the multi-pronged career path that exists within the IT Group. As described in the accompanying graphic, work progresses along an individual contributor path until level 3, at which point the path diverges to include project management and functional management work streams. Individual contributor and project management paths then continue to progress to level 4, while the functional management path continues to level 5.
Legend:
- IC = Individual Contributor
- PM = Project Manager
- PL = Project Leader
- D = Director
- M = Manager
- TL = Team Leader
Given that this is a highly technical group, it is critical that evaluators recognize that IT functional management and project management jobs are technical management roles and require a balance of the technical and management aspects of work throughout the application of the IT job evaluation tool.
In addition, despite a wide variety of diverse work streams related to specific technology areas and functions within the IT Group, the design of this job evaluation plan reflects a business direction to value all technology areas equally.
Context and relativity
It is critical for evaluators to understand the full context of a given job both as part of the organizational structure within which it sits, as well as within the context of the IT Group across government.
Understanding this broader core public administration context is of particular relevance to smaller departments or agencies housing small IT organizations, since they must consider their IT positions relative to the broader spectrum of IT work across government. To illustrate, consider an IT management job situation:
- In a micro or very small department or agency housing a smaller IT organization, the IT manager is likely considered the top IT job in that department or agency. This job may sit at the executive table and provide advice on a host of IT matters pertaining to the organization’s business. The implications may be that, in the context of its home organization, this job may be described with ‘top’ management, planning, and knowledge type language in the job description, which could possibly lead to over-classification against the IT classification standard.
- The context challenge to understand is that there are even higher levels of IT work that exist in other, larger IT organizations. The scope, breadth and complexity of IT work performed, particularly of management jobs that come with larger, more complex businesses will surpass the complexity and scope that resides in a smaller IT organization. This must be understood and considered in evaluating work consistently across the whole of government.
This same principle must also be applied to a subject matter expert position as it is relative to the whole IT Group across the core public administration.
Order of element evaluation
This job evaluation standard determines the relative value of the ensemble of IT work in a given position by bringing together the important and interrelated aspects of work for assessment. It evaluates the assigned work responsibilities and the related knowledge and skill required to carry them out. In other words:
- A job requires specific knowledge and skills in order to execute assigned responsibilities. The assigned responsibilities, therefore, are the lens through which we understand how knowledge and skills are applied and the relative levels of knowledge and skill required.
The sequence order of the job elements in the IT job evaluation plan have therefore been set out to reflect this natural principle as follows:
- Element 1 Critical Thinking and Analysis This element sets out the foundation of IT work by describing the central purpose of IT work, be it in an individual contributor, project leadership or functional management role. The focus is on problem solving and analytical skills underpinned by the increasing levels of complexity of work from entry through to senior level jobs.
- Element 2 Leadership and Planning The Leadership and Planning element builds on the foundation of Critical Thinking and Analysis by addressing the fact that the delivery of IT work requires additional functional and project management structures and responsibilities. This element measures the responsibility to plan and lead work and people.
- Element 3 Technical Knowledge and Element 4 Management Knowledge In rating the Knowledge elements, the key question is “what level of knowledge and nature of knowledge is required to execute the assigned work responsibilities?” By rating the Critical Thinking and Analysis and Leadership and Planning elements first, this combined understanding assists evaluators in assigning the appropriate rating to technical and management knowledge elements.
- Element 5 Communication and Interaction The Communication and Interaction element then rounds out this cumulative understanding of IT work by considering the communications skills required to execute the work described in Critical Thinking and Analysis, and Leadership and Planning, as well as the purpose and contextual complexity of the interactions.
- Element 6 Sensory and Physical Effort and Element 7 Psychological and Physical Work Environment Finally, evaluators should examine the sensory and physical effort required to perform the work, and the psychological and physical working conditions within which the work is conducted.
Each of the key skill and responsibility elements are naturally correlated in their measurement of IT work. This means that when a job requires a certain level of responsibility, it will require a commensurate level of knowledge and skill. Therefore, with the design of IT work and its corresponding IT job evaluation plan, one would expect consistency in rating patterns across key elements. For example, a subject matter expert role would score higher on technical elements and lower on functional management elements than its project/management counterparts at the same level.
In this context, after evaluating work on an element-by-element basis, evaluators should review the ratings and the degree descriptors to ensure that there is cohesion in the overall evaluation. Any unexpected ratings should be validated against the job description, organizational structure, surrounding positions, and supporting information from the responsible manager.
Element 1: Critical thinking and analysis
General guidelines
This element measures the increasing levels of critical thinking and analytical skill that stem from the complexity of typical issues encountered in the work, the nature of the analysis required, and the judgment that must be applied in working through the analysis.
Critical thinking and analysis increase in direct proportion with the complexity and impact of issues encountered in the assigned work. This element rests on the critical continuum of complexity that differentiates IT work from junior to senior levels regardless of aspect or element of work being measured. In other words, this complexity continuum underpins many of the elements in this job evaluation standard as it is a key differentiator that naturally occurs in the design of the jobs.
Complexity should be considered as a number of integrated pieces that are weighed and balanced differently for each issue that arises in the work. Examples of these integrated pieces include:
- the scope and variety of technical areas,
- operational, client management, client technology issues and their variety, scope, risk, reach of impact and degree of inter-relatedness, and
- the number and nature of stakeholders involved.
The degree descriptors for this element depict typical blends of these contributing factors found in the various levels of IT work.
When evaluating the level of critical thinking and analysis, also consider the level of guidance available in dealing with issues and problem solving. Normally, the less guidance available means that more judgment is required. Similarly, the more guidance available, the less complex the problem will be lowering the required level of critical thinking. Guidance can take several forms including policies, frameworks, instructions, precedents, management direction and advice, et cetera.
Specific guidelines
Degree descriptors comprise three components to reflect the three dimensions that grow together. The first part of the degree descriptor describes the nature and complexity of typical problems or issues encountered in the work. The second part describes the corresponding nature of analysis required and its practical application to problem solving and analysis. The third statement describes the nature of guidance available.
Note that problems and issues can take many forms including technical challenges, management issues, client concerns, et cetera. The job evaluation plan does not differentiate the content of the problems and issues. Instead, it focuses on the overall complexity regardless of the type of issue encountered.
At degree 1, problems are routine and well defined. They would be considered common issues with an established set of instructions or standardized processes and procedures to follow in resolving them.
When atypical problems are referred to higher levels, this includes occasions where the standard approach does not result in a fix to the problem, requiring a higher-level, more experienced analyst to delve deeper for a different root cause and solution.
At degree 2, the problems are fulsome in nature. This means that they include more components and factors to consider, making the thinking challenge greater in coming up with a solution. Work at this degree needs to research problems further and examine a variety of information sources at a deeper level in order to understand what is truly going on. While the problems and solutions are less straightforward at this degree, the paths, or processes to conduct the investigation and analysis remain known.
This is an autonomous level where the requirements of the position are to work through issues independently and guidance is in the form of support from colleagues and management when required or sought.
At degree 3, issues are described as complex in that they increase in variety and challenge, and are more comprehensive, encompassing a greater number and/or depth of factors. At this degree, problems are broader in scope and issues involve more people, more opinions, more areas of technology, and the consideration of broader operational variables. Because of this added complexity, solutions and analytical approaches are ill-defined and require the development of a ‘thinking strategy’ first, in order to work through the various issues versus getting directly to solution options. In other words, problems must be broken down into components and thought through separately, yet in an integrated way. Correspondingly, the analysis needs to take into account any broader trends, as well as the resulting implications beyond the immediate problem that may affect other people, operational and/or technical aspects.
In terms of scope, issues and problems at this level are confined to the work team and smaller scale projects. Guidance at this degree is available from frameworks, directives, policies, and processes, reflective of the greater ambiguity in analytical approach and possible solution paths.
At degree 4, issues are highly complex. They are larger in scope, risk, and impact, and they are multi-dimensional in that the problem and its components have many facets that need to be examined in a number and variety of ways. Issues at this level involve many stakeholders and perspectives, often with competing priorities. Issues also have a longer line of sight with broader and longer-term implications on the direction of IT programs and policies, resulting in the requirement to think broadly to areas of risk and impact that would not typically be obvious.
Complexity of analysis is increased by the requirement to consider how to balance technical solution options that may not be in harmony with business or policy directions or objectives, or desires of a client business owner, necessitating a broader approach to analyze risks and impacts in determining solution options that consider all perspectives. Technical advice and recommendations at this degree are authoritative.
At degree 5, the issues are of the highest complexity (within the IT Group) involving the convergence of technology, business, policy, program, and resource strategy challenges and constraints in order to deliver the work. The breadth and impact of the issues and analysis at this degree are at the level of overall program direction and technology priorities. There is also a horizontal perspective in critical thinking and analysis that reaches across business and technology programs and policy interests with impacts on overall program strategy and direction.
The guidance becomes much less at this degree. There may be some broad guiding principles. However, principles; however, precedent is elusive, and frameworks need to be developed and adapted to address these highly complex matters.
Critical thinking and analysis rating scale
This element measures the requirement for critical thinking and analysis in IT work. It measures the increasing level of critical thinking and analysis that stems from the nature and complexity of typical problems and issues encountered in the work; the nature of analysis and judgment that must be applied; and the degree of guidance available.
Problems and issues are typically well-defined, straightforward in nature, with known solution options. Critical thinking involves assessing fact-based information and following standardized diagnostics, processes and procedures with atypical problems being referred to more senior levels.
Analysis is guided by standardized instructions and operational procedures with supervisory oversight.
Problems and issues are fulsome in nature involving a variety of components and factors to consider however, analytical paths and approaches are known. Critical thinking and analysis involve researching and analyzing problem components and assumptions to identify connections and to uncover and address underlying issues and gaps in information.
Problem solving is independent at this level with advice and direction available from more senior colleagues and management.
Problems and issues are complex in nature characterized by a variety of more comprehensive, challenging technical, people and operational variables, often with ill-defined solution options. Critical thinking and analysis involve breaking down problems into component parts; identifying patterns, trends, and conflicts, and anticipating emerging issues and implications to generate alternative solution options and recommendations.
Problem solving and critical thinking are generally within the context of the work unit or project area's objectives and plans and are guided by associated established frameworks, directives, policies, and processes.
Problems and issues are highly complex and multi-dimensional, involving multiple perspectives, often-competing priorities, and significant technical and business risk. Critical thinking and analysis involve assessing and balancing technical, business and policy objectives, and determining risk and impacts to provide authoritative advice and recommendations that impact the direction of IT policies, programs or services.
Problem solving and critical thinking are generally within the context of the organization or a large, broad project and are guided by associated established frameworks, directives, policies, and processes.
Problems and issues are of the highest complexity, involving multiple and highly interconnected technology, business, policy, program, and resource strategy challenges and constraints. Critical thinking and analysis are highly horizontal and strategic in nature involving the alignment of IT program strategy with departmental business objectives, priorities and resource realities while balancing technology investments and risk management strategies.
Problem solving and critical thinking are generally guided by broader business, policy and technology direction governing the directorate, department, and whole of government.
Element 2: Leadership and planning
General guidelines
This element measures the responsibility for planning, leading and being accountable for resources and the achievement of results. It captures the planning of independent work of a single position through to the formal delegated responsibility for managing people, financial resources and results in formal organizational structures as well as the leadership challenges of bringing people, resources and expertise together in a project team format to achieve results where there is not a formal reporting relationship. Responsibilities include planning work, planning, and managing resources, assigning work, ensuring quality of deliverables, providing feedback and follow-up to ensure that performance standards are met, and results are achieved.
While management jobs at multiple levels comprise a number of the same accountabilities, (for example, planning and managing people and financial resources in the delivery of work, reporting, performance et cetera), the relative complexity, scope and size of operations, units or teams being managed result in very different levels of management challenge within the work. For example, an increase in scope, nature and complexity (as evidenced by a variety of technology and business interests, risks and impact, number and nature of resources and constraints, presence of subordinate management structures, et cetera) leads to an increase in complexity of management accountability and challenge in the work as it progresses.
NOTE: Evaluators must consider the leadership and planning requirements of the job in the context of all IT jobs across government not simply within the context of their own departments and their own work.
Specific guidelines
Evaluators should take note of the naming convention in this job evaluation standard regarding organizational units (see “organizational nomenclature” in glossary). Because organizations differ from department to department in their structures, variability in organizational design and nomenclature for organizational structures and business lines, generic language is used to denote organizational scope.
Degree descriptors are structured such that the first portion describes the nature and complexity of leadership and planning responsibility. The last portion describes the scope through samples of the types of leadership and planning activities that typify work at each degree. This is intended to provide evaluators with a practical indication of the activities involved at each degree. These portions of the degree descriptors are not intended to be an exhaustive representation of leadership and planning activities and should be considered as representative examples only. The organizational scope delineator must always be considered carefully since a number of leadership and planning activities may be similar from degree to degree and scope determines the complexity.
At degree 1, the leadership and planning role is limited. While there is a requirement to coordinate with clients, colleagues, and management in the delivery of work, the nature of work is relatively junior and of limited scope and complexity. Because of this limited complexity, the need to plan, manage and work with and through others is correspondingly limited.
At degree 2, work is at the fully autonomous independent contributor level, and the requirement to participate in and contribute subject matter expertise to project initiatives is typical. As such, the work
requires more planning to balance various commitments and deliverables. Leadership and planning at this degree may extend to assigning tasks to more junior staff, though supervisory requirements are not as fulsome as at degree 3.
At degree 3, work is at the first formal level of both leadership and planning, where roles are either Team Lead or Project Lead. The planning and leadership challenges therefore include associated operational and functional (human, materiel and financial) management responsibilities. Scope at this degree is within a work team or project team setting.
At degree 4, work is the first formal level of management. Leadership and planning responsibility moves to the level of a unit (that is, multiple teams reporting to a manager position). Because of this significant increase in organizational scope and complexity, the level of planning and leadership responsibility also increases. Note that degree 4 has a double-barreled statement to describe the structure and scope surrounding functional management and project leadership roles. While the roles and level of planning and management responsibility are equivalent, the components that create complexity are different in each case. In cases where both descriptions apply to a single position, a rating of degree 4 shall be given.
At degree 5, responsibility for planning and leadership is at the level of a large and comprehensive IT organization comprised of multiple layers of subordinate management organizations, and multiple technology areas and business lines. The multiple technology areas and business lines can refer to a variety of work streams within an IT organization or it can refer to a variety of specialized areas within a single stream of work in a large IT organization in a very large department. Leadership and planning are operational and strategic in nature, whereby the jobs must integrate a technical focus with horizontal and future-oriented outlooks to be effective.
Leadership and planning rating scale
This element measures the responsibility for planning, leading and being accountable for resources and the achievement of results.
Limited planning and leadership required in the job. Responsible for prioritizing and completing assigned work activities according to plan, participating as a team member and working collaboratively within a broader team environment.
Responsible for the independent planning and delivery of an assigned workload within assigned area of work and expertise. Responsibilities include coordinating with colleagues, clients, contract resources and management in the delivery of the work, contributing expertise as a technical subject-matter resource on broader project teams as required. May supervise tasks and activities of more junior staff.
Responsible for the planning and management of people and resources assigned to a work team, section, or project team. Responsibilities include assigning work to team members, contractors, and support staff, ensuring quality, timeliness and consistency of work and results, monitoring and feedback, and independent management of relationships and issues with clients, vendors, and contract resources.
Responsible for the planning and management of people, resources and operations assigned to an IT organization comprised of multiple subordinate projects and/or multiple work teams or sections, team leaders, project leaders, technical advisors, contract resources and staff.
Responsibilities are focused on setting the priorities for the assigned organization, planning operational work, establishing and managing HR and financial plans to meet operational requirements, aligning team members to work assignments, ensuring quality of deliverables, evaluating performance, providing coaching and guidance, managing operational results and contributing to and implementing IT business plans.
OR
Responsible for planning and leading highly complex, multi-dimensional IT project teams typically comprised of a variety of diverse specialized technical staff and contractors, and multiple integrated streams of activity and sub-projects.
Responsibilities include conceiving and planning the overall approach to conducting the project and its component sub-projects, determining and negotiating resource requirements, establishing and managing the project team, its components, and sub-project team leads, assigning work, establishing and monitoring objectives and results, coordinating requirements and schedules of multiple business owner stakeholders and resources; integrating all component inputs into the comprehensive deliverable, and providing ongoing guidance, advice and feedback to team members.
Responsible for broad operational and strategic leadership and planning of all operations and resources of a large and comprehensive IT organization comprised of multiple layers of subordinate management organizations, and multiple technology areas and business lines. Responsibility at this level involves balancing a variety of highly complex business, technology and governance challenges and risk management considerations.
Responsibilities include setting the vision, business direction and priorities of the group, managing key client business relationships, reviewing and integrating work plans and priorities of subordinate units and project teams, including human and financial resource plans into broader cohesive strategy and plan, as well as contributing to and implementing higher level business plans.
Element 3: Technical knowledge
General guidelines
This element measures the level of IT subject matter knowledge, including its various disciplines, components, theories, and principles, as well as its practice and practical application in the business environment. This element also measures knowledge of the technology context relevant to the position, including stakeholders’ technology contexts such as technology platforms, technical environments, and IT requirements.
In seeking to evaluate the degree of knowledge required in IT jobs one must look toward the practical application of the knowledge in the work as the key indicator to guide the rating. In other words, ‘abc’ technical knowledge is required in order to execute ‘xyz’ responsibilities of the work.
It is important to note that in this element, all disciplines of IT are valued equally. The focus is on the overall level of technical knowledge required to perform the work, regardless of the discipline.
Consider only the knowledge required for the job within the assigned area of work, and not the knowledge that the incumbent may possess.
Specific guidelines
At degree 1 of technical knowledge, work is at a junior or developing level and requires practical technical job content knowledge specific to the assigned work. In addition, the position is within a technical operational context; therefore, the work requires a general understanding of what technology platforms and products are used within the position and the technological environment in which the position is required to operate.
At degree 2, the technical content knowledge grows in depth and breadth to perform the work autonomously. At this degree, the technical knowledge requirement enables work on the full spectrum of typical issues and activities that would be encountered at the working level. Atypical or very complex concepts are referred to more senior levels of technical expertise. The contextual technical knowledge also grows to include a fulsome understanding of the clients’ technology environment.
At degree 3, the work is typically at an experienced working level and technical content knowledge increases in depth to deal with more complex technical issues. Advanced technical content knowledge is required to oversee and review the work of others, be a reference source for more junior IT staff, handle the technical problems that are escalated from junior levels, and act as a subject matter resource. The contextual technical knowledge increases in breadth to include clients’ technology partners and the broader government technology arena.
At degree 4, technical content knowledge grows in breadth to incorporate a variety of technical areas. The variety of technical areas can refer to multiple distinct business lines (that is, teams or units with different technological focuses) which are managed by a single position. The contextual technical knowledge increases in depth to include the interactions, strengths, and vulnerabilities of the broader interdependent development and delivery area. Degree 4 is the highest technical knowledge for management positions where technical knowledge plateaus to allow for the significant management knowledge also required of these positions.
At degree 5, technical content knowledge is at the greatest depth of subject matter expertise within an IT discipline, is relatively rare across government, and is a unique position within a department. This rating should be reserved for work which requires the highest subject matter expertise and to which technical authority within the specific IT discipline is recognized at the departmental or government-wide level. It is important to consider the organizational context of the position when applying this degree. Smaller-scope organizations have requirements for subject matter experts. However, when gauged against the expertise across the IT Group of the core public administration, this expertise may not meet the test of the degree 5 descriptor. Recall that the elements are cumulative. Therefore, degree 5 subsumes all aspects of degree 4.
Technical knowledge rating scale
This element measures the level of subject matter knowledge of information technology, including its various disciplines, components, theories and principles, and its practice and practical application in the business environment. This element also captures the critical contextual knowledge required related to the broader security and policy environments governing IT in the Public Service, as well as knowledge of technology stakeholders and business partners, including clients, vendors, contractors, and consultants.
Requires knowledge of information technology theories, principles and practices related to assigned work and a general understanding of the operating context within which the work is performed.
Requires sound working-level knowledge of the information technology discipline and associated theories, principles and practices related to the assigned area of work and a sound understanding of clients’ business, technology, and operations.
Requires advanced subject matter knowledge of the information technology discipline related to the assigned area of work including associated theories, principles and practices and their application, as well as, a strong understanding of clients’ business and technology environments, technology partners and their function, and the broader government technology arena.
Requires extensive and broad knowledge of information technology across a variety of technical areas focused on strategic knowledge application to large-scale technology interconnectedness, functionality, effectiveness, vulnerabilities, and risk.
Requires deep and comprehensive understanding of the subject matter of the specific information technology discipline related to the work. Knowledge is at the greatest depth of subject matter expertise within the IT discipline, such that the requirements of the position are to provide departmental or public service-wide expertise on issues related to the discipline.
Element 4: Management knowledge
General guidelines
This element measures the level of knowledge of management principles, processes and approaches, and their application required to operate at increasing levels of IT management. This element captures management knowledge required of the full range of functional and project management roles, including knowledge of management practices and approaches (that is, human resources, operational, and financial), as well as the contextual knowledge of operational, policy and governance constructs.
Management knowledge focuses on practical knowledge application from tactical and operational to strategic management knowledge. When evaluating the level of knowledge required in IT jobs, consider the practical application of the knowledge in the work as the key indicator to guide the rating (that is, the knowledge required to execute leadership and planning responsibilities).
The foundation element in this job evaluation standard is technical expertise. Overlaying this technical expertise is the secondary role of management, and the knowledge that it requires. Note that a position may not hold the top degree in both the technical knowledge and the management knowledge elements. It follows that as jobs move from technical practice to management practice, the technical knowledge and expertise plateau to accommodate the additional requirement for a high degree of management knowledge.
Specific guidelines
Degree descriptors begin with statements that focus on the body of functional management knowledge required in the core public administration, including principles, practices, processes, prevailing legislation, and accountability requirements.
Degree descriptors end with management context for the positions’, clients’, partners’, and vendors’ organizations. The management context includes governance structures, accountability mechanisms, and decision-making channels. This contextual knowledge is required to deliver on objectives within the applicable approval structures.
Consider only the knowledge required for the job within the assigned area of work, and not the knowledge that the incumbent may possess. Also, consider the knowledge of the job in the context of all IT management jobs across government not simply within the context of the home organization and structure.
At degree 1, work does not require management knowledge beyond awareness of the management constructs within which this work is assigned to the individual contributor and/or team participant. Knowledge of supervisory techniques is developing at this degree, for example, through exposure to the supervisory techniques and practices used within the position’s organization or through development opportunities.
Degree 2 is the first level at which management knowledge is applied in that there is a formal subordinate structure or responsibility for leading a project team with resources formally or informally assigned. As such, the position requires sound knowledge of basic resource management techniques, policies, protocols, and associated management contexts.
Degree 2 also captures the application of sound functional and project management knowledge and contextual management knowledge required by senior subject matter experts in the execution of their responsibilities. For example, expert advisors are required to integrate their work and deliverables into complex project plans, organizational structures, and governance mechanisms and provide technical recommendations that impact functional resources; these responsibilities require a more sophisticated application of management knowledge than is found in degree 1 despite the absence of formal supervisory responsibilities for the position.
At degree 3, management knowledge is in-depth because there are formal management responsibilities related to a broader program or service area than those found at degree 2. With this larger management scope and accountability, there is a need for deeper management knowledge across a number of business, finance and human resources management areas. The complexity of roles also requires an in-depth level of management contextual knowledge related to the management and governance constructs of client and stakeholder organizations to navigate projects and deliverables through applicable governance structures.
Degree 4 is the highest level of management knowledge and it requires strategic application. The work requires extensive knowledge of a variety of management approaches and how to position operations to achieve long-term IT strategies and priorities. Organizational scope is broader and more complex due to the multiple layers of subordinate and multidisciplinary management structures, which requires a corresponding increase in management knowledge from degree 3 in order to set the business plans, human resources plans and budgets for the operation and execute more complex and varying responsibilities.
Contextual management knowledge requires an extensive understanding of the surrounding departmental and governmental IT, operational and policy contexts within which the operation sits, and in IT across the core public administration.
Management knowledge rating scale
The Management Knowledge element captures functional, project and operational management principles, practices, and their application in the associated management contexts.
Requires knowledge of the management constructs within which work is performed within the federal public service with some developing knowledge of team leadership and supervision techniques.
Requires sound knowledge of functional and project management principles, processes, and approaches, as well as of prevailing management-related policy and legislation and their application to a variety of practical work situations.
Requires an understanding of the management context of clients’ businesses, as well as of the internal management and governance context of the position.
Requires in-depth knowledge of functional, operational and project management principles, processes and approaches and an in-depth understanding of the relevant business, operational, legislative and policy contexts related to the development or delivery area.
Requires an in depth understanding of the management context of clients’ businesses, as well as of the internal management and governance context of the position.
Requires expert knowledge of information technology management at the strategic level and extensive knowledge of strategic and operational management approaches and the translation of strategic objectives into operational priorities and plans.
Requires a multifaceted understanding of the various challenges and integration points for a multi-disciplinary IT program including an extensive understanding of the relevant business, operational and policy contexts related to broader IT environment within the department being served and across the core public administration.
Element 5: Communication and interaction
General guidelines
IT work in the core public administration requires delivering work through complex networks of teams and working with a variety of business owners, external partner organizations, contractors, and other stakeholders.
IT work requires communications skills and the management of interactions, not only in the daily management of the work, but also building and managing relationships, influencing and facilitating stakeholders to coordinate approaches, advance issues, negotiate agreements and deliver on commitments. It is critical to assess only the communication skills that the job requires, and not the skill that an incumbent may possess. To facilitate rating this element, evaluators should first assess the typical interactions required of a job, and then assess the corresponding level of communication skill required in the work (refer to the Order of Element Evaluation section).
This element does not value the level or importance of the people with whom the job is required to interact or the audience or subject of communications. For example, if a job requires providing information related to a straightforward technical issue to a senior executive, the fact that the recipient of the information is the executive has no bearing on the assessment of the level of interaction and communication skill. The fact that the issue and the exchange are straightforward is what determines the level of challenge in the interaction and therefore the required communication skill.
Specific guidelines
This element is structured with three dimensions that grow together: nature of communication skill, purpose of interaction, and scope and complexity of typical interactions. Degree descriptors portray the relative skill and responsibility at each level. The overall statement, in aggregate, must be representative of the job.
Degree descriptors begin with statements describing the nature of communication skill required as it relates to the purpose of interactions. The second portion of the degree descriptors describes the scope and complexity of communication and interactions. Degree descriptors end with the type of communication products to illustrate the progression in complexity of communication skill and responsibility.
At degree 1, both the issues and the context of interactions are of relatively low complexity. The nature of communication is typified by responding to client queries, clarifying work assignments, and exchanging information with colleagues. Typical written communications products at this level are similarly straightforward and include template-based reports and/or straightforward technical documentation.
At degree 2, investigation and consultation skills are required to probe and explore situations, extract root causes and missing information, and bring people and ideas together. The scope statement frames the interaction to single clients or single issues, and communication products convey more complex information in a broader variety of settings. Communication products include full technical reports and more complex technical specifications and documentation.
At degree 3, facilitation and advisory skills are required, and interactions are focused on building collaboration with a broader, more complex scope of team or project context. Communication skill increases in scope and complexity of product and output. Communication products include a variety of comprehensive project and technical documents including project charters, project and work plans, in-depth technical documents, and a variety of management-related proposals, briefing and reporting documentation.
At degree 4, a broad variety of interactions with a multiplicity of clients and stakeholders requires tailoring communications accordingly and requires higher level persuasion and diplomacy skills in order to bring differing perspectives together to achieve solutions. Complexity is increased by the large variety of technical issues that must be synthesized and communicated. Written communications products include a variety of complex technical, project-related, and operational business planning, policy and delivery documents and reports.
At degree 5, communication skills are at the highest level. The work requires managing key relationships and influencing decisions which affect the full IT organization. The context surrounding interactions is of significant scope, complexity, and impact. Communication at this level must influence and set direction with strategic intent.
Communication and interaction rating scale
This element measures the communication skill required in carrying out job responsibilities in IT work by considering the nature and complexity of typical interactions within which the communication skill is applied.
Responds to requests and exchanges information related to client service calls and work assignments including questioning to clarify requirements to deliver on assigned work tasks. Interactions at this level are typically straightforward in nature and have generally been encountered before. Completes template-based reports and writes straightforward technical documentation.
Probes and explores problems or client situations where objectives, root issues or information are not clearly defined or apparent, requiring investigation and consultation skills to extract required information from clients, colleagues and delivery partners to deliver the work. Interactions at this level are typically non-routine and either single-issue or client-specific in nature. Writes full technical service reports and more complex technical documentation.
Facilitates discussions with and provides advice to clients, colleagues, and delivery partners to build collaboration toward a common approach to work delivery and project initiatives and solicit input toward improvement of team planning and delivery. Interactions at this level are typically single-focus project or work-team related and involve a variety of connections to other work or project teams and deliverables. Written communications skills include writing a variety of comprehensive project and technical documents, and a variety of management-related proposals, briefing and reporting documentation.
Requires advanced persuasion and diplomacy skills to consult and provide advice on complex issues and ideas, negotiate resourcing, funding and service level agreements, work across multiple businesses, technical and project areas in order to secure support and involvement in projects and initiatives and ensure alignment, quality and consistency of planning and deliverables. Interactions at this level typically involve large, broad projects or work teams with multiple and diverse stakeholders, resources, technical and business domain areas. Writes a variety of complex technical, project-related, and operational business planning, policy and delivery documents and reports.
Requires extensive negotiation and influencing skills to manage key relationships with IT and business owner leadership, external delivery agents, and subordinate unit and project leadership toward agreement on highly complex matters including objectives and plans, integrated resourcing and funding, service level agreements, and contracts, as well as to influence on issues impacting the overall direction and delivery of the IT organization.
Interactions at this level are characterized by significant complexity resulting from multiple stakeholder parties within and/or outside government, multiple technical and business issues of substantial, broad-reaching scope, risk, and impact; diverse and often competing perspectives; and variability in objectives.
Element 6: Sensory and physical effort
General guidelines
This element measures the physical and sensory effort required in the performance of IT work. It recognizes the physical effort and energy involved in exerting force, either while moving or while staying still, or in performing a sequence of small movements. It also recognizes the strain associated with intense sensory focus, for example, visual, tactile, or auditory.
The element provides some generic examples of efforts in these broad categories. These examples are intended to provide illustration of the nature and intensity of physical and sensory effort captured by this element. However, they are not exhaustive. Other efforts of equivalent intensity should be also be considered and rated similarly.
Evaluators should consider frequency with a degree of reasonability. The standard does not require a precise calculation of time for these efforts in order to make an appropriate rating assessment. The question is one of typical efforts associated with the work being evaluated relative to all other work in the IT Group.
Remember that there is a separate element that assesses the environmental conditions of the work.
Sensory and physical effort rating scales
This element captures the sensory and physical effort required in the performance of IT work.
Sensory Effort measures the effort required by the work to use one or more of the senses (for example, sight, hearing, et cetera). All factors that contribute to fatigue or strain associated with sustained use of the senses in the performance of the work should be considered.
Physical Effort measures the effort required to perform the work. All factors that contribute to physical fatigue in the performance of the work are considered. It does not consider the physical fitness of the individual, only the relative levels of physical effort required by the work.
Both components must be rated separately.
Regular periods of sensory effort such as listening, reading, reviewing data or documentation with opportunity to shift activity.
Prolonged periods of sensory effort such as listening, reading, or reviewing data or documentation with limited opportunity to shift activity.
Prolonged periods of sitting, keyboarding, or performing other repetitive fine-motor movements. Occasional carrying or moving light-weight work materials.
Regular requirement to lift and move heavy electronic equipment or other materials or the regular requirement to bend, climb, crouch, or crawl to reach computer equipment in awkward places.
Element 7: Work environment
General guidelines
This element measures the psychological and physical surroundings or conditions within which the work must be performed and the extent to which they make the job unpleasant. The psychological surroundings include the exposure to aspects of work that result in psychological discomfort, whereas the physical surroundings include the exposure to aspects of work that result in physical discomfort. Both components are to be rated separately.
When rating, assume that working conditions comply with current legislation and standards. Do not consider any inefficiencies relating to local heating, cooling or ventilation systems or other such matters that are regulated through workplace health and safety policies. Measure only those conditions that are an integral part of the work. In addition, do not consider any working conditions that are remunerated separately, such as those under the prevailing collective agreement, the terms and conditions of employment, or National Joint Council directives (for example, overtime, travel, foreign service, motor vehicle operation, et cetera).
Note that there are no frequency or duration scales in this element. When evaluating the psychological and physical work environments, select the highest normal level that applies to the work, excluding rare, or chance occurrences that are not an integral part of the work.
Specific guidelines
Keep in mind that this element is designed to capture the conditions under which the work is normally performed as opposed to the effort required to deal with the conditions. The lists of examples provided under this element are intended to represent the type of environment that may be encountered when performing the job.
For the most part, as high-level professional knowledge work, IT work is generally performed in a typical office environment with relatively few challenging physical or psychological working conditions beyond the norm.
Psychological and physical work environment rating scales
This element measures the psychological and physical surroundings or conditions within which IT work must be delivered and the extent to which these conditions make the job unpleasant. Below are illustrative examples of the disagreeable psychological and physical conditions that may be found in the IT work environment.
| Degree | Degree Descriptor | Points and BM |
|---|---|---|
| Psychological Work Environment | ||
| 1 | Possible exposure to disgruntled clients; occasional tight deadlines. | 1 BM 1 BM 2 BM 3 BM 6 |
| 2 | Complaints and criticism from clients; frequent uncontrolled mandated time pressures; pressure from clients or stakeholders; conflicting or changing priorities. | 5 BM 4 BM 5 BM 7 BM 8 |
| Physical Work Environment | ||
| 1 | Physical work environment is generally a controlled office environment; open office environment may present visual and auditory distractions and interruptions. | 1 BM 2 BM 3 BM 5 BM 6 BM 7 BM 8 |
| 2 | Frequent exposure to unpleasant temperatures, dust, dirt, confined spaces, or other uncomfortable work settings in the delivery of the work. | 5 BM 1 BM 4 |
