SFIA
Background
The SFIA is a framework used predominantly in the IT industry and which identifies the skills required to develop effective ISs and makes use of ICT.
The framework itself is owned, managed and configured by the SFIA Foundation, which is made up of the following members:
the British Computer Society (BCS), the ‘Chartered Institute for IT’ (see BCS);
E-skills UK, the sector skills council for business and information technology (see ESKILLS);
the Institution for Engineering and Technology (IET), one of the world’s largest professional societies (see IET);
the Institute for Management of Information Systems (IMIS), an international professional body associated with IT management (see IMIS);
the IT Service Management Forum (ITSMF), a truly independent worldwide forum for IT management professionals (see ITSMF).
The framework has an intended audience of:
IT professionals and their managers. This includes anybody associated with IT, whether it is providing a product or service operating these IT systems. Notice here that it is assumed that IT managers have a technical background and actually understand what IT is. This is reflected in some of the other stakeholders who are specifically defined as having a non-technical background.
Human resource managers. This includes anybody involved in recruitment, placement of people in different jobs, competency definition and assessment and so on. Notice that there is no specific requirement here for any particular technical or domain knowledge.
Non-technical managers. These managers may be people who are involved with management but who do not have a technical or IT background. Of course, there will be a different skillset required for the different types of manager, so it is important that they can be differentiated.
Internal staff-training personnel and people interested in CPD. It may be perceived here that there is an overlap with HR managers, which may very well be the case. However, there is a strong requirement for a CPD role that is not connected to HR in many organisations. It is increasingly common to find specific departments with their own drivers for competence and competency assessment that are part of a technical department, rather than being seen as remote and inside the HR department.
People working in professional bodies. It may seem very obvious, but people who work in professional bodies have a strong requirement for understanding what competence is and how it can be measured. Bearing in mind that one of the main requirements for any professional body is providing a mechanism for CPD, then the definition and use of frameworks is a no-brainer.
Lecturers, trainers and people involved with developing curricula for education. In order to demonstrate effective courses and training resources, it is essential that they meet the needs of the industry. By having a good understanding of the SFIA framework, it is possible to map the key course aspects to the framework, hence ensuring that the training satisfies the requirements of the framework.
Government personnel. In order to achieve any sort of consistency across the public sector, it is crucial that the government, and its employees, share the same vision of what skills are needed by staff.
People working in IT service organisations. It is not just the people providing the IT infrastructure and applications, but also the associated services that make up the IT industry as a whole. It is important, therefore, that all aspects of the IT industry can be represented by the framework.
With this in mind, it is now time to look at the key concepts and terminology that are used in the SFIA framework, by considering the SFIA ontology.
The SFIA ontology
The framework itself is made up of a two-dimensional matrix that is described in Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.3 SFIA framework ontology
It can be seen here that the ‘SFIA Framework’ provides a ‘Model’ that is made up of a single ‘Matrix’. This is made up of two main elements that are the ‘Skillset’ and the ‘Level of Responsibility’. The ‘Skillset’ here refers to the broad categorisation of all IT skills that is made up of a number of ‘Category(ies)’. Each ‘Category’ is made up of one or more ‘Subcategory(ies)’, each of which is made up of one or more ‘Skill(s)’. This basic structural hierarchy provides the two levels of categorisation (excluding the highest level, ‘Skillset’ which encompasses everything) and the actual skills themselves, which are the elements that are actually assessed. Each skill has a four-letter abbreviation that provides a unique identifier.
The other dimension of the matrix is the ‘Level of Responsibility’ that is made up of one or more ‘Level(s)’. In SFIA there are seven levels that exist and it is this level that relates to the actual skill that is being assessed. The level at which a particular skill is held is the ‘Level of Competence’ for an individual in that area. The categories that make up the skillset are:
the ‘Strategy and Planning’ category, which is made up of: information strategy, advice and guidance, business/IS strategy and planning, and technical strategy and planning;
the ‘Development’ category, which is made up of: systems development, human factors, and installation and integration;
the ‘Business change’ category, which is made up of: business change management and relationship management.
the ‘Service provision’ category, which is made up of: infrastructure, operation and user support;
the ‘Procurement and management support’ category, which is made up of: supply management, quality and resource management;
the ‘Ancillary skills’ category, which is made up of: education and training, and sales and marketing.
In terms of the levels, they are defined under the four attributes of: autonomy, influence, complexity and business skills. Each level has, basically, four main headings that are used to define each attribute and the combination of these four descriptions provides the overall description for the level. These levels may be broadly described as follows:
‘Follow’. A person with a skill held at level 1 is expected to be supervised most of the time and seek advice often. They are not expected to make any significant decisions, but will possess a basic knowledge of the skill.
‘Assist’. A person with a skill held at level 2 is expected to work under minor supervision and to only seek advice where necessary. They are expected to begin to use their judgement in making minor decisions.
‘Apply’. A person with a skill held at level 3 is expected to work under general supervision and will be able to make a decision as to when and where advice should be sought.
‘Enable’. A person with a skill held at level 4 will work only under general direction and will have a clear set of responsibilities. They will also plan their own work and follow processes.
‘Ensure, advise’. A person with a skill held at level 5 will work under a very broad direction but will hold full responsibility and accountability in a specific area of work. They will also set their own work goals, plans and objectives and delegate assignments.
‘Initiate, influence’. A person with a skill held at level 6 will have defined responsibility and accountability for a significant area of work. They are also accountable for decisions made by themselves and others below them.
‘Set strategy’. A person with a skill held at level 7 will have significant responsibility and authority and will be involved in defining policy. They will also be accountable for the decisions of any people working as their subordinates.
These levels can be used as a basis for mapping onto an organisation’s specific framework where necessary or may be used as stand-alone definitions.
Discussion
One of the immediate observations that strikes many people is the sheer size of the SFIA framework. There are almost 80 skills held at seven levels, which is visualised via a large chart. At first, this can be quite intimidating, but it should be noted that it is the complexity of an entity rather than its size that makes something difficult to understand and, despite its size, SFIA is well structured and defined and deceptively easy to follow.
There are seven levels of responsibility here – most other frameworks only have four or five. This is not a problem and, indeed, it is easier to map to fewer levels than it is to map to more levels (i.e. mapping from seven levels to four is less complex than mapping four levels to seven). The sheer number of levels can put some people off the framework.
The skills themselves and the categorisations shown are really for illustration only. It is made quite clear that it is the actual skills themselves that are important rather than how they are categorised. Indeed, people are encouraged to define their own structure of classification and not just to use SFIA in an off-the-shelf manner.
Like many of these frameworks, the emphasis is largely focused on the technical skills rather than the soft or human skills that may be required for a person. This is a problem that is common to many of the frameworks, but it should be borne in mind that a boundary must be put onto a framework somewhere and this boundary is quite clear in SFIA.
With the number of skills that are identified here, there are some surprising omissions from the technical areas described. One specific area that may be a cause for concern is the area of requirements engineering that is not really addressed in the framework.
The SFIA framework is very mature and has a large and formal process of continuous improvement, dedicated conferences and a massive uptake of its use in the IT industry. In terms of assessment, individuals can become SFIA-accredited consultants; this involves an assessment fee and attending a course to become a listed consultant. This only means that the assessed person is recognised as being able to give advice on SFIA skill areas, so it is not an assessment mechanism as such.