Rank in Man or Job? Both!

Abstract

IT is a widely held belief that there are two separate, incompatible, and even antagonistic personnel systems in the world-a personal rank system centering attention on the individual and his qualifications, title, and status opposed by a job-oriented system concentrating attention on distinctions in job levels with little regard for the persons filling the jobs. British Civil Service, the U. S. Foreign Service, and military personnel plans often are cited as examples of the first system. typical U. S. and Canadian civil service plans are considered to be examples of the second. There is much evidence, however, that the differences are becoming smaller in the United States and that, in many essentials, placement systems centering on rank-in-the-man and those centering on rank-in-the-job are now similar. Our experience demonstrates, for example, that a career service (in which young people are brought into the organization to remain and advance throughout their working lives) is possible in job-oriented systems and, in fact, is thriving in many federal agencies. Under good personnel management in either system, the rank of the man matches the rank of his job. Recent studies of public personnel practices recognize that characteristics of the two systems generally are mixed, and 0. Glenn Stahl concludes: The proper balance between the position-oriented and person-oriented approaches will continue for some time