The Impact of Decision-Making Methodology on Job Evaluation Outcomes
研究比较了传统共识法、名义小组法和德尔菲法三种决策方法对岗位评估结果的影响，发现传统共识法导致更高评估值，名义小组法导致更低评估值，德尔菲法无显著变化，且不同方法下决策满意度存在差异。
This research investigated the impact of different consensus decision-making methodologies and individual needs on compensation committee decisions using the Factor Evaluation System (FES), the U.S. Civil Service's nine-factor job evaluation system. Differences between subjects' initial evaluations and final group evaluations were assessed to investigate the impact of three consensus decision-making techniques (the traditional consensus approach, Nominal Group Technique, and Delphi Technique) on job evaluation outcomes. Also, subjects' scores on a job evaluation decision-making satisfaction questionnaire were used to assess their perceived satisfaction of the decision-making process. Results indicate that the traditional consensus approach yielded higher evaluations, the Nominal Group Technique yielded lower evaluations, and no change was found using the Delphi Technique. Furthermore, differential levels of satisfaction were found across the techniques.