What is job evaluation?
Job evaluation answers the question: “how much is a specific job worth in a given organisation”, or more simply: how much should the person performing that work earn, based on the value they bring to the company. It clearly separates the job and scope of duties from the person, in the sense of a specific employee (by name), focusing on competencies or working conditions. Job evaluation is, in fact, an answer to the question of what is important in the organisation and how much we want to pay for it. We are moving away from a mentality of paying for holding a job towards paying for the individual elements that make up the job evaluation. The fact that a person speaks 5 foreign languages or has worked for a given company for 20 years does not mean that these 5 languages and experience have the same value for every employer.
The aim of implementing the directive is to ensure pay transparency and equal pay. It is precisely transparent job evaluation, based on the same criteria for every job, that is intended to ensure clear and transparent pay rules.
Four basic evaluation criteria
The directive requires job evaluation to be based on at least 4 criteria, such as: skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions. An organisation can, of course, expand the list with additional criteria and sub-criteria, depending on the complexity of the work. However, it must include those specified in the directive, and any additional criteria and sub-criteria must be gender-neutral. In practice, this means that competencies generally considered female should not be overlooked. For example, competencies such as emotional effort, conflict resolution skills, and similar ones (more frequently attributed to women) should not be overlooked in favour of analytical skills more frequently associated with men.
In addition, the job evaluation system used by a given organisation should cover all jobs. Such an approach helps compare requirements (competencies) with pay and create a coherent pay system based on the value of work.
Job evaluation methods
Current legislation does not dictate which method an employer should use to determine the value of individual jobs, but they do provide clear guidelines that limit the choices. The directive provides guidelines, describes the minimum requirements for the scope of job classification (the 4 criteria described above), but leaves freedom in choosing the methodology. Additionally, to assist employers, the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) has prepared tools that they can use. Current job descriptions are not enough. Regardless of the number of employees, a process is needed to determine the relative value of work.
Pair comparison as a simplified evaluation method (Tool 4)
In the European Commission and EIGE toolkit, pair comparison (Tool 4) is described as a simplified approach for small and medium-sized organisations that allows them to compare the relative value of jobs and rank them. Jobs are compared in pairs according to the criteria in the factor and sub-factor plan (skills, responsibility, effort and working conditions) and the more demanding one in a given pair receives a point. After comparing all pairs, the total number of points determines the job's place in the ranking, which can then be linked to pay grades. The toolkit notes that the method relies heavily on the evaluator's judgment, so the evaluation committee should ensure that unconscious gender bias does not influence its decisions. The requirements of the job must be evaluated, regardless of how well a specific person performs them.
Point-factor method
The point-factor method involves evaluating each job separately according to factors and sub-factors, which are assigned levels and points, and the total number of points determines the job's value and its place in the hierarchy. The factors are the criteria from the directive (skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions), which allows the result for each job to be justified separately for each criterion. The European Commission and EIGE toolkit recommends this method (Tool 5) for medium and large organisations with diverse roles and describes it as providing the strongest protection against gender bias. The Polish guide of the Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Policy (MRPiPS) and the Central Institute for Labour Protection, National Research Institute (CIOP-PIB) (version 1.0 from November 2025, preliminary) considers analytical methods to be the most appropriate, while emphasizing that the point method is just one example and that the approach remains flexible.
When working with a client, I always use the analytical method. It is transparent and universal. When an organisation grows and creates new jobs, applying it does not require developing a new methodology or specialized competencies. A well-designed Excel spreadsheet created once is enough.
Which evaluation method should you choose?
Although neither the directive nor the draft act imposes a single solution, for organisations employing more than 50 people, I always recommend the point-factor method.
Organisation size and the method in the EU toolkit
The toolkit prepared by EIGE divides organisations into 3 groups. The first consists of those that employ fewer than 10 employees. The toolkit for the second group describes how to ensure pay transparency when employing between 10 and 249 employees. The last group consists of large enterprises and organisations.
In addition to useful tools, the website also offers additional guides that are useful in the process of comparing the value of work.
What does the Polish MRPiPS guide say?
In addition to the materials available on EU websites, the Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Policy (page in Polish) also provides a range of materials for employers. Emphasizing transparent criteria for evaluating work, the Polish guidelines clearly state that summary methods (i.e., those that compare jobs without breaking them down into criteria) may not be sufficient. They also recommend the point-factor method as more appropriate and provide examples of job evaluation when using it.
Is market benchmarking a form of job evaluation?
Given that job evaluation criteria are determined based on the organisation, market benchmarking seems unsuitable for implementing the requirements of the directive. This method of comparing jobs is based on external factors, namely market pay, rather than the value of jobs within the organisation (or rather, the value of the competencies required for a given job).
How do you carry out job evaluation?
The job evaluation process is carried out in stages. When working with my clients, we always start with a diagnostic stage, checking the current situation: whether there is an up-to-date job hierarchy, job descriptions containing the required competencies and scope of responsibility, internal rules, procedures, regulations and other documents that affect the assessment of the value of jobs.
The job evaluation process step by step
We only begin the job evaluation process once we have finally confirmed which jobs exist in the company and what the requirements for them are. Together with employee representatives, we build a matrix of criteria and sub-criteria with assigned levels. Take the “physical effort” criterion as an example. We can grade it in various ways, from a simple division into low, moderate and high to more complex solutions that combine physical effort with risk. By assigning a specific weight (or point) to each criterion and sub-criterion, and doing the same with the levels, we obtain a matrix.
The next step is to assign the appropriate requirement from the matrix to each job. If the organisation uses only four criteria for evaluation, each job must have a specified level of complexity for each of them. In this way, it also receives a score based on the sum of the values from the matrix.
Evaluation result and pay comparison
After assigning a score from the criteria matrix to each job, we can easily relate it to the pay structure and thus to the pay level for a given job. The point-factor method gives the organisation and its employees a very high level of transparency in shaping pay policy. The primary aim of the directive is to eliminate inequalities caused by gender discrimination. In my opinion, the added value comes from the comparability of jobs. It will be clear to every employee what competencies they must have in their job and what they must do to advance. A pay increase for so-called “seniority” ceases to be justified, because competencies are what matter to the employer.
What are the most common mistakes and challenges in job evaluation?
The most common mistake when working on job evaluation is starting the evaluation without a verified job structure. It is like building a house without foundations. Job evaluation only makes sense when we have clearly defined jobs, their descriptions and their scope of duties, that is, when we know what competencies are required.
Once we have dealt with potential mistakes, it is time to address the challenges. And these are related to the human factor, namely negotiations with trade unions or employee representatives. The larger and less mature the working group, the greater the risk, unfortunately, that everyone “will pull” in their own direction, meaning they will fight for the highest weight for their own strongest competency.
Summary: how to choose a job evaluation method?
Directive 2023/970 leaves the choice of job evaluation method to the employer and requires evaluation based on four criteria: skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions. The European Commission and EIGE toolkit recommends pair comparison for smaller organisations and the point-factor method for organisations with diverse roles, which the Polish MRPiPS guide identifies as an example of analytical methods considered most appropriate. Market benchmarking answers the question of what the market pays, so in this sense it does not replace the assessment of a job's value within the organisation itself. The evaluation result, namely the job's score, allows it to be related to the pay structure and enables the comparison of pay for jobs of the same value. In our practice, the whole process begins with organising the job structure, because without it, there is nothing on which to build the criteria matrix.
If you want to carry out this process in your organisation, we can guide you through it: from diagnosing the job structure, through the criteria matrix, to scoring and the pay structure. See what our job evaluation and job description service looks like. If you prefer to do it yourself, our workshops will prepare your team to work with their own matrix.
