Ellen,
Hi. I've been heavily involved for the past ten years in in the development
and use of competencies from both the point of view of national and
international recognition and use of competency/skills standards (from the
policy maker's level) and their application in the workplace (as both a
practitioner and researcher). I am currently lecturing on this at university
and am applying this as academic director for a nationally recognised
management level course.
What this means is that I have both experience, and vision, about what
competencies can be used for and how they can influence organisations and
nations wherever they are applied.
Before answering your question I must state, and probably lose a few readers
in doing so, that my experience and research shows that competencies are
wasted on trainers and educators. We have a very serious role to play in
defining them and helping people reach and maintain them. But that is where
our role should end. It is up to the organisation or industry concerned to
take these competencies and use them to better achieve short, medium and long
term goals and objectives. They are tools that are important to the growth of
whole organisations, industries and nations, not just the tools used by
educators to write their courses.
There is an old saying that people are hired for their skills and fired for
their behaviour. We (the trainers and educators) have for too long
concentrated only on the skills believing that we were providing the
behaviour. We weren't. This is proven time and again by people who will post a
list of traits or skills areas and call these competencies. Nothing could be
further from the truth.
Competency isn't a list of skills or knowledge but the application and
management of skills and knowledge that influence change in the workplace. In
the past these would be defined by a job description or duty statement but
today they go much further than this.
Competency, in today's definition, actually captures all of those things that
a person is assessed or appraised on in the workplace. It includes not only
the skills and knowledge needed to do the job that he/she is currently doing
(or aspires to do), but also the management and application of all those other
tasks that go into the competent application of the skills and knowledge (eg,
dressing appropriately, reacting under adversity, time management,
communicating with others and so on).
Competency also includes the application of skills and knowledge to develop
and apply contingency planning when things go wrong (eg, computer system shuts
down in the middle of an important letter, or staff don't comply with
instructions), and being able to manage the job or environment in which he/she
applies the skills and knowledge (eg, working in teams or with others,
transferring the skills and knowledge to different situations, understanding
and applying guidelines and procedures etc.).
At an organisational level, and remember this is where the people who graduate
from any education activity must return and apply them, these competencies
underpin any well functioning appraisal system and provide the basis for
succession planning, recruitment and promotions throughout any organisation.
They cover all levels of an organisation and provide the basis for all
training, development, education and self-development programs any employee
could ever need now and in the future. But they aren't ours to play with -
they belong to the organisation who uses them.
As can be seen, competency is far more than a list of things a person must do
(as, for example, shown in a list of traits or 'core competencies') but is a
description of the skills and knowledge needed to perform in a certain
function against the needs and objectives of the organisation in which that
function is found.
For trainers this makes the game very difficult because it is saying, in
essence, that because each person (even when coming from the same branch in
the same organisation) will have different influences on his/her job therefore
the competencies will be different. This is true but it depends on how the
competencies are written.
If the competencies are written as inputs (eg, the person 'must know' or
'understand') then it will be very difficult to contextualise and apply these
back on the job - just as any experience trainer will have already found. But
if they are written as outcomes (eg, 'files are classified according to the
appropriate security procedures', or 'Individual appraisals are conducted in a
supportive and positive manner') then these can very easily be contextualised
because it is only in the workplace that they are assessed. They cannot be
assessed any other way.
All of the above has been provided as the background to the comments I'm going
to make regarding your request. I'd be happy to send you more information
regarding everything I've put above but, for the moment, I'll address your
questions:
Ellen Louise Short wrote:
> Hello -
>
> I am currently doing research on competency in
> management/business, and competency in business schools' curricula (e.g.,
> are competencies taught and if yes, how are they taught, evaluated, etc.).
>
> I would appreciate receiving information/comments re: the
> following:
>
> 1. Implementation of competencies in the work environment
> (e.g., how well to competencies that are taught in graduate business schools
> translate in work environments?).
If the competencies are written based on the work environment then there will
never be any problem with them. All training and education should be based on
what happens in real life (except, of course, programs that rely only on
theory or historical discover) and therefore reflect what people must be
capable of doing to be deemed competent. However, we have tended to slip away
from this and run programs that are based more on how long we can keep people
in the classroom (success based on number of hours spent learning!!). As a
result all sorts of knowledge is covered - some of it relevant but most of it
not.
If we allow the workplace to be the yardstick by which training or education
is measured, rather than the Happy Sheets or our contentment at having
achieved only our learning objectives, then the two will be forever
compatible.
> 2. Can competencies be measured? If yes, how?
Absolutely. A competency is a description of a performance. If it is written
in terms of output or outcome (rather than learning input which really only
measures our effectiveness) then it will always be capable of measurement.
But, measurement by whom?
First of all they will always be measured by the individual's manager and
workmates. They are the ones who are influenced and affected by the skills and
knowledge he/she applies so they are usually a good source. However I disagree
that 360 degree assessment is a valid way of doing this because it doesn't
always measure what it sets out to measure. Measurement of an outcome is best
carried out by assessing evidence of that outcome or output, not measurement
of the person. But, having said that, a 360 degree assessment can provide
useful supporting evidence of competent performance, but not direct evidence.
Exactly who carries out the assessment is another issue well worth exploring
separately.
> 3. Can competencies be updated? If yes, by what process?
>
In theory competencies can, and should always be, updated. But in practice
they rarely are. The reason for this is simple: one of the key competencies
for any competent person is the ability to take and use new information and
methods for doing things as and when they are identified. A 'competent' person
will always be looking around for better and newer ways of applying his/her
skills and knowledge. This means that even when the competencies aren't
updated formally, they will always be updated in the how the skills and
knowledge are applied.
Writing competencies in the first place is a very simple task (made very
difficult by those who took Honours in research methodology). Once they have
been developed they need not change in toto but in detail. For example,
competencies are written to cover those elements of what was once known as a
learning or training objective. We have the Behaviour (the element of
performance), the Standard (the performance criteria), and the Conditions (the
range of conditions or contexts/variables in which the performance is
applied).
There are very few work related skills and knowledge outside of the purely
technical competencies that haven't been around since the Pyramids - and
probably before then. What has changed is where and how they are applied. This
means that if there are any changes to be made to competencies it will usually
be in the contexts or environment in which the competencies are now applied.
A good example of this is project management. Where this was once the domain
of architects and engineers it is now accepted that such skills and knowledge
provide the basis of any competent staff member or manager at most levels of
any organisation. Much of middle management has been replaced by project teams
which have to be managed and coordinated. But, if we have a close look at the
skills and knowledge of a project manager, many of them are applied, on a
daily basis, in any well run and managed area.
> 4. Are there any examples of Dynamic Models of Competency
> that are frequently used?
>
How many do you want? Just about every country in the world is using some form
of competency-based processes. In the US the NSSB are putting more emphasis on
the development and use of skills standards (albeit on a voluntary and State
by State basis) but most other countries have developed their own. Give me a
yell for more details.
> 5. Can educators influence competencies effectively? What
> are the best methods of doing this?
>
It depends on what you mean by 'influence'. If you mean 'can they teach
competency' then the answer is no. Educators can only teach the skills and
knowledge and how to apply them in line with the individual's needs. Educators
can even assess whether or not they have been applied, but it is up to the
individual to apply the skills and knowledge because only he/she knows exactly
why and how they are used. And because this application is a central part of
competency then, no, the educator can't teach it.
This question reminds me of the argument regarding whether or not educators
can teach attitude and behaviour. I say they can't because these are reflected
in the way certain skills and knowledge are applied. For example, poor
customer service might infer a certain attitude or behaviour, but it is only
exampled by the skills and knowledge as they are applied. Anyone can have a
racist attitude but as long as it is isn't shown in the way they apply their
skills and knowledge then there is little chance that others will notice.
Attitude and behaviour are discipline problems and best left up to line
managers to deal with. Our role is to provide the skills and knowledge -
including the knowledge of where and how to apply them back on the job.On the
other hand, if your question relates to whether or not educators have a part
to play in identifying and developing the competency or skills standards then
I'd have to say yes, definitely. Here is where I believe our greatest
challenge, and enjoyment, is going to come from in the coming years.
Whereas we would once be active in carrying out training needs analyses which
identified (or so we thought) what training was required, we now have the
opportunity to more accurately identify not what training is needed but the
skills and knowledge people need to be competent in their work. And not all of
this will come from training.
From here we identify the gap between what they now know, and what they should
know, and there is the training need - or development need, or
self-development need, or need for a special project, or experience, or
mentoring, or coaching .... and so on. In other words, we are fast becoming
managers of learning, and not trainers and educators. Exciting isn't it?
> 6. In teaching competencies, what, if anything is lost in the
> educational experience? Is it possible to avoid this?
>
To answer this question, have another look at my last paragraph. Competencies
are based on the needs and objectives of the organisation, not on the
educational processes. As a result, our job takes on a far wider guiding and
coaching role than ever before. In the development of the standards by which
competence will be measured, people are told - sometimes for the first time -
exactly what their job entails and how they will be measured in it. Some
people will say that they've always done things that way, and in which case we
need only recognise and appropriately reward their past (and presumably
current) activities. Others will say that they didn't know they were supposed
to be doing things that way and in which case we develop opportunities for
them to do so. Others still will say that they don't have these opportunities
in which case we move into an OD mode where we help them influence their whole
organisation based on what is recognised as best practice in the competencies
they are applying.
(I should mention that competencies aren't based on the status quo - they are
actually based on what the best people are doing, or are striving to do,
within the vocational field for which the competencies are developed. This may
mean that some people will say that their organisation doesn't do things that
way which gives them the opportunity to not only look at what the people are
doing, as measured against the best, but also what their organisation is
doing.)
Here is where so many opportunities are opening up for the traditional
education and training provider to form partnerships with industry.
Identifying and developing the desired competencies is a big job, and not one
that can be undertaken simply by reading books. It takes a fair degree of
workplace analysis and support by both management and their training/education
providers.
Some organisations can do all of this, others can do some, while others still
won't have the resources to do any. What an opportunity.
Up until about 3 years ago I was working with the national and international
policy developers, working hard to get agreements at national levels for these
processes. I have worked in several countries and found that in only a few
instances were the educators willing to step out of their comfort zones and
look closer at what we were doing. Since then I have been working closely with
our university developing a model program that not only demonstrates how
easily these processes work, but the immense benefits to be gained from it. We
are running only two distance courses (in project management) but have so far
won customers - by word of mouth - from nearly every country in the world. Is
it the most brilliant project management course around? I doubt it. But it is
competency-based and as such it is directed straight at the heart of any
student's needs - to be more effective in his/her work area.
I hope that helps. If you want any more details please feel free to give me a
yell. I occassionally (occassionally? Hahahahaha) get up on my soap box about
this subject but if you can bear with me I'll talk all day.
Regards
Phil Rutherford
Lecturer and academic director
University of New England
and
Competency-based systems specialist
robnphil@ozemail.com.au