The most common way to collect job information is to ask the people who are doing a job to fill out a questionnaire. Sometimes an analyst will interview the jobholders and their supervisors to be sure they understand the questions and that the information is correct. Or the analyst may observe the person at work and take notes on what is being done. The advantage of conventional questionnaires and interviews is that the involvement of employees increases their understanding of the process. However, the results are only as good as the people involved. If important aspects of a job are omitted, or if the jobholders themselves either do not realize or are unable to express the importance of certain aspects, the resulting job descriptions will be faulty. As a result of this potential subjectivity, as well as the huge amount of time the process takes, conventional methods have given way to more quantitative (and systematic) data collection. A questionnaire typically asks jobholders to assess each item in terms of whether or not that particular item is part of their job. If it is, they are asked to rate how important it is and the amount of job time spent on it. Questions are grouped around five compensable factors: knowledge, accountability, reasoning, communication, and working conditions. Results can be used to prepare a job profile based on the compensable factors. If more than one person is doing a particular job, results of several people in the job can be compared or averaged to develop the profile. Some consulting firms have developed quantitative inventories that can be tailored to the needs of a specific organization or to a specific family of jobs, such as data/information processing jobs. In addition to involvement by analysts, jobholders, and their supervisors, support of top management is essential. Support of union officials in a unionized workforce is as well. They must be alerted to the cost and time commitments of a thorough job analysis, and the fact that changes will be involved.