TECHNOCompétences COMITÉ SECTORIEL DE MAIN-D’ŒUVRE EN TECHNOLOGIES DE L’INFORMATION ET DES COMMUNICATIONS

Challenges and limitations of the competency-based approach

A little confusion...

There is a lack of clarity with regard to the competency-related problems. There is little uniformity in the vocabulary and methods used, which would require a research and reflection initiative to determine what positioning to adopt.

The competency-based approach may fail if the following factors are present:

• A lack of commitment by executives and by management: the organization’s leaders must approve and support the use of a competency-based process. Otherwise, failure is certain.

• A lack of harmonization of management practices, which must be revised in line with the implementation of the competency-based approach.

• An excessive number of competencies requiring development: stick to the key or strategic competencies.

• The selected model does not really correspond to the organization’s strategic objectives: the selected competencies must be essential with regard to generating a superior return. Furthermore, individuals must be evaluated based on the organization’s key success factors.

• A poorly-designed model and the inability to develop adequate methods for competency validation, evaluation, and training.
  The organization’s inability to share information and distribute the most strategic data.

Flash Competencies

Research by McClelland1 (1973) proved that certain types of competencies are more accurate predictors of performance:

1. Knowledge (about a given discipline)
2. Skills: behavioural demonstration of expertise: leading meetings, etc.
3. Self-perceptions (attitudes, values, self-image: perception of being a leader, etc.)
4. Traits (tendency to act a certain way: perseverance, flexibility, initiative, etc.)
5. Motivations (inner strengths that nurture behaviours such as performance)

It appears that in complex jobs, the last three are the competency types that dictate success. They are called differential competencies.

• Quite often, the competencies that correspond to an individual’s in-depth characteristics (such as leadership) are the most strategic; however, they are also the most difficult to evaluate.

• Organizations have a tendency to develop the same competencies, such as “client-focus”, for example. The difference is in the ways these competencies are evaluated and the personnel is trained.

• It could be a good idea to analyze the behaviour of individuals whose performance in the organization is superior. The results of this analysis could serve as the basis for an effective model.

• Be aware of the life span of competencies: competencies can quickly become outdated (except for behavioural competencies). An effective exercise entails projecting competencies into the future and attempting to evaluate their life span and to recognize new competencies as they emerge.

• Intellectual function tests and diplomas earned are not necessarily predictors of performance in a position (McClelland, 1973).
  Competencies are evaluated, but it is also necessary to evaluate an employee’s results. The most competent employee is not necessarily the one with the most in-depth knowledge but the one who can apply his or her knowledge to the objectives at hand.

___________________________________________________
1 Michel Tremblay, “Payer pour les compétences validées : une nouvelle logique de rémunération et de développement des ressources humaines” in Gestion, vol. 21, no 2, juin 1996, p. 33.
2 Idem.