Yes Virginia, thereis an objective reality in job analysis
反驳了Sanchez和Levine的相对主义观点，强调工作分析中描述可验证工作特征的过程存在客观现实，并区分了工作分析与工作规范的不同。
We fundamentally disagree with Sanchez and Levine (this issue) on several issues. Terminologically, we are troubled by their failure to differentiate between the descriptive process of rating verifiable work characteristics (i.e., job analysis) versus the subjective process of inferring worker ability and ‘other’ (AO) requirements (i.e., job specification). Although ‘consequential validity’ is crucial for evaluating job specifications, it is largely irrelevant for assessing properly conducted job analyses. Ontologically, we reject their relativist view that an objective reality does not exist when describing work activities. When verifiable descriptors are rated using sound rating scales, independent judges can definitively assess position rating accuracy; such a review constitutes all the ‘validity’ evidence needed for the job analysis per se. We discuss a number of additional concerns, including the way in which practitioners deal with true cross-position ratings variability, and the role of holistic inferences. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.