Competency frameworks are funny things. If they are well-designed, fit the organisational culture and work well they have a way of taking over HR processes. Pretty soon they form the basis of every recruitment campaign, every learning needs analysis, every development plan, career plan and succession plan, every performance management review meeting...
But it’s almost as if they work TOO well. When organisations use ‘joined-up thinking’ to link all these processes with competencies, then the levels of competency (skills, knowledge, abilities) of employees tend to improve. Two to five years after being introduced, the levels, and even the competencies themselves, start to look out of touch with the increasingly high levels of behaviour and performance demonstrated by employees. They need revision and updating.
Of course, if your organisation’s competency framework (you have got one, haven’t you?) ISN’T being used to improve recruitment, development, performance management and reward, then the levels of competence of employees could well have NOT changed since the framework was introduced. And if it’s not being used in any structured or integrated way, then it’s probably not being evaluated either.
So there’s the dilemma: really good competency frameworks need (expensive) regular reviews and revisions, while mediocre or under-used competency frameworks can be left alone for years.
What’s yours like?
No comments:
Post a Comment