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:
They are static documents which box people in - they don’t encourage innovation or personalisation
They are out of date as soon as they are written
They are often works of fiction - they don’t describe how a job is actually done
They take time to complete and are not easy to update
They don’t capture the true value or purpose of a role
They get lost across the organisation
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 is the founder and Chief Positive Deviant of Tailored Thinking.
September 2021
