Reading the AfC evaluation handbook and looking into the process a few weeks ago I had the impression that if the majority of factors outlined in the JD/JS match to the job profile then the panel would try to match to an appropriate profile using the JMQ to assist in this.
Only then if a match could not be made then the JEQ route would be considered if local matching were unsuccessful. This is not what I'm discussing - I was talking about the local matching process, based on established profiles, not Job Evaluation that applies in your case, I believe, Ken.
The Job Matching Questionnaire (JMQ) is used to assess the levels once you've been matched to an initial band, hence the matchers should be aware what the factor levels are likely to be for the initial profile considered (based on tangiables, i.e. knowledge/skills, etc). This is a "benchmark" I suppose.
If you exceed the factor "levels" for the band you're initially matched to then the panel considers awarding more points, i.e. increasing a level, or possibly moving you up a band, if the majority of the factors in the JMQ indicate this, or vice-versa if your JMQ factors are very poor relative to the initial profile chosen.
That's the way I remember reading the local job evaluation process and I believe this is the process that has been applied to our matching. Only when this process fails to give a match is the JEQ route considered, I believe. Could be totally wrong and nowhere near the mark since I've only discussed the process breifly (and locally) with individuals who're involved in the process.
Points do have to be capped for each factor, for a job profile in a particular band , otherwise a really good score in one factor only could lift you into a higher band if the potential score were not limited - this would make a mockery of having other factors and establishing "benchmark" levels for particular job profiles - hence I do not believe this is how "profiling" works.
