Martin Mulder, Tanja Weigel & Kate Collins, May 2006 Wageningen University, Social Sciences Group, Chair

group of Education and Competence Studies martin.mulder@wur.nl; www.ecs.wur.nl

Competence Development in Organisations

Wageningen University, Cedefop, nor the authors are to be held responsible for interpretations and use of the information in this presentation.

Background of the study

population: ETV members voluntary participation first round: beginning 2005 second round: middle 2005 total response: about 1,300 education and other organizations data cleaning

Focus of the Study

collecting experiences with working with competence instruments as a follow-up of an earlier national study in NL more variety in organizational size selection of countries n > 20 selection of cases who work with competence instruments this group of cases is between 600 and 700 13 countries in the final group

Number of Respondents 100 120 20 40 60 80 0

Co un try Sw ed en Au st ria Fi nl an d Ire la nd G re ec e Po rtu ga l Be lg iu m

Countries Involved

Number of Respondents by Country

Country
Th e

Sp ai n Ita Ne ly th er Un la ite nd d s Ki ng do m G er m an y Fr an ce

Countries Involved
Country Austria Belgium Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Portugal Spain Sweden The Netherlands United Kingdom Total Missing Total Number of Respondents 34 72 37 110 100 61 38 87 65 72 28 95 96 895 127 1022

Instrument Use-Overall
Instrument Use Overall
700 N u m ber of U sers 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
De fi n A Ar I De Ad De D is U A Im Ma A U r an ntr o pl e r k e s si g pp oi si ng tin se c c kno du v elo p ot c v elo ec n m n ge o g co w t t m c u p p co en om pr o le o re e is h fa pe mp co ac c o m ta p e c om du mp ten dg e co e te h p c o c il iti us e s p e t e c se en m i of es e te e t c t n mp s s e ten ea for ss pe /s e fo r ce nc n ce pe f or nc et e m t m c s e e r a r co ba ep ep s v s e n a l nc mp m an s se s se rof rof c e c ess m l ly a nts f ic es e o e ar n o nal d sm e a i o e c il ile wi n de te g pe fo e qu re ntr so en ve e s o r ga g r so ir e m p th c o n c e e r s e s nts i t in f f l o n d nn j ob j ob nis l oy de mp pm co se re m e v ati e f h e e l l ec mp elo am ee ma ol d t nt on e un nc ti o ete pm i li e pla va na er s er a e n l ua nc s e ns ge of tio e me ti o as la nt ne n n b nt w e em l pl o ye es

Yes No Do not Know Missing

Instrument

Instrument Use-Overall
Instrument Define core competence of organisation Arrange facilities for learning Introduce use of personal development plans Develop competence profiles of job families Adpot competence-based personnel management Develop competence profiles of job holders Distinguish competence centres Use competence assessments in selection of new employees Acknowledge informally acquired competence Implement assessments for employee evaluation Market products/services with competence as label Assign coaches for competence development Appoint competence managers Using competence assessment in remuneration Yes 608 562 459 454 435 423 418 388 381 374 358 284 267 177 No 104 152 231 210 228 204 238 245 239 281 283 361 348 441 Do not Know 39 16 31 55 58 50 63 56 74 32 50 32 48 53 Missing 271 292 301 303 301 345 303 333 328 335 331 345 359 351 Totals 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022

Business Sectors
defining the core competence of the organisation
Education Sector

arranging facilities for learning

Public Sector

introducing the use of personal development plans using competence-assessments in the selection of new employees appointing competence managers adopting competency based personnel management developing competence profiles of job holders marketing competence on the label of our products/services acknowledging informally acquired competence developing competence profiles of job families distinguishing competence centres implementing competence-assessments for employee evaluation assigning coaches to employees for competence development using competence assessment in remuneration

Other sectors

Business Sector Instrument Define core competence of organisation Arrange facilities for learning Introduce use of personal development plans Market products/services with competence as label Adpot competence-based personnel management Develop competence profiles of job holders Acknowledge informally acquired competence Develop competence profiles of job families Distinguish competence centres Use competence assessments in selection of new employees Implement assessments for employee evaluation Assign coaches for competence development Appoint competence managers Using competence assessment in remuneration Public Sector 156 136 94 Education 199 196 164 Other 170 156 145 Total 525 488 403

73 97 103 80 109 119

147 143 142 142 139 138

97 134 124 105 147 113

317 374 369 327 395 370

83

138

112

333

82 64 53 34

122 99 95 55

117 87 80 56

321 250 228 145

Organisation Size
Micro
defining the core competence of the organisation
Micro distinguishing competence centres

marketing competence on the label of our products/services appointing competence managers adopting competency based personnel management developing competence profiles of job families using competence-assessments in the selection of new employees
Small

developing competence profiles of job holders implementing competence-assessments for employee evaluation using competence assessment in remuneration introducing the use of personal development plans arranging facilities for learning assigning coaches to employees for competence development acknowledging informally acquired competence

Organisation Size
defining the core competence of the organisation
Micro distinguishing competence centres

Medium

marketing competence on the label of our products/services appointing competence managers adopting competency based personnel management developing competence profiles of job families using competence-assessments in the selection of new employees developing competence profiles of job holders
Large

implementing competence-assessments for employee evaluation using competence assessment in remuneration introducing the use of personal development plans arranging facilities for learning assigning coaches to employees for competence development acknowledging informally acquired competence

Organisational Size Instrument Define core competence of organisation Arrange facilities for learning Develop competence profiles of job families Introduce use of personal development plans Develop competence profiles of job holders Distinguish competence centres Adpot competence-based personnel management Implement assessments for employee evaluation Use competence assessments in selection of new employees Market products/services with competence as label Acknowledge informally acquired competence Assign coaches for competence development Appoint competence managers Using competence assessment in remuneration Micro 100 83 63 65 64 64 74 55 Small 111 94 64 74 74 77 75 54 Medium 129 118 96 94 76 82 90 76 Large 260 258 226 219 205 192 191 183 Total 600 553 449 452 419 415 430 368

57 63 71

68 57 75

76 77 86

182 155 144

383 352 376

48 46

52 45

60 55

122 118

282 264

32

26

42

75

175

Not Working with Competence

Reason for not working with competence
180 160 Num ber of Respondents 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Other Do not expect enough from it Lack of time Reason Not familiar w ith concept Decided not to Yes No Do not know

Not Working with Competence

Reason Other 21 Do not expect enough from it 13 19 53 Yes No Do not know Total

66 Lack of time

139

58

263

99 Not familiar with concept

102

52

253

120 Decided not to

155

35

310

154

106

36

296

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

Organisational Effects
45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Percentage Response

im

ra im im in im in pe im de de is i te cr pr pr cr rfo cr pr pr pr gr ea ng ov ov ea ea ov ov ov rm at s in em em em e em s si n cu i an ng in m g s e e g g en en en ce t f n n o c l n cu ex to to u m to to t u i l m of tu m sto er ib fc fe fq fc pr ra be il it co lev m om ffi ua us o ld y ro rp er ci e ve to el l ity m i o f m f f co m n ra un er of d cy e m e i t m en st nt e i ca sa ro an pl ur go ce t is of ti o ri e ain ag ba s ve fa th n nt em nc ts cti e r a n es ti o or an en on ga n an ce t ni d sa m tio alf n un cti

on ing

Effect

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

Level of Agreement Organisational Effect Performance improvement of the organisation Improvement of communication Improvement of corporate governance Improvement of efficiency Improvement of customer orientation Raising customer level of satisfaction Improving quality management Increasing flexibility Integrating cultural differences Decreasing customer complaints Decreasing number of distrubances and malfunctioning 69 69 110 78 65 74 77 88 119 111 124 145 145 115 108 107 105 135 165 125 231 225 204 210 205 193 176 192 183 203 213 222 167 241 229 219 242 211 137 154 102 103 76 103 130 128 134 104 102 66 141 115 171 127 127 151 139 137 159 200 142 143 149 148 158 150 149 155 157 163 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 None Weak Moderate Considerable Strong Do not know Missing Total

101

144

189

165

67

194

162

1022

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

HRM & HRD Effects
45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Percentage Response

im re al i in c off ma in c in c im im im in c im im du gn pro pro pro pro er pro pro re re re re k in ce me i ng as as as as vi n v v v v v g da i e e e e ed ng ing ed ed nt ex ds dr da ds be g bs i o pe c mo pe em n tte e e e t s f a ru te c ru m en l se p r e c ta rfo rd e ti v pl o c g e plo cti tee er ss tur ra rs itm rm ev ati ti o on ye y m t o m e i i sm e o a an elo on ns n e en a n o n b p n n t f i c r e s l ity re of pm of ts ac du a eo p a s l a g r t g i ns ac em i sf ti c tru o l e en a et o a f r m g fe rdi ac es ri e tru em ti c ctu to oi plo an en m ng es tio sa m pl o pp r lln i t ye s e p en n ati em loy n es ort ye es dr ts on s ee un p lo es em a s iti e ye n u d ne s es p ra er m ti o so ore n nn cl e el ar po li c y

Effect

Level of Agreement HRM & HRD Effect Improved recruitment practices Improved selection practices Increased motivation of employees Increased performance of employees Increased employee satisfaction Improved assessment structure Improved structure of salaries and remuneration Reduced absenteeism due to illness Making expectations regarding employees more clear Offering better development opportunities Improving career management increasing employability of employees Improving integration of organisation and personnel policy Alignment of personnel instruments

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

None Weak Moderate Considerable Strong Do not know Missing Total 118 115 95 78 101 100 131 120 133 108 134 131 207 199 215 223 205 186 204 216 206 226 197 213 71 81 115 123 116 103 149 139 113 123 121 137 142 152 145 141 148 152 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022 1022

261 201

186 173

153 153

111 98

35 36

125 207

151 154

1022 1022

120

132

181

193

119

119

158

1022

96 135 108

118 159 121

207 178 206

220 178 199

129 99 96

100 115 138

152 158 154

1022 1022 1022

117 120

140 146

172 183

191 169

92 75

147 166

163 163

1022 1022

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

Training & Development Effects
44 Percentage Response 42 40 38 36 34 32 30
st im ul im be be im im be im op m de ak pr tte ti m pr pr pr pr tte tte fi n ov ov ov ing ov ov ra ing r r i s b a in in in em ed i l n as l i b i g g gn g g as g e n g b e i e t s a t th se m he t m a nt m th d e f s e en or v ic ru en pl e ss is of le le oy le t t t s m e f a t h a o o e o h ar rn e e en o r r f f e n e o n ni t tra ing tra se ra ing ad f in tc s p ng ' in le in a i w rit d n c f r p ing cti ing or i ed an ing ul tic er l o l i m ng tu te on i ia d p v a a a a re nt alu at n de nd n n l fo of e i d le al ion d i rr s n ve e t d l a de s ra ea o t es e of r h lop i f n t ve n in ve o e r t i ult n n h t i t ra m lea ng lop o r i g e l n o a r ini en m ga g pm in w r a m n ea p or ng ing to ct n e r e k i o iv i su nt sa nt fe pla an gr ti e re w tio w m a d c it h m m s it h n pl e de s en oy p o v er rg ts el ee so op an s nn m is a en e t l io t? m na an ls a. t.. .. . im

at in

Effect

The Effects of the Use of Competence Instruments

Level of Agreement Training and Development Effect Better alignment of training and development with personnel management Better alignment of training and development with organisational strategy Improvement of the added value of training and development Improving advice on participation in training Improved basis for training and learning programs Optimising the learning potential of the workplace Defining assessment criteria for result measurements Improving employee willingness to learn Better basis for the selection of training activities Improving the learning culture of the organisation Stimulating the learning and development of employees Making better use of informal learning None Weak Moderate Considerable Strong Do not know Missing Total

83

153

194

209

98

120

165

1022

80

146

186

227

109

114

160

1022

75 87 76 82

121 127 128 144

191 190 201 199

224 222 228 219

128 108 113 98

119 125 112 112

164 163 164 168

1022 1022 1022 1022

120

129

179

186

102

132

174

1022

77 96 78

151 115 139

198 177 177

194 231 214

106 119 132

129 110 112

167 174 170

1022 1022 1022

78 93

131 134

182 176

220 201

129 108

110 132

172 178

1022 1022

Perceptions of Competence

assessment of competence does not indicate ways to develop them.

Agreement with statements by those not familiar with concept

there is resistance against the use of competence instruments.

working with competence instruments leads to more bureaucracy.

competence profiles are not reliable.

competence profiles are not valid.

working with competence instruments happens at the cost of attention for performance improvement.

the benefits of working with competence instruments are limited.

the cost of working with competence instruments is too high.

the definition of the competence concept is ambiguous.

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Statement

Number Agree/strongly agree

asse ssm e n t o f co m p eten ce d oe s n ot in d icate w a ys to d eve lo p th em .

Perceptions of Competence

Agreement with statements by those deciding not to use instruments

th ere is re sistan ce ag a in st th e u se o f co m p eten ce in stru m en ts.

w o rkin g w ith co m pe te n ce in stru m e nts le ad s to m o re bu rea u cracy.

com p e te nce p ro files a re n o t re lia ble.

com p e te nce p ro files a re n o t va lid .

w orking w ith com p e te nce in stru m e nts ha p pe n s at th e cost o f atte ntio n fo r p e rfo rm a n ce im p ro vem e n t. th e be n efits o f w o rkin g w ith com p e te nce in stru m e nts are lim ite d. th e cost of w orking w ith com p e te nce in stru m e nts is to o h ig h.

the d e fin itio n of th e co m p e te nce co n ce p t is a m b ig uo u s.

N um ber agree/strongly agree

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Statement

Reason (number)

Perceptions of Competence
Not familiar with concept Decide d not to Do not expect enough from it Lack of time

Other

Statement (agree + strongly agree) the definition of the competence concept is ambiguous. the cost of working with competence instruments is too high. the benefits of working with competence instruments are limited. working with competence instruments happens at the cost of attention for performance improvement. competence profiles are not valid. competence profiles are not reliable. 21 working with competence instruments leads to more bureaucracy. there is resistance against the use of competence instruments. assessment of competence does not indicate ways to develop them. 25 15 12 2 36 23 21 61 32 28 33 22 18 84 25 14 7 4 0

22 18

24 26

13 13

19 17

1 4

29

41

30

28

59

79

32

49

37

49

29

35

10

Levels of Training & Development

Define core competence of organisation Appoint competence managers

Use of instruments by those with no promotion of employee training and development

Market products/services with competence as label Develop competence profiles of job families Acknowledge informally acquired competence Distinguish competence centres

Arrange facilities for learning Introduce use of personal development plans Adpot competence-based personnel management Develop competence profiles of job holders Assign coaches for competence development Using competence assessment in remuneration Implement assessments for employee evaluation Use competence assessments in selection of new employees

Instrument

Number of Respondents

Levels of Training & Development

Arrange facilities for learning Define core competence of organisation

Use of Instruments by those with strong promotion of employee training and development

Introduce use of personal development plans Develop competence profiles of job families Develop competence profiles of job holders Adpot competence-based personnel management Acknowledge informally acquired competence Distinguish competence centres Implement assessments for employee evaluation Use competence assessments in selection of new employees Market products/services with competence as label Assign coaches for competence development Appoint competence managers Using competence assessment in remuneration

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Instrument

Number of Respondents

Levels of Training and Development

Instrument Use competence assessments in selection of new employees Implement assessments for employee evaluation Using competence assessment in remuneration Assign coaches for competence development Develop competence profiles of job holders Adpot competence-based personnel management Introduce use of personal development plans Arrange facilities for learning Distinguish competence centres Acknowledge informally acquired competence Develop competence profiles of job families Market products/services with competence as label Appoint competence managers Define core competence of organisation 1 1 35 24 103 102 128 120

Level of Promotion of Training and Development of Employees None Weak Moderate Considerable Strong

110 113

49

61

54

13

62

100

98

2 3

25 38

99 117

154 141

131 129

38

96

173

139

3 4

46 42

146 118

189 127

164 114

27

88

134

118

41

111

154

132

5 6

39 20

94 76

104 83

103 72

60

172

192

163

Conclusions 1
Voluntary participation: the study is not meant as a representative review of use; responding organizations that work with competence instruments were selected as the basis for the further analysis of the use and added value of the use of competence development instruments. No inference may be made regarding the amount of use of competence instruments in organizations in the countries studied. Response was high. Large amount of educational organizations responded.

Conclusions 2
The instruments that are being used by over 60% of the organizations are:
Defining core competence Providing facilities for learning Using personal development plans Using competence profiles

10 of the 13 instruments listed are being used by over 50% of the responding organizations

Conclusions 3
The differences in using competence instruments between the Education Sector and Other Sectors are minimal. The same holds for Organization Size. There are various reasons for not working with competence instruments; only 7% say they do not expect enough from it.

Conclusions 4 The top three effects at organisational level

Reported by over 40% of the responding organisations

Improving quality management Improving customer orientation Improvement of efficiency If these experiences reflect reality, the use of competence instruments at organisational level has a lot of potential.

Conclusions 5 The top three effects at HRM & HRD level

Reported by over 35% of the responding organisations

Offering better development opportunities Increased performance of employees Increased motivation of employees Also, if these experiences reflect reality, the top two effects are already sufficient to justify investments in implementing competence instruments in general.

Conclusions 6 The top three effects at Training & Development level

Reported by over 40% of the responding organisations

Stimulating learning and development of employees Improvement of the added value of training and development Providing a better basis for the selection of training activities And again, if these experiences reflect reality, these effects justify investments in implementing competence instruments for training and development purposes.

Conclusions 7
Over 60% of those who are unfamiliar with or not using the competence concept have resistance to use: unknown makes unloved? What are the decisions based on? The next three statements they agree with are:
The definition is too opaque: there indeed is no standardization yet! Assessment does not indicate development: but repeated assessment does. It leads to more bureaucracy: fear of paper work?

Conclusions 8
There are large differences in the use of competence instruments by the strong or weak promotion of employee training and development in general, regarding:

It seems that there are two approaches: the organisational development and personnel development approach, which can be complementary.

Arranging facilities for learning Using the concept for marketing The presence of competence managers The use of competence profiles for job holders