Competency-based or a traditional approach to training? A new look at ISD models and an answer to the question, What's the best approach?

T+D, April, 2004 by David Dubois, William Rothwell

With training budgets increasing and managers and HR practitioners recognizing that "jobs" are "out" and "work" is "in" the subject of what approach to training is best arises again.

At the same time, a need emerges to define what competencies or traits a worker must possess to achieve prescribed work outcomes. Competencies models, detailing not only those traits but also how those traits should be used in a work setting, are now being addressed in various training settings, such as the traditional and systematic ISD model and Dubois's Strategic Systems Model (SSM), which advocates the wide participation of people in and external to the organization.

The authors suggest that training can become competency-based in at least three ways: 1) by reinventing the ISD model (or using the SSM), 2) focusing attention on training to build individual competence relative to a competency model of exemplary performance, or 3) building individual competence in a work-team context.

After tackling the advantages and challenges associated with a competency-based approach to training, the authors explain when employee training should become competency-based or be handled traditionally, and how to implement competency-based training.

**********

You might think of employee training as a process of helping individuals adjust to the corporate culture of an organization and become or remain productive as competitive, technological, and organizational conditions change. This article compares traditional and competency-based views of employee training. To that end, it addresses and answers these questions: What is employee training? What are competencies, and why are they important? How is training traditionally carried out? How can training become competency-based? What are the advantages and challenges of a competency-based approach to employee training? When should training become competency-based, and when should it be handled traditionally? What models can guide competency-based training? How can the model of competency-based training be implemented? These questions, and our answers to them, provide thought-provoking ways to compare and contrast a traditional to a competency-based approach to training.

"Training," according to The ASTD Reference Guide to Workplace Learning and Performance (HRD Press, 2000), "is a short-term learning intervention. It is intended to build on individual knowledge, skills, and attitudes to meet present or future work requirements." Training should have immediate and highly specific impact on work performance and be grounded on requirements of an organization and its unique corporate culture. In that respect, it differs from education and employee development, which prepare people for work and life.

There are various types of training:

* remedial or basic skills

* orientation

* qualifying

* second-chance

* cross-training

* retraining

* outplacement.

Remedial training helps people meet the basic screening or entry-level requirements for a job.

Orientation training helps individuals become socialized into a corporate culture.

Qualifying training helps people become productive, meeting the basic performance expectations of the work they're hired to perform.

Second-chance training is given to people who aren't performing in line with organizational work standards, and is literally a second chance before they're transferred or terminated.

Cross-training helps people master new jobs or new job skills.

Retraining provides upgrading to keep skills current as technological or organizational conditions change.

Outplacement training prepares employees for departure from an organization in the wake of retirement, downsizing, right-sizing, smart-sizing, or other staffing changes.

Recent research suggests an increase in spending on training. In 1998, the amount spent on corporate training was US$62.5 billion according to Industry Report: 1999. The ASTD 2003 State of the Industry Report states that overall expenditures for training increased from $734 in 2001 to $826 in 2000 on a per-employee basis among ASTD's Benchmarking Organizations.

A Future Search conference, held in June 2001 in conjunction with the 2001 ASTD International Conference, the Academy for Human Resource Development, and ASTD's Research-to-Practice National Committee had the theme, "Shaping the Future: Leading Workplace Learning and Performance in the New Millennium." About 65 specially selected experts discussed their perspectives on the future of the field and voted on trends that they believed would impact workplace learning and performance.

The top 10 trend areas identified:

1. Money

2. Diversity

3. Time

4. Work

5. World

6. Meaning

7. Change

8. Knowledge

9. Technology

10. Careers.

"Eight Trends You Need to Know Now" {January T+D)

What are competencies? Why are they important?

We will proceed to answer that question by providing the underlying foundation for understanding the meaning of "competencies." Operations managers and HR practitioners are equally recognizing that "work" is "in" and "jobs" are rapidly becoming "out." Why?