The Origin Story: The Job Canvas

Origin stories seem all the rage at the moment. It feels like every other film at the cinema or TV box set is focussed on telling the story of where a character came from. 

Jumping on Hollywood’s bandwagon, in this blog I wanted to share the Job Canvas origin story (I can’t promise it will be as exciting as the origin of “One” in Stranger Things or how Han Solo found the Millenium Falcon in Solo). 

I’d like to say that the idea for the Job Canvas came like a bolt from blue, but the truth is, as an idea and then as a product it has been developing and evolving over a number of years. It emerged from thinking, testing and doing rather than as a fully formed product.

I sent the first email about the Job Canvas to someone in 2017 and gmail tells me that I have sent over 893 emails about the Canvas since this date (I write this in July 2022).

The starting point - the problem I wanted to solve

As I’ve written before as an HR professional, despite writing and reviewing 100’s of job descriptions, I have never been a fan. They have the potential to box people into fixed ways of working, are inflexible, often frustrating to produce, and out of date as soon as they are written. 

The consequence of all this is that people seldom rely on or derive value from their job descriptions; they are often documents that are hidden away on a hard drive gaining digital dust only brought out for promotions, disciplinaries or the dreaded annual review. 

Rather than providing clarity, job descriptions often blur the lines. They don’t capture the essence or reality of how a job is undertaken. 

When I was doing research for my book (Personalisation at Work - available at all good and evil book stores) I started to realise that - perhaps unintentionally - job descriptions could be a significant barrier to people personalising their work. 

Daydreaming about solutions to this problem, I began to get curious about what a more flexible, agile, personal and frankly more human way of describing and capturing and defining a job would look like.

From digital dust to digital canvas

When I was setting up Tailored Thinking I had been introduced to the idea of using canvases to capture and map out different parts of the business. These canvases were often split into different segments or elements that mapped out the different, but often interrelated aspects of a function. For example, the Business Model Canvas (probably the most well known and used canvas amongst start ups) maps out different elements of core business model.

Taking inspiration from the canvases I was using for the business, combined with other research and themes I was exploring from design thinking, I started to explore what a “Job Canvas” would look like.

Following testing with colleagues, friends, clients and other interested organisations, I developed 9 core elements of the Canvas that gave insights to different elements of the role and got to the heart or the DNA of a job.

I remember feeling really excited when I explored the canvas with the HR team at a challenger bank close to me and they were able to get a really good outline of the job in 18 minutes (2 minutes per section). 

Creating a digital canvas

At first the Canvas was just a powerpoint template that I printed out and tested with individuals and teams.

Once I was happy with the 9 core elements of the Job Canvas, I started to consider addressing some of the other challenges with job descriptions. For example, they’re not always easy to update, they get lost, and the data in job descriptions aren’t centralised.

Looking back at my notes on the creation of the digital Canvas I wanted it to be:

• Easy to access and update

• Saved so that people didn’t have to re-complete it

• Downloadable into a PDF 

• Centrally stored for managers and HR colleagues so that the documents didn’t get lost

• Analysable to support broader organisational and people analytic insights

Having got some ideas of what I wanted, I was introduced to a patient, curious and amazing software developer (thanks Nick) who turned my thoughts into the first version of the digital job canvas that is now free to use. 

Some unexpected results…  

One of the joys of seeing individuals and teams use the Job Canvas is that you can see them gaining different insights and reflections.

Working with one HR team in the early stages, a team leader shared that the Job Canvas exercise allowed her to put her finger on an issue that she had been struggling to resolve.

One of the moments about the Canvas was that people doing the same role might view their roles differently. E.G. someone working in HR might see their key customers as employees or others might see their key customers as the organisation and the leaders. Now both perceptions are valid, but this might explain the behaviours in the team.

For example, one person might spend a lot of time sorting out individual issues with employees and advocacy whilst others might spend less time doing this - might be perceived as less accessible - and spend more time looking at strategic issues.

As a line manager, this enables you to have better conversations with staff and understand whether there are any conflicts or friction with how that person sees that job and requirements for that job. 

Future thinking…

Building on the ideas of our current users and becoming more immersed in digital HR products, we see lots of opportunities to develop the canvas further and include greater features. 

We’ve already started holding meetings with interested teams and prospective clients to explore how we could improve the Job Canvas and what they would like us to add into future iterations of the product.

If you would like to be involved and share any insights or feedback then please let us know at [email protected].

I’d like to thank the following people who have helped shape the early developments in the Job Canvas.

Satalia, Virgin Money, Anne-Marie Lister, Sarah Dewar, Lisa Davidson, Sara Cox, Melanie Cheung, Michelle Reid, Michelle Minnikin and many more (give me a nudge if I’ve missed you off).

The author of this blog, Rob Baker is founder and Chief Positive Deviant at Tailored Thinking. Rob is a chartered fellow of both the CIPD and the Australian HR Institute and has a first class Masters in Applied Positive Psychology from the University of Melbourne. He is passionate about making work better and making better work.

Connect with Rob on LinkedIn.

3 reasons the Job Canvas is better than job descriptions

Job Description.

Recognise this image above? A traditional job description. Does this fill you with joy or excite you? I didn’t think so.

Whilst the world of work is changing rapidly, job descriptions have remained the same. Gathering digital dust as we like to call it.

Over his career, our Founder, Rob Baker has written and reviewed hundreds of job descriptions. In his blog, the history of job descriptions, Rob understands organisations are reliant on job descriptions for good reason. Such as mapping out what a role entails, responsibilities etc. However, he believes this is due to an absence of a viable alternative.

In response, Rob created the Job Canvas. The Job Canvas is digital tool used to map out your role in 9 elements. In a few clicks, you can capture what your role entails, the value that you add to others, the people you support and the resources you need to work at your best.

The Job Canvas is re-inventing how we define, discuss and do work.

“The Job Canvas is a modern digital upgrade to the job description. Developed to support modern, flexible working practices.”

— Rob Baker, Founder of Tailored Thinking

The Job Canvas

3 reasons the Job Canvas is better than job descriptions

Boxing people in vs setting people free.

1. Job descriptions weigh people down. The Job Canvas sets people free.

Job descriptions and role profiles don’t accurately capture what people do in their day-to-day work. Therefore, they are just there as works of fiction, to hold people back.

The Job Canvas is regularly updated, with relevant elements that can enable people to thrive. Like looking at the core value of your job and your strengths and skills.

Time consuming vs quick and easy.

2. Job descriptions are time consuming. The Job Canvas is quick and easy.

Creating and reviewing a job description are both time consuming and un-engaging activities.

Data collected from Job Canvas workshops shows that colleagues can effectively complete a personal canvas in just 18 minutes. Not only is this quick, it is also fun and interactive by being able to move the boxes around and personalise your Canvas.

Boxing people in vs being flexible

3. Job descriptions box people in. The Job Canvas enables people to be flexible.

Job descriptions are static documents. They consist of a list of tasks and responsibilities that an employee will do in their job. Traditional job descriptions can have the unfortunate impact of creating glass walls. These are invisible barriers on people which stop them from adapting, improving and shaping themselves and their jobs.

The Job Canvas is an editable and interactive document, enabling people to tweak and update elements of their job whenever they like.

It also encourages people to innovate and become more flexible by looking at areas of their role a job description would never consider. For example the core value and purpose of a role, which has become particularly important over the last few years.

Let’s face it, job descriptions do not reflect our modern ways of working. If you want to level up your people, click here to learn more about the Job Canvas.

Why it's time to ditch the Job Description

Over my career I’ve written, reviewed, edited and formally evaluated (high) hundreds of job descriptions and role profiles. And do you know what? I don’t think I’ve ever met a job description that I have really liked.

For many years, like many people professionals, I’ve tolerated job descriptions as a necessarily evil, something that was just a (frustrating) part of normal organisational and HR life.

More recently, as I’ve been more actively exploring the psychology, practices and processes of what makes people healthy, happy and highly productive at work, I’ve realised how destructive and damaging our reliance on job descriptions can be.

We’ve developed a form of “learned helplessness” when it comes to job descriptions – widely recognising their limitations, but using them as the only approach to capturing how and what people should do in their jobs. 

You could think of them like a blister on the foot of organisations caused by ill fitting footwear, yet despite wincing, we’ve never thought to change the shoes we are wearing.

Why Job Descriptions don’t deliver

The first job descriptions were developed over a hundred years ago to bring order and rigour to organisational structures, yet we have not developed this tool to keep pace with modern working practices.

The job description has failed to keep pace with changes in how we think about, describe and do work. Consequently, there are a number of ways in which they can bring more harm than help to organisations.

Here are 7 key reasons why I think job descriptions don’t deliver:

1. They are static documents which box people in - they don’t encourage innovation or personalisation

2. They are out of date as soon as they are written

3. They are often works of fiction - they don’t describe how a job is actually done

4. They take time to complete and are not easy to update

5. They don’t capture the true value or purpose of a role

6. They get lost across the organisation

7. They don’t provide organisational or people insight

1) They are fixed and box people in

One big barrier that stops people from being fully engaged and energised by their work is that they feel restricted and constrained in how they are able to perform their jobs.

Many of us are familiar with the concept of glass ceilings as an invisible (and corrosive) barrier that stops people – particularly women and people from ethnic minorities – from progressing within organisations.

I believe that traditional job descriptions can have the unfortunate impact of creating glass walls. These are invisible barriers on people which stop them from adapting, improving and shaping themselves and their jobs.

The consequence:

The hidden cost of rigid and homogenous job descriptions is huge. They can limit a sense of personalisation, development and growth which are the very things that makes people come and feel alive at work [1].

2) They are out of date as soon as they are written

Job descriptions by their nature reflect a snapshot in time. The consequence of this is that they are out of date as soon as they are written and their value and usefulness diminishes once they have been created.

As Alex Killick, Director at Leading Kind, once put it to me:

“Job Descriptions are like a brand new car, as soon as they drive off the forecourt they lose their value.”

The consequence:

The fact that documents are out of date as soon as they are written means that people don’t regularly refer to them. They derive no value or benefit in doing so. And any relevance a descriptions might have diminishes the longer that someone has been in their role.

3) They are often works of fiction

When they are created job descriptions often describe a wish-list of all the task and responsibilities that we expect (or perhaps hope) someone will complete in their job.

The reality is that job descriptions and role profiles don’t accurate capture what people actually do in their day-to-day work.

In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever met someone who - if they have had a job description produced for them - feels that it wholly captures, or gets to the heart or true DNA, of what they do or why they do it.

The consequence:

The impact of this is that employees don’t feel a sense of connection to their job description - rather than being something to be actively reviewed and discussed, it becomes something that is hidden in case it highlights gaps between the realities of what someone does and what - according to their role profile - they are expected to do.

4) They take time to complete and are not easy to update

One of my personal prejudices about job descriptions is that they are a massive time suck. Most of the job descriptions I’ve worked with are cumbersome documents which are not easy to update or amend.

Many organisations use fixed templates requiring generic text to be found, pasted into word documents and then re-formatted.

Getting to a final document often requires different versions being pinged to various stakeholders across the organisation.

The consequence:

The consequence of this is that people often disengage and detach from the process of completing job descriptions in the first instance, resulting in half-hearted and limp documents they don’t fully inspire or work for anyone.

5) They don’t capture the true value or purpose of a role

Whilst job descriptions regularly spill onto multiple pages they often fail to define or detail a core element of a job.

The purpose, or value of a job - the very reason that the job exists - is often missing or absent.

Most of us want to feel a sense of meaning in the work we do, yet we seldom design job descriptions in a way that fosters this.

We often don’t highlight the impact of the role, the people an employee helps or serves in their job, or an employee’s connection to the wider purpose of the organisation.

The consequence:

The potential impact of this is that people fail to see - or perhaps more importantly feel - how their work helps other people. Not only does a sense of meaning fuel people’s motivation but it can boost wellbeing and buffer stress and even burnout [2].

6) They get lost across organisations

A frequent frustration working in HR was trying to track down up-to-date job descriptions.

The reality is that most people didn’t update their job descriptions, and if they did they weren’t saved or easy to access or track centrally.

The consequence:

A consequence of this is that job descriptions are often documents that are hidden away on a hard drive gaining digital dust only brought out for new appointments, disciplinaries, promotions or the dreaded annual review or appraisal.

7) They don’t provide organisational or people insight

Despite most people - in theory at least - having a job description they are not easily analysed at an organisational level to gain insights into the roles that people do and the skills they need.

If you wanted to collate data about key skill and strengths or reporting lines in a specific function area then you would need to find (good luck) and analyse individual job descriptions.

Consequently, there is not a way to explore and gain insights from the vast amount of data that is included into a job description.

The consequence:

At a time where organisations are striving for data-driven and evidence-based practice it feels criminal waste that the rich data that we include in job descriptions cannot be usefully analysed.

Why technology has not improved the job description

Whilst there have been new technological development in the creation of job descriptions, to date most of the focus has been on making them easier and faster to complete.

Many HR systems offer generic checkboxes of skills, tasks and responsibilities and standardised text to enable person specifications to be quickly created. Whilst potentially saving time for the recruiting manager, innovations of this kind have not been used to improve the way we describe or define the work itself.

With the focus on making the production of job description faster we’ve missed the opportunity to make these documents better.

What’s the alternative to a job description?

If job descriptions aren’t fit for purpose and don’t reflect our modern ways of working what’s the alternative?

Rather than tethering someone to a fixed job description, proponents of more people-centred and self-managed approaches to working encourage us to trust people to take a different approach.

In Teal organisations jobs are defined by people rather than the organisation and in self managed structures such as Holocracy the job or more specifically role are defined by a collective team or circle rather than senior leaders.

The Corporate Rebels encourage us to forget fixed job descriptions and job titles, embrace job crafting and focus on Mastery and Talent instead.

At Tailored Thinking, we’ve been exploring and experimenting with a different approach we are calling the Job Canvas. This is digital tool designed to get to the value, purpose and DNA of a job and can be quickly and easily produced, updated and shared.

It’s time to take a different approach

I know at the end of these blogs I’m supposed to outline a clear call to action. I’m not expecting you to tear up or set fire to the job descriptions in your organisation or to dramatically delete them from your shared drive.

I know many organisations are reliant on job descriptions - particularly in the absence of a viable alternative. I therefore have humbler ambitions.

Next time you see, draft or review a job description ask yourself the following questions:

1) Is this adding value? - to the role holder, their colleagues or the organisation?

2) Does this create space for people to personalise or shape their roles?

3) Is this a realistic representation of the job?

And if the answer to any of these is no, then look to make a small change to make the document better.

If you have ideas to make job descriptions better then let us know. Perhaps you are a job description lover - I’d love to know why. And if there’s a different reason you have a distaste for descriptions please share.

Rob Baker

Rob Baker is the founder and Chief Positive Deviant of Tailored Thinking.

September 2021

The history of the job description.

In the world of work most of us will have had to read, review or develop a job description or specification. They are ubiquitous across modern workplaces. And whilst they may differ slightly in style, most job descriptions follow a similar format and content. But where did this document come from?

This article will explore the early history and blueprints for modern-day job descriptions and examine why they haven’t changed or developed significantly in the last century despite the significant evolution in how we do our work.

What is a job description?

A Job Description or ‘JD’ is a written narrative that describes the general tasks, or other related duties, and responsibilities of a role at work.  A Job Description may include relationships with other people in the organisation: supervisory level, managerial requirements, and relationships with other colleagues. It may also include information about the grade or level of the role, working conditions, physical demands, health and safety requirements and other competencies for the job role, which in this regard, it is sometimes known as the ‘Role Description’.

Where do Job Descriptions Come from?

The very first job descriptions can be traced back over a 100 years. Created to bring order and rigour to organisational structures, a job description is a written narrative that describes the general tasks and responsibilities of a role at work.

The story of the humble job description has its roots in ‘Scientific Management’ or more commonly known as Taylorism and the work of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911). Although scientific management as a distinct theory or school of thought has arguably been in decline since the 1930s, many of its themes have been indelibly inked into our thinking and practice within workplaces today.

It all started with Job Analysis

Unlike today, the earliest job descriptions were seldom developed independently or in isolation. They were originally produced as the end result of a process called job analysis.

Job analysis was a formal endeavour to identify the content of a job in terms of the activities it involves in addition to the attributes or requirements necessary to perform those activities. It considered the areas of knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAO) needed to perform the job.

The formal document capturing these details could be thought of as the first formal job descriptions. When they were first developed job descriptions were sometimes accompanied by a separate document (the personnel specification) which detailed the skills, abilities and knowledge of the job.

Job analysis can be traced to two of the founders of industrial-organisational (I-O) Psychology, Frederick Winslow Taylor and Lillian Moller Gilbreth in the early 20th century.

Taylor established standard times for specific jobs and tasks through time studies.

Through motion studies the Gilbreth’s identified techniques and technical definitions for describing the mechanical and physical elements of a job and its individual elements.

Time and Motion Study in action

The two techniques of time and motion became integrated and refined into a widely accepted and popular method of time and motion studies, applicable to the improvement and upgrading of work systems.

Time and motion studies led to the creation of the role of the Time and Motion Officer (the predecessor of a modern-day Personnel Officer).

One of the first I-0 psychologists to introduce job analysis was Morris Viteles (1922) where he used job analysis to select employees for a trolley company car. Viteles’ techniques could then be applied to any other area of employment using the same process.

Industrial Psychology - a seminal text by Morris Viteles

Evolutions of job analysis

Since Viteles’ first efforts work designers and theorists have developed many different systems approaches to accomplish job analysis.  Many forms of systems are no longer in use, but those that still exist have become increasingly detailed over the decades with a greater concentration on tasks and less concentration on human attributes. 

Moving beyond traditional job analysis

Formal job analysis and time and motion studies have now fallen out of favour in many organisations.

Part of the reason for this is that job analysis techniques makes the implicit assumption that core elements of jobs are fixed, static and repetitive.

The reality of many modern jobs is that they are made up of many elements, each of which are subject to change and evolution. Capturing all these components in a time and motion study is complicated and time consuming. And ultimately the data collected is quickly out of date as the job evolves and changes.

Whilst the limitations of job analysis to meaningfully capture modern working practices has led to a reduction in its use, this has not stopped organisations continuing to rely on job descriptions to define and specify the work people do in their jobs.

Whilst the job description used to be the end-product of a formalised and rigorous process, it is now relied upon and used as a product itself.

Rather than rely on formal processes to evaluate and assess jobs, many organisations now rely on line managers - with occasional input from HR professionals - to use their discretion to create job descriptions with the help of existing (often very detailed and specific) templates and pro-forma.

Without a viable alternative to a job description, organisations rely on this document for core processes including; recruitment, performance management, performance conversations and internal promotion cases.

Current Trends in Job Description Design

There has been a growing trend in recent years to broaden the responsibilities that people have in organisations and to encourage employees to have more autonomy and to look - and work - beyond what is simply stated on their job descriptions.

In part, this a response to an increased need for organisations to be more responsive and flexible. And this is something that became particularly pertinent during the Covid-19 pandemic where employees were challenged with doing their work in different ways - and for homeworkers particularly - often from different locations.

As HR professionals, we understand the need to continue to capture the core elements of peoples jobs. This is important for both legal (such as ensuring fair and equal pay) and performance (such as giving employees and their colleagues clarity on the focus of their work) reasons. But the reality is that many - arguably most - jobs aren’t static but are constantly evolving and could change daily. 

In this regard, there is a growing need to be more responsive to what employees do at an ‘individual’ level. Also, for the process of designing and defining jobs, and what we do to become more people centred rather than being fully defined by outdated management and HR practices.

What’s next? A personal job analysis.

At Tailored Thinking we’re exploring new ways of analysing our jobs and doing job descriptions.

We’ve created a multi-dimensional, adaptable and personalised job canvas. This is something that enables team leaders to support people to undertake their own personal job analysis - and get to the essence and details of the why and what of their work.

Trialled and tested by multiple organisations across various sectors, the job canvas is changing the way we work for the better by enabling employees to quickly, easily and digitally capture and define their job. And have better - coaching based - conversations with their line managers about the work they do.

Explore it yourself on our job canvas home page.

Thank you to Dean Horsman who kindly helped write and shape this blog bringing his knowledge and expertise alongside Rob Baker.

Dean is a Senior Lecturer in Human Resource Management at Leeds Business School, Leeds Beckett University.

Rob is the Founder and Chief Positive Deviant of Tailored Thinking.

5 reasons job descriptions are a waste of time

Job descriptions are a waste of time

Do you have a job description?

If you do, when was the last time you looked at it?

Do you even know where the latest version is saved?

Our guess, it’s probably stored on a hard drive somewhere, collecting virtual dust. 

We wonder whether job descriptions are fit for purpose in the current world of work. Whilst there is a big list of things wrong with job descriptions, these are our top 5 for today.

Our 5 top things wrong with job descriptions:

1) Old news / Instantly out of date

Our jobs are constantly changing, yet our descriptions stay the same. Once written job descriptions remain frozen in time, untouched until they are needed for a recruitment, promotion or performance process.

We believe: Job descriptions should constantly evolve and change in the way that our work does yet they seldom do.

2) Unrealistic

Job descriptions are a little like many social media profiles. They tend to show the best bits but deliberately hide or obscure the day-to-day realities of our lives. Similarly, job descriptions tend to paint a positive picture of a role without truly representing what it looks and feels like to do a job on a day-to-day basis.

We believe: Job descriptions should give readers a true sense and representation of what it feels like to do a particular job.

3) Too much or too little

There tends to be no in-between with job descriptions. They are either pages long, crammed with endless responsibilities and activities, that you rarely actually do.

On the other hand, job descriptions are far too sparse and focus on a specific number of responsibilities without reflecting the broad range of tasks and activities the job actually entails. Either way they often don’t reflect the reality of the job role.

We believe: Job descriptions should be carefully curated to give a representative picture of what a job entails.

4) Exploring and explaining why the job exists

Job descriptions often focus on tasks, competencies or responsibilities without clearly defining and explaining why the job exists in the first place. Jobs exist to provide value and a service to others yet this is infrequently captured in the job descriptions. Consequently, many job holders fail to understand or focus on the core purpose and value of the job. 

We believe: Job descriptions should clearly state and explain the purpose of the role and the value it creates to others.

5) Costly to create

A survey looking into job descriptions uncovered that more than 50% of respondents found that it takes 2 or more hours to write a job description. 

In terms of pounds and pence this would be a minimum of £32.00 per document assuming that only one person was involved in checking the document and they earned close to the average wage in the UK.

If you had 500 people working for your organisation that would be a cost of 1,000 people hours and £16,000. This figure ignores the fact that in many organisations job descriptions need to be reviewed and checked by senior and HR managers or the cost would be much more than this.

The reality is that job descriptions don’t provide a return on investment for organisations in terms of the value they create compared to time taken to write and produce them.

We believe: Our time at work is precious and job descriptions and role profiles should be able to be produced in a time efficient and cost effective way.

Doing things differently

In short we don’t think many job descriptions are worth the time and effort . We believe that job descriptions should:

• Constantly evolve and and change in the way that our work does.

• Give readers a true sense and representation of what it feels like to do a particular job.

• Be carefully curated to give a representative picture of what a job entails.

• Clearly state and explain the purpose of the role and the value it creates to others.

• Should be produced in a time efficient and cost effective way.

Creating a job canvas

At Tailored Thinking we think that job descriptions are boring, outdated and out of touch. 

We’ve created a job canvas which is easy to complete and update and captures the core elements and essence of a job rather than an infinite list of duties and tasks. 

We’re currently testing the canvas with a few selected clients. If you want to be at the front of the queue to find out more, then you can enquire here.