UCAM SUPPORT PROCESSES
The four processes discussed in the previous sections form the core processes of UCAM and are executed to ensure that the competency assessment elements described in the UCAM meta-model (see Chapter 3) are created and utilised. As shown in Figure 4.3 above and previously discussed, there are a number of UCAM support processes that can be carried out prior to and following execution of the core UCAM processes.
When tailoring UCAM for use within an organisation, a large part of the tailoring effort is likely to be needed in the identification and definition of these non-core UCAM support processes. These support processes can be organised into two groups: the pre-assessment processes that are executed before the core UCAM processes and the post-assessment processes that are run afterwards.
In this section a number of possible support processes are discussed. This is not meant to be an exhaustive definition, but is intended to give an indication of the types of support process that will be needed when tailoring UCAM. Also, it is not the intention here to define these processes in detail, since the exact nature of each process will depend on the requirements of the tailoring organisation. For each process introduced, a simple text description will be provided. The pre-assessment processes are introduced first and are shown in Figure 4.23.
Figure 4.23 identifies four types of ‘Pre-assessment Process’, which are discussed below. Note the use of the ‘{incomplete}’ constraint to show that not every possible ‘Pre-assessment Process’ has been identified. The processes shown are:
Figure 4.23 The Pre-assessment Processes
‘Job Description’. This process would be executed when UCAM is to be used to support recruitment. The ‘Job Description’ process is responsible for identifying the competencies necessary for a given job, perhaps helping to identify source frameworks that could be used as a basis of recruitment assessment or identifying relevant competencies from frameworks that have already been selected. In this way the outputs from the ‘Job Description’ process could feed into the core ‘Framework Population’ process to help define competency scopes or even applicable competency sets.
‘Assessee Preparation’. This process is responsible for informing assessees of the purpose and scope of an assessment and of the types of evidence that will be required. The assessees can then gather such evidence and even familiarise themselves with the framework(s) against which they will be assessed. This may or may not be desirable, as knowledge of the content of an assessment framework often leads some assessees to study the framework in an attempt to ‘beat the system’. This process would normally be executed prior to the core ‘Assessment’ process.
‘CPD Planning’. This process would be executed when UCAM is to be used for self-assessment as part of a CPD activity. The process is intended to force assessees into considering which CPD aspects are to be assessed and hence to help identify any source frameworks or competencies that are needed for the assessment. It could therefore feed into the core ‘Framework Definition’ or ‘Framework Population’ processes.
‘Promotion Opportunity’. This process is intended to support those who want to apply for a promotion. It would lead them through a gap analysis to identify the differences in the competencies that they currently hold, and the levels at which they are held, as against the required competencies and levels for the new position. As with the ‘CPD Planning’ process, it would then help to identify any source frameworks for missing competencies. For competencies that they hold at a lower level than is required, the process would help to identify any indicators that must be demonstrated to gain the competency at the higher level.
The post-assessment processes are shown in Figure 4.24, which identifies five types of ‘Post-assessment Process’. Again, note the use of the ‘{incomplete}’ constraint to show that not every possible ‘Post-assessment Process’ has been identified. Also, although the diagram shows six types of ‘Post-assessment Process’, one of them (the ‘Training Analysis’ process) is shown as being {Abstract}. This means that although ‘Training Analysis’ is a meaningful concept for a type of process, it cannot exist in its own right but identifies a type of process that requires a concrete ‘Training Analysis’ process (such as ‘Trainer Assessment’) to implement it. (To understand the concept, think about the concepts of ‘mammal’ and ‘cat’. Mammal is a meaningful concept but is abstract in that there is no such thing as a ‘mammal’. You cannot go to a zoo and see a creature that is just a mammal, but you can see types of mammals such as cats.)
Figure 4.24 The Post-assessment Processes
The processes shown are:
‘Tender/bid Support Analysis’. Traditionally, when responding to tenders for work, organisations have supplied CVs (résumés) for the staff members that they intend to use on the project in order to support their tender responses. CVs are, however, largely subjective in what they say about their subject and many organisations issuing tenders for work are now requiring that more objective information be provided about the competence of any person put forward for the project. This process is intended to be used by an organisation responding to a tender. It covers the analysis of a tender in order to determine the competencies that will be required by the people being put forward to work on the project that is the subject of the tender. It then covers the identification of the staff who have the required competencies, so that their details can be included in the tender response.
‘Trainer Assessment’. This process is used to identify training requirements from a trainer’s point of view. It takes the results of an assessment (or set of assessments) and uses them to help a trainer understand the areas in which people require competence. This can then be used to help drive the creation of new courses and the tailoring of existing courses towards delivering these competencies.
‘Personal Training’. This process takes the results of an assessment and uses them to perform a personal training needs analysis, based on the competency profile generated by the assessment, in order to bring competencies up to the levels defined in the competency profile. If required, the process can also cover the arrangement of such training and participation in the training.
‘Future Recruitment’. This process is executed in order to determine future recruitment needs for an organisation (or part of an organisation). By looking at the existing combined competency profile of an organisation (created by combining the competency profiles of all individuals in the organisation) and comparing it against a competency scope created to identify future organisationalcompetency needs, then it is possible to identify organisational competency gaps. This gap analysis can then be used to drive future recruitment by feeding into the ‘Job Description’ pre-assessment process when UCAM-based assessments are used as part of the future recruitment activity.
‘Project Set-up’. Getting the balance of competencies right for a project team is a necessary (although not sufficient) condition for project success. This process defines a competency scope not for an individual or a role but for a project and then takes the competency profiles of candidate team members and compares them against each other and against this scope. The aim is to ensure that the required competencies for the project are met by the sum of the competencies of each individual. In effect, the process ensures that a combined competency profile for the candidate team members (hopefully) matches or exceeds the competency scope for the project. Where there are gaps between the required and actual competencies, the process helps to pick the best match. The ‘Personal Training’ or ‘Future Recruitment’ processes could then be executed to close any such gaps.
Examples of using some of these UCAM support processes are given in the following section, which discusses scenarios for using UCAM.