Competencies are probably most closely related
to abilities. However, in our craft, the term ability normally means
either able to do or a special talent; while competencies relate more
to expertise and experience. Competencies can be thought of as the
state or quality of being well qualified to perform a task. A person
gains competency through education, training, experience, or natural
abilities. Klemp (1980, p21) defined competence as “an underlying
characteristic of a person which results in effective and/or superior
performance on the job.” While a more detailed definition is “a cluster
or related knowledge, skills, and attitudes that reflects a major
portion of one's job (a role or responsibility), that correlates with
performance on the job, that can be measured with well-accepted standards,
and that can be improved with training and and development (Parry,
1996, p50).“
While there are many definitions of competency, most of them have
two common elements:
The competency is an observable and measurable knowledge and skills.
The knowledge and skills must distinguish between superior performers
(or exemplary performance) and other performers.
Since its initial conception, attitudes, traits, or personalities
have also played a major role in competencies, even though they
are not normally thought of as being observable and measurable.
Some people group attitudes with competencies, such as McClelland,
while others, such as the U.S. Army, separate them by listing attitudes
under attributes to create a Capability Model (Northouse, 2004):
Attributes —> Competencies —> Performance Outcomes
David McClelland
The original use of competencies was conceived by David McClelland.
He first used it as an alternative for the replacement of intelligence
tests with criterion reference testing (McClelland, 1973). He argued
that intelligence tests were not valid predictors of intelligence
and irrelevant to the workforce. There used to be a joke among Psychologists
that intelligence was what the intelligence test measured, but McClelland
thought the joke was “uncomfortably near the whole truth and nothing
but the truth.”
Following his groundbreaking 1973 article, a number of large organizations
called him. McClelland selected to work with the U.S. State Department
to improve their failing selection process, which was based on selecting
the best and brightest from elite universities. McClelland developed
competencies for each position based on behavioral interviews with
superior performing Foreign Service Officers and underpinned each
competency with behavior indicators. However the State Department
never really implemented his findings because it challenged their
fundamental view — they came from the top schools themselves and
were personally committed to upholding the status quo, rather than
improving their selection process (Berger & Berger, 2003). However,
he was more successful in implementing similar programs for the
U.S. Navy and other large organizations.
Contrasts
If one had to contrast or contextualize competencies with something,
it would probably be tasks (to include conditions and standards).
Tasks are normally very specific in that they inform the task holder
and other interested persons, such as supervisors and trainers,
on how each logical and necessary action results in a major accomplishment.
The main benefit of tasks is that since they are normally very specific,
especially when they include the steps, they leave little room for
error when it comes to evaluating the worthiness of task performance.
However, being very specific, they can be extremely time-consuming
to create, especially when a job may have 50 to 100 tasks or more.
And with jobs and processes rapidly changing in many environments,
they can quickly become outdated. In addition, when it comes to
such professions as management, leadership, and knowledge workers,
most job responsibilities are often ill-defined and very broad in
scope, thus the specific nature of tasks do not work well.
Thus, the ideal of competencies, which at first may look more like
broad conceptions of a job, is to base them on the analysis of exemplary
performers (McClelland, 1973). After an analysis, normally composed
of interviews and/or observations, a few keyword(s) are chosen to
describe each competency. Each job normally has five to ten competencies.
The number is normally kept small, otherwise they run into the same
problems as tasks — there are simple too many to properly evaluate
and keep up-to-date.
For example, some of the competencies for a person in a leadership
position might include Ethics, Decision Making, Team Development,
and Coaching.
Behavioral Indicators
As noted, competencies are normally based on an analysis by interviewing
and observing an expert performer. During the analysis, key behavioral
indicators are determined for successful performance of the job.
These behavioral indicators are linked to a competency. For example,
the competency of Decision Making might include the following behavioral
indicators:
Dealing with difficult decisions:
Able to connect information together in order to diagnose problem.
Determines root cause to fully resolve issue
Sensitive to the needs of others when dealing with divisive issues.
Commits to a course of action:
Can make decisions quickly when necessary.
Seeks the correct answer and understands the impact that the decision
could have on other organization issues.
The behavioral indicators are often contrasted with INEFFECTIVE
indicators, for example:
Dealing with difficult decisions:
Avoids making decisions and often waits for others to make the
decision.
Does not take responsibility for wrong or ineffective decisions.
Since one of the main uses of competencies is to help in the interviewing
and selection of new hires, questions may be created to elicit responses
from the candidates that will reveal their past behaviors with the
premise being that past behaviors will help in predicting the behaviors
that you can expect from them if hired. Listed below are two lines
of questions to help in determining a person's competency on Decision
Making. Note that each question is followed by one or more questions
in case there is a need to draw additional information from the
candidate:
Tell me about a recent decision you have had to make in which there
was little or no time to seek addition information? What impact
did the decision have on the business? What did you do to help lessen
the risk of making a bad decision?
Tell me about a time you made a bad decision? What lessons did you
learn from it?
Competency models are also helpful in the growth of present employees.
Few, if any employees will be expert performers in all the competencies
listed for a position, thus the model is used to help them with
their career growth within the organization. For example, in one
organization where I worked we had a manager who was very good,
except for his decision making aspect. He had a tendency to make
decisions that were good for his department, but were often not
well suited for the organization as a whole, that is, according
to the behavioral indicator given above, he failed to realize the
impact his decisions had on other organizational issues. Thus he
was promoted to a department that had a history of making good decisions
and put under the mentorship of a person known to excel in making
quality decisions (sometimes it pays to be not quite perfect).
Criticisms
The two major complaints about competencies seem to be its lack
of a common definition and understanding and the possibility of
becoming ethnocentric.
While many terms in our craft lack a common definitions and understanding
among its members, competencies seem to be about the worst offender.
In some cases, the word entirely changes. For example, Behavioral-Based
Interviewing looks as if it is mostly based upon the concept of
the competency modeling process.
Since competencies often encompass attitudes, there is the danger
of them becoming so specific that it could promote ethnocentrism,
rather than diversity. One has to be quite careful when including
attitudes with competencies.