If the HR officer uses job-ranking to determine employee pay increases, what result should they expect?

Using job-ranking to determine employee pay increases typically results in subjectivity. Job-ranking involves comparing jobs based on their overall value or worth to the organization and ranking them accordingly. This process can lead to subjective evaluations, as different individuals may have varying opinions on what makes one job more valuable than another. Factors such as personal biases, experiences, or differing interpretations of job responsibilities can significantly influence these rankings.

While the intent behind job-ranking is to establish a systematic approach to pay increases, the reliance on individuals' judgment can introduce inconsistencies and perceptions of unfairness among employees. This subjectivity may lead to discrepancies in pay increases that do not necessarily reflect the actual work performed or the value added by employees.

In contrast, methods that focus on objective criteria, such as performance metrics or standardized evaluation systems, tend to minimize subjectivity and can lead to more equitable outcomes.