Colin Ibrahim· Job Architecture Lead, Halcyon Financial Group
Asked in Job Architecture & Careers ·
We are a food manufacturer headquartered in the US Midwest, about 9,000 employees across North America and Mexico. A two-year project to build our job architecture finishes in November: 26 families, ten levels, every job mapped. The project team of six goes back to their day jobs.
Nobody has decided who owns it afterwards. Compensation assumes it is ours. Talent management thinks career frameworks are theirs. HR business partners want authority to approve new jobs locally because the central queue was slow during the project.
I'd like to hear how others split ownership, and roughly how much effort the steady state takes. I have been offered half a headcount.
5 helpful · 2 insightful · 1 agree · 5 replies · 167 views · 7 following
Accepted answer· by Ximena Ibrahim
What has lasted for us through four years and two reorganisations is splitting by decision type, not by team. Compensation owns the structure: families, levels, criteria, and anything that creates a new job or changes a level. Business partners may assign people to existing jobs and create a position from the catalogue without asking anyone, which is 80% of the volume. Write it as a one-page decision table before the project closes; ours has eleven rows. And ask for a service standard instead of headcount in the abstract: we committed to five working days for a new job and then showed what that takes.
Read in the conversation ↓
People Analytics Lead, Tidewater Utilities
Half a headcount will not cover it at your size. We are 11,000 people in chemicals and run it with 1.5 people plus a quarterly governance meeting. Volume is around 30 new or changed jobs a month. If you take half a head, the queue is slow again by February and the business partners get their local authority by default.
Benefits Analyst, Meridian Health Systems
Ownership sits with compensation in our company, and I think that is right, because every levelling decision is ultimately a pay decision. Talent owns the content that hangs off it: development guides, career path pages, learning. They are consulted on criteria changes but they do not approve jobs.
Samir DelaneyCBS, CEP
Senior Compensation Analyst, Silverline Media
Director, Total Rewards, Ravenna Chemicals
Accepted answer
What has lasted for us through four years and two reorganisations is splitting by decision type, not by team. Compensation owns the structure: families, levels, criteria, and anything that creates a new job or changes a level. Business partners may assign people to existing jobs and create a position from the catalogue without asking anyone, which is 80% of the volume.
Write it as a one-page decision table before the project closes; ours has eleven rows. And ask for a service standard instead of headcount in the abstract: we committed to five working days for a new job and then showed what that takes.
Reward Partner, Beacon Retail Group
The decision-type split is what I was missing; I had been arguing about which team instead. I've drafted the table with ten rows and I'm taking a five-day standard and a request for 1.5 heads to the steering group's last meeting.
