13 Chapter 2: Critical Literature Review 2.1 ... - Dissertation

54mandatory questions. Once the analysts have ensured that the filled out questionnaire is ready forevaluation, it is forwarded to a panel of that is constituted primarily of two members of the staffand two members of the management of the institute/organization/hospital that the subjectemployee is working in. The questionnaire responses are then evaluated in light of the 16 factorsto determine the exact value of the job to the institute/organization/hospital.It is essential to realize that this article makes extensive use of secondary data and whileit presents the findings in exquisite detail, the absence of primary data puts the researchperformed in the article in a position where the credibility of the findings of the article suffersignificantly (Watts and Green, 2004). This can be concurred on the basis of the fact that thelarger share of articles that were considered for evaluation for the purpose of this paper includedprimary data and the analysis of that data in a manner that was nothing less than in depth. In lightof this fact, while the article is highly detailed and presents credible elaborations, the findings ofthis particular article can only be considered as a minor contribution to the research into jobevaluation in NHS.The authors bring the article to a conclusion with recommendations for the matchingprocess and the evaluation process. The matching process is one that requires extensiveincorporation of enhanced levels of flexibility, and the evaluation process has become far toocomplex and time consuming in attempts to make it as accurate as possible (Watts and Green,2004). The authors end with an optimistic note on the NHS Job Evaluation System, stating thaterrors such as those of the NHS Job Evaluation System can be trusted to be ones of only minorsignificance and should evolve out of the system as time passes and modifications andamendments are brought about.