Posted By Sean Fraser
Steve,

This is a hot topic at the moment and there are a multitude of different views out there as to how to determine "competency", but I will refer you back to the definition in reg 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 -

"A person shall be regarded as competent . . . where he (sic) has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to enable him properly to assist in undertaking the measures referred to in paragraph (1)" [appointment of a competent person]

As you can see, a broad definition and one that seems difficult to pin down - but here's the good thing. YOU determine the standards and qualifications to be met, then assess people on that basis. Senior competent persons can assess and pass juniors, so starting the cycle that will be self perpetuating. The problem in some cases will be in not establishing consistent standards to be met by documenting them,thereby basing decisions on subjective assessment. While there may be occasions where this is the only true way of assessing competency, you will want to avoid it if at all possible. Setting out the standard can be contentious, but at least it is a starting point and an anchor with which to start a rational and responsible debate, rather than the possible anarchy of subjective views and the dangers of exageration without substance. Aprocophal stories are just that and of limited use when establishing policies or systems. Factual based decision making is a key quality principle and one that is applied in safety as well.

The recommendation would be to have your own people determine the standards that _they_ would expect a competent person to meet, then you assist in designing a suitable measurement and assessment framework to ensure assessments are applied consistently, fairly and are properly documented. Remember that competency assessment is not a static process - the false belief that once assessed, forever competent - and your system needs to include a means by which people are re-assessed, usually through observation of their work or through a review of work samples - this can be done during quality/safety audits as a means of utilising an existing system to feed into another. After all, the workplace is continually evolving, through new work practices or updated technology, so people need to adapt to meet these changes and this can sometimes be a challenege to their long held knowledge and beliefs. They need to demonstrate that they remain as capable now as they were 10, 5, 3 or even 1 year ago. Obviously this is dependent on the nature of the individual workplace and how often it changes, so pitch it at the right level. Too often can be intrusive and of limited benefit (or even detrimental), but too seldom can put people at a disadvantage. A good competency system will encourage continual learning and perhaps prompt ambitions to progress personally and as an organisation, especially where you have different comptency levels.

Note that one key quality of any competent person is being aware of where their knowledge / experience is lacking - in my personal definition "competency is knowing when to ask!". This can be done by knowing when (and where) to look things up, go on a training course, go for a new qualification or simply when to consult someone else.

But beware - linking competency directly to pay can be a minefield. There is no more guaranteed method to cause dissent and resentment than to link new systems to the actual money people earn. Make sure that if this is planned, you have a firm and well researched basis upon which to build your system and that you have the reasoning well prepared in advance!

Critical to anything that has such a major impact on how people work is consultation. By involving people as much as possible in the development stages, you will encourage ownership and co-operation when it is finally implemented. Sounds simple, but it is surprising how often companies drop this on their staff believing they have developed the near perfect system, only to be surprised when mass resistance and resentment causes it to fail. And the shame is, somethimes the system was as near to perfect as it could have been and any compromise replacement won't be as good as it could have been.

Gosh, this is quite a ramble, isn't it. The point is - only you, as a company/organisation, can determine your competencies as there seems to be little in the way of outside guidance on this, beyond NVQ/SVQ (and once again, these are qualifications!). Perhaps one route to check out would be appropriate trade associations related to the trades / occupations you employ regarding any competency standards they have already developed, but be careful they aren't just endorsing training or courses - these provide a foundation for competency but aren't the standards to be achieved and maintained. Try any recognised Trade Unions and consult with your TU reps if you have any. The TUC can be a very useful resource to tap into and they are likely to be happy to help.

So, finally, to directly answer your question - get those people who you currently deem competent to set out what they see as the standards to be achieved, then determine how these can be defined, measured/assessed and recorded. Make sure that the people who assess competency can demonstrate their own competency and hence have authority to carry this out. There is nothing worse than having an excellent system at the lower levels but failing to demonstrate the competency at the top end, making the good work suspect through lack of traceability. Probability is that you will end up with a number of competency levels (i.e. novice, competent, proficient, expert) that would apply to each competency developed. Therefore, just because you have achieved that competency level doesn't mean you stay there! And of course it gives people room to develop a specialism (or two) and provides a ladder for ambition. Then, and only then, can you consider using competencies as a means of determining promotion (remember the cautionary note regarding linking competence to pay scale!).

We are going down a similar route at the moment and it seems qquite daunting, but like all things, a clear vision of what you want to achieve and a step by step approach will bring you closer to your goal.

Some web pages for further information:

http://www.trainingneedsanalysis.co.uk/tna_cd.htm

http://www.hse.gov.uk/policy/outline.htm

http://www.doceo.co.uk/background/expertise.htm

http://www.re-skill.org.uk/relskill/confid.htm

http://www.imeche.org.uk...mpetence_statement_c.pdf

Hope at least some of this has been useful.