Publications

Broadbanding (1997)

In a recent survey more than two-thirds of state government personnel managers indicated that they would like to change their state’s salary and classification systems. The survey found that:

  • State personnel managers believe that their states have far too many job titles, with an average of 1,802 titles;
  • there are too few employees per job title, with an average of 24 employees per title; and
  • classification and compensation systems are too old, with an average age of 23 years.

In order to address these concerns, many employers are turning to "broadbanding." Broadbanding refers to the adoption of a job classification structure with significantly fewer classifications than a traditional system. For workers, this can be either good or bad. If implemented in the context of broader organizational changes to promote worker participation in decision-making, teamwork, and career development for employees, broadbanding can have a positive effect. However, if the goal of broadbanding is to cut costs and make it easier for managers to shift workers from task to task, it could lead to arbitrary job assignments, stifled promotional opportunities, or, worse, the downgrading of work.

Under a typical broadbanding plan, jobs are grouped into broad occupational families, based on similarities in attributes such as the tasks performed, required skills, career progression, and the work process. These groups form the basis of new, "broader" classifications. The combining of job classifications often (though not necessarily) reduces the number of pay grades and increases the range between the bottom and top rates of each grade.

Why Broadband?

On the positive side, broadbanding can play an important role in workplace redesign. Traditional job classification systems designed to support old management structures have become increasingly incompatible with efforts for workplace change. In "high performance workplaces," with greater flexibility, reduced hierarchy, multi-skilling, and employee involvement in decision-making, changes in the job classification system are often needed.

The advantages of broadbanding to the employer are obvious. Since jobs are defined more broadly, the employer has more flexibility in assigning work and getting a job done. Workers can be redeployed to meet changing needs without constant attention to classification issues. Though they require careful crafting, there are potential advantages to broadbanding for employees as well. Especially for employees in lower-end classifications, broadbanding can offer improved career development opportunities. Opportunities for horizontal mobility can also expand when tasks previously associated with different job classifications are grouped within the same classification.

Broadbanding and Pay

In a typical pay plan, job classifications are grouped into pay grades. Advancement from the bottom to top step within a pay grade is determined by seniority, occurring at regular intervals until the top step is reached. In a broadbanded pay plan, pay grades still exist, though there will likely be fewer of them and the range from the minimum to the maximum rate of a grade will likely be greater. Movement within the grade may be determined not only by years of service but in conjunction with other factors like the acquisition of new skills or demonstrated ability to perform higher level work. Indeed, many advocates of broadbanding view it as working best in conjunction with "skill-based pay." Under a skill-based pay plan, an employee’s mix and level of skills determines advancement from one pay level within a band to the next, instead of straight seniority.

Determining an employee’s skill level is easier for some jobs than others. Where certification or licensing is required for various tasks, the lines of progression are relatively easy to determine. For other jobs, skill-based advancement can be based on demonstrated proficiencies, completion of training, passing examinations, or other objective measures in combination with on-the-job experience.

Broadbanding should never result in any employee receiving a downgrade in their salary or a layoff of personnel. Careful attention should be paid to the job evaluation process as new classification specifications are written. While factors like new technology that have changed the nature of work must be taken into account, incumbent employees should be protected. Where job requirements are updated to reflect the changing nature of work, incumbent employees should be offered training to fulfill the requirements of their new classifications.

Potential Problems with Broadbanding

Like any other tool for improving organizational performance, broadbanding can be misapplied. One major concern is that work will be shifted from higher-level to lower-level positions. An example of this in the health care industry is ironically called "patient-focused care," under which many tasks associated with patient care are shifted from licensed to unlicensed staff. The unlicensed staff are "broadbanded" in that they must perform new responsibilities in addition to their regular tasks, often with little training or increase in pay. Licensed staff find that their contact with patients is limited through the erosion of their job duties, and thus their ability to provide quality care is hindered. Ultimately, unless protections are built in, this form of "broadbanding" is driven by the bottom line and provides no benefit for licensed staff, unlicensed staff, or patients. It is often a method of reducing and de-skilling the workforce.

Another concern with regard to broadbanding is that it can allow management too much discretion and can lead to abuse. Narrow, specialized job classifications have served at least one purpose for workers over the years: They offer some protection from arbitrary job assignments and being forced to perform out-of-class work without extra pay. Thus, a broadbanding plan must include objective criteria for movement within pay grades and clear distinctions between levels within the broadbanded classifications.

Broadbanding also increases the range of tasks that employees may be asked to perform, which can lead to poor performance and increased stress if workers are forced to perform unfamiliar work. Another potential problem is that training opportunities may be provided only to a few "favored" employees. Thus, assurances need to be made that all workers have an equal opportunity to develop skills that will allow them to perform effectively. This is even more important if a skill-based pay plan is in effect, since advancement within a salary band would be at least partially contingent on the development of job-related skills.

Because each worker is more versatile, broadbanding often leads to a decrease in the aggregate number of workers and/or higher productivity. It is essential that the union negotiate to ensure that workers are appropriately compensated for these efficiencies.

For more information about broadbanding, contact the Department of Research and Collective Bargaining Services at 202/429-1215.

Print Version