Competency-based 360 Multi-source Feedback: Selecting a Multi-source Feedback Software Solution

Part 4 of 4 in the CompetencyCore™ Guide to 360 Multi-source Feedback series:

1. Feedback Goals
2. Process and Resources
3. Delivering the Project
4. Selecting a multi-source feedback software solution

Download the complete guide to 360 Feedback

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

The first three blogs in this series examined “best practices” in establishing the goals for, designing and implementing a 360 Multi-source Feedback process. However, it is almost impossible to implement an effective Multi-source Feedback process without having a software system in place to support delivery and analysis of the Feedback results.

This post examines what to look for in selecting a software system that will work for your organization.

Why a competency management software system is important

Designing, developing, implementing and maintaining a competency framework is difficult to do in a paper-based format. It can quickly become unwieldy and out of control if not managed through a competency management software system.

Without such a system it is difficult to build and maintain processes like 360 Multi-source Feedback based on the most current competency information.

What to look for in a system

• A system with existing well-researched competency content
  This includes a library of the general competencies as well as technical / professional competencies that are suited to your organization. These days, it is not necessary or even advisable to develop your competencies from scratch. It can take years to develop high-quality competencies.
  
  Vendors often also have standard job competency profiles available that reflect the job duties / tasks typically required in jobs within specific functional areas as well as industry sectors. These can then become the starting point for use within your organization, editing and adjusting them to fit the unique requirements of your organization.


• A system that supports standardized implementation
  Organizations are increasingly experiencing distributed workplaces, with employees operating out of multiple locations. As a result, it is becoming more difficult to ensure that the human resource processes are implemented in a uniform and standardized way. If you have a system that supports the standardized adoption of competency content and competency-based HR processes, it becomes easier to ensure that HR professionals, managers and employees are accessing and implementing the correct competency content in an online 360 Multi-source Feedback process.


• A flexible system configurable to your needs
  In many 360 Multi-source systems, the software delivery and content are inextricably linked. Organizations therefore have to “buy-in” to the content and underlying model being delivered in the software. So, for example, if you wish to implement a 360 process to assess Leadership Competencies, you effectively have to adopt the leadership competency model that is part of the feedback tool. But the model being delivered in the software may not meet your organizational needs, reflect the values and culture of your organization, or incorporate the competencies you are attempting to reinforce and develop within your various employee groups.
  
  A more appropriate and valid approach is to have a system that links to the competency content and models you have designed and developed for your organization. As such, the system should allow you to pick from a list job competency profiles or models, and then implement this competency information within the 360 Multi-source Feedback tool that is part of the same system.
  
  In addition, the tool should allow you to select the individuals and groups who will be part of the feedback process. In some cases, for example, you may wish to collect feedback from work colleagues; in other cases you may wish to collect feedback from work colleagues and clients of the target participants. In each case, the groups providing feedback should be based on the job being performed and the purpose of the assessment.
  
  The system should also be flexible with regard to the rating scale being implemented, both in terms of the number of levels (rating scales can run anywhere from 3 to 7 levels) as well as the scale type (e.g., effectiveness scale; observed frequency of the behaviour; etc.). Research on the number of levels and type of rating scale is extensive and subject to a great deal of debate as to what is best practice. You should have the flexibility to be able to choose or design a rating scale that works best for the feedback process and type of work being performed.
  
  Finally, you should have the flexibility to identify what type of competency information is being assessed. Most systems take the assessment process down to the level of the behaviour / performance indicators for each competency (e.g., for Client Focus – proficiency level 3 – “Looks for ways to add value beyond the client’s immediate request”), but in some cases the assessment may be performed at the level of the competency. You should be able to choose what is being assessed according to the goal of the assessment. In CompetencyCore, for example, you have the choice of assessing the competencies at the individual behavioural indicator and / or at the Competency level.


• Reporting of Feedback Results
  The 360 Multi-source Feedback tool should also provide good graphical information that allows the comparison of results across the different types of people providing the feedback. The breakdown of information should not only be provided at the competency level, but also at the level of the individual behavioral indicators for each competency. This allows the target participant to gain different perspectives on his / her performance. It also provides a more diagnostic perspective on how each competency should be developed. For example, although the average performance on a particular competency might meet performance expectations, individual behaviours may require improvement within the competency.
  
  Finally, organizations can engage in a 360 Multi-source Feedback process to review performance at an organizational, regional, and / or functional level (e.g., all financial jobs). The reporting tools should therefore allow for the aggregation of data to determine key themes across selected groups. Plans and programs can then be identified to address high-priority development or training needs.


• Security, Confidentiality and Anonymity
  As noted in a previous post, it is important to protect the anonymity of certain types of raters – in particular, when using direct reports to the target participant in the Feedback process. As well, with a small number of raters, one person’s feedback can have a disproportionate impact on the overall ratings. It is therefore important to be able to define the rules in the software for combining certain types of raters’ scores to ensure feedback confidentiality and anonymity.
  
  Finally, when raters are asked to provide comments to substantiate their ratings, it is important that they are instructed to do this in a positive and helpful way, and that when doing so, they abide by whatever confidentiality and anonymity rules your organization establishes. Make sure that your software allows you to incorporate these kinds of instructions.


• Integration and Alignment within the Talent Management Process
  360 Multi-source Feedback is not a stand-alone process. It is done to accomplish a particular goal, for example to address gaps in competency through learning and development. Therefore, the software should allow the user to link to other HR processes in the system. For example, in CompetencyCore, any competency gaps identified through the assessment process can feed directly into a Learning Plan tool that provides targeted learning resources (e.g., on-job activities, books, courses, etc.), organized by competency, to help address those gaps. This is only one example of how the 360 Feedback process can be integrated with, and feed into, other Talent Management processes within the organization.

Sources:
 DTI. (2001). 360 Degree Feedback: Best Practice Guidelines. Downloaded from: www.dti.gov.uk/mbp/360feedback/360bestprgdlns.pdf‎
Maylett, T. (2009). 360-Degree Feedback Revisited: The Transition From Development to Appraisal. Compensation & Benefits Review, 41(5), 52–59.
Morgeson, F. P., Mumford, T. V., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Coming Full Circle: Using Research and Practice to Address 27 Questions About 360-Degree Feedback Programs. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 196–209.

---

Want to learn more? Get the Guide!

This guide reviews the best practices for 360 degree feedback, beginning with establishing 360 feedback goals, to process design, project delivery and software platform selection. It also includes a 360 degree feedback checklist for a successful implementation.

Competency-based 360 Multi-Source Feedback: Delivering the Project

Part 3 of 4 in the CompetencyCore™ Guide to 360 Multi-source Feedback series:

1. Feedback Goals
2. Process and Resources
3. Delivering the Project
4. Selecting a multi-source feedback software solution

Get the complete Guide to 360 Feedback

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

In the first two blogs in this series we discussed the importance of following best practices in Multi-source Feedback to ensure a positive and enriching experience for all participating in the process, starting with defining the Feedback Goals for your organization and then determining the process and resources needed to achieve these goals.

Having defined the process and resources needed for your Competency-based Multi-source Feedback in your organization, the next steps are to pilot, implement and finally evaluate your program to ensure that it is meeting your intended goals.

Essential Criteria to Consider in Designing Your Process

How participants view the process is critical. If participants do not think that the system is fair, the feedback accurate, or the sources credible, then they are more likely to ignore the feedback they receive.

Piloting

A pilot can generate a realistic picture of the resources required to manage the process throughout the rest of the organization. Valuable insights can be gained into the time required to provide ratings and feedback, as well as how soon the feedback can be given to participants.

Piloting also helps reduce uncertainties by allowing a test group to experience the process. It provides useful information for further planning and communication and allows for a review of the Multi-source Feedback instrument. An initial review allows consideration of such questions as whether the questionnaire is user-friendly, and whether appropriate development actions have been identified.

Lessons learned through the pilot should be considered. Any alterations and adaptations that will make implementation smoother should be made.

Implementation

The most critical part of the implementation process is ensuring that all participants are clear about what is involved. To ensure this occurs:

• Establish an individual or team to take responsibility for administering the system—this helps ensure that the procedure is running smoothly and any issues are resolved swiftly.

• Provide a point of contact for participants with questions and concerns.

• Establish deadlines for providing ratings and timeframes for providing feedback.

• Send automated email invitations and reminders to individuals who are late completing their feedback. This reduces the administrator’s workload and maintains momentum.


• Brief raters on the objectives of the scheme and provide instructions for completing questionnaires.


• Provide clear and positive communication throughout the process.

Providing Feedback

Effective feedback is the springboard for subsequent development and is integral to the success of the process.

How will the feedback be communicated?

Given that an individual is receiving sensitive information about how their colleagues, direct reports and manager view their performance, sensitivity is required. Best practice would be to make someone available to help interpret the results with that person.

The people giving feedback will need to have the skills to support this process. The facilitators need a good understanding of the organization’s policies on the process, the instrument and report, an awareness of the range of reactions individuals have to feedback, and interpersonal skills in conducting a feedback session. Facilitators must also be seen as trustworthy and credible.

When being done for development, discussion of the results with the facilitator can help focus the discussion on future development planning rather than on the feedback itself. Skilled facilitators will help the individual to draw out evidence and make connections across different people and situations. It is this process that stimulates self-awareness and makes Multi-source Feedback such a powerful process.

When will the feedback be communicated?

Ideally, individuals should receive feedback as soon as possible after the feedback was given. This maintains the momentum of the process and the motivation of the individual. Given the pace of change in many organizations, shorter turn-around times ensure that the feedback is still relevant for the role.

It is important to ensure that people receive feedback when there is support available to interpret the results. Providing a report without support, particularly prior to a weekend or going on holidays, is far from ideal, and can have negative consequences.

Review

Reviewing and evaluating the success of the process is a widely overlooked. The key question to consider is whether the program met its original purpose. If the original purpose was to improve performance, have relevant development needs been identified? If it was to support the performance review process, has the process supplied the required information in a fair and credible way?

Qualitative Review

A qualitative review with the key people involved can provide invaluable information on whether the process has achieved its goals. This review should include individuals receiving feedback, doing the rating, facilitating the feedback and the line managers of those involved. The timing of the review will depend on the original purpose, with more time needed when the purpose was development.

The Questionnaire

How effective is the questionnaire?

• Was it consistent with and link to other relevant indicators of performance in the organization?
  
• Did individuals gather development information?
  
• Did raters use the rating system effectively?
  
• Was it reliable?
  
• Did it ‘look’ right?
  

Use a system that aggregates data from the questionnaires in order to identify patterns of strengths and development needs across the participating group. This information can be used to feed into development planning at a strategic level, to ensure that the organization has people with the relevant skills to meet its objectives.

The next and last post in this series examines what to look for in a software system to support the effective implementation of 360 Multi-source Feedback in your organization.


Sources:
 DTI. (2001). 360 Degree Feedback: Best Practice Guidelines. Downloaded from: www.dti.gov.uk/mbp/360feedback/360bestprgdlns.pdf‎
Maylett, T. (2009). 360-Degree Feedback Revisited: The Transition From Development to Appraisal. Compensation & Benefits Review, 41(5), 52–59.
Morgeson, F. P., Mumford, T. V., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Coming Full Circle: Using Research and Practice to Address 27 Questions About 360-Degree Feedback Programs. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 196–209.

---

Want to learn more? Get the Guide!

This guide reviews the best practices for 360 degree feedback, beginning with establishing 360 feedback goals, to process design, project delivery and software platform selection. It also includes a 360 degree feedback checklist for a successful implementation.

Competency-based 360 Multi-source Feedback: Process and Resources

Part 2 of 4 in the CompetencyCore™ Guide to 360 Multi-source Feedback series:

1. Feedback Goals
2. Process and Resources
3. Delivering the Project
4. Selecting a multi-source feedback software solution

Download the complete guide to 360 Feedback

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

In the first post of this blog series, we discussed the importance of following best practices in Multi-source Feedback to ensure a positive and enriching experience for all participants in the process, starting with defining the Feedback Goals for your organization. The next step is identifying a process and the resources needed to achieve these goals.

Essential Criteria to Consider in Designing Your Process

How participants view the process is critical. If participants do not think that the system is fair, the feedback accurate, or the sources credible, then they are more likely to ignore the feedback they receive.

Commitment

Commitment from senior management plays a key role in establishing the credibility of a Multi-source Feedback process. Senior management commitment can be gained through witnessing the success of the system in one part of the organization, if their direct involvement is not possible at the outset.

It is important to seek employee input in the development of the process to clarify employee expectations and perceptions of fairness.

The raters

A number of factors need to be considered when choosing raters:

• Identify the most appropriate people to rate each individual’s performance. The recipient must consider the raters to be credible in order to act on the resulting feedback.

• Identify an appropriate number of raters. If too few raters are used, one person’s feedback can have a disproportionate impact on the overall results. With a small number of raters it is also difficult to ensure the anonymity of feedback sources. We recommend a minimum of 3 to 5 people per feedback group. If fewer are available, then combine groups—for example, combining direct reports and peers into a single group.

• Concern that the person being rated may respond negatively to raters who provide negative feedback. To minimize this concern, feedback should be delivered anonymously for those groups for which there is concern or retaliation could be an issue.

The questionnaire

Best practice suggests that the method of assessment used in a Multi-source Feedback process should:

• Describe behaviors related to actual job performance. Competencies define the behaviors employees need to display for the organization to be successful; therefore, measuring the competencies at the target proficiency levels required in the job is an essential part of the feedback process.

An example of how competencies are measured in a 360 Feedback process is shown in the diagram below.

In this case, the competency being assessed is “Teamwork”. The competency is defined as “Working collaboratively with others to achieve organizational goals” and the specific behaviour that is being assessed is “Seeks input from other team members on matters that affect them”. Those individuals providing feedback rate how effective the employee is based on the employee’s observed behaviour on the job.

• Align with other HR processes within the organization. The competencies that are incorporated within the feedback process will depend on the goal of the process. If it is aimed at supporting employee development within their current jobs or roles, then the competency profile for the target employee’s job would be used as the standard for providing feedback.

If, however, the 360 Feedback process is being used to support development for advancement within the organization (e.g., Career Development; Succession Management), then the competency profile for the next level, or another more advanced job, would be the standard used to measure and provide feedback.

It is, therefore, important to define the goal of the 360 Feedback process and then to pick the competency profile most suited to support this goal. These competencies and their associated behavioral indicators will serve as the measurement standards in the assessment process.
Reflect the organization’s culture and values. Job profiles often incorporate core competencies that describe in behavioral terms the key values of your organization.

Allow respondents to indicate when they have not had the opportunity to observe a behavior (so as to avoid feedback based on guesses).

The structure of feedback 

Consistent with best practice, feedback should be broken out for each question by presenting the average ratings from each feedback group so that differences in perspectives are easy to identify. If there are enough raters involved, this should not compromise anonymity. If there are only a few raters, group averages can be combined to protect anonymity.

The option to add observations or comments should be provided. This can help to throw more light on the ratings, but the person giving the feedback needs to be sensitive in providing this information.

It is important, therefore, to provide an orientation to those giving feedback on best ways to do this, both in terms of the providing accurate rating as well as providing comments and examples that validate the rating in both a respectful and honest manner.

Once a decision is made on who has access to the ratings, this needs to be followed consistently. A change in who has access to the information is one of the most commonly cited reasons for a lack of trust in the process. If there are good reasons to change, it is critical to seek the permission of the individuals involved before making that change.

Time & Resources Required

When planning a Multi-source Feedback process, it is important to have an accurate view of the time and resources needed to roll it out effectively. This includes the time needed to set up and manage the program, provide the feedback from the different groups, gather the feedback and compile reports, and finally give that feedback to the individual and support subsequent actions to develop and improve performance.

When Multi-source Feedback is being used to encourage and enhance development, it is important to consider in advance the resources needed to support such development. Gathering feedback information is just the starting point in the development cycle. The next step is to create individual learning plans that target specific developmental needs.

Having defined the process and resources needed for Competency-based Multi-source Feedback in your organization, the next steps are to pilot, implement and finally evaluate your program to ensure that it is meeting your intended goals. The third blog in this series addresses this topic.

Sources:
 DTI. (2001). 360 Degree Feedback: Best Practice Guidelines. Downloaded from: www.dti.gov.uk/mbp/360feedback/360bestprgdlns.pdf‎
Maylett, T. (2009). 360-Degree Feedback Revisited: The Transition From Development to Appraisal. Compensation & Benefits Review, 41(5), 52–59.
Morgeson, F. P., Mumford, T. V., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Coming Full Circle: Using Research and Practice to Address 27 Questions About 360-Degree Feedback Programs. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 196–209.

---

Want to learn more? Get the Guide!

This guide reviews the best practices for 360 degree feedback, beginning with establishing 360 feedback goals, to process design, project delivery and software platform selection. It also includes a 360 degree feedback checklist for a successful implementation.

Competency-based 360 Multi-source Feedback: Establishing Feedback Goals

Part 1 of 4 in the CompetencyCore™ Guide to 360 Multi-source Feedbackseries:

1. Feedback Goals
2. Process and Resources
3. Delivering the Project
4. Selecting a multi-source feedback software solution

Download the complete guide to 360 Feedback

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and
Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

360 Multi-source Feedback is increasingly being used in employment settings to monitor and measure performance and provide meaningful feedback to employees on their strengths and areas for development.  When used properly, this experience can be enriching for employees and managers alike; however, when improperly developed or implemented, 360 Multi-source processes can be highly damaging for both the employee and the organization.

This series takes a look at the best practices organizations need to implement to ensure a positive experience for all involved.

360 Multi-source Feedback Defined 

360 or Multi-source feedback is a process for collecting information about an individual’s performance from a range of sources. In addition to the individual being reviewed, these sources include supervisors, peers, subordinates, and in some cases customers.

Multi-source systems are primarily used for developmental purposes, promoting individual self-awareness and highlighting key strengths and areas for development. Multiple sources provide a variety of perspectives about an individual's skills and competencies, helping to build a richer and more accurate picture than could be obtained from any one source.

An effective 360 degree feedback process leads to more reliable performance ratings, better performance information, and greater performance improvements than feedback processes relying on a single source of information.  Properly constructed, they promote an increased understanding of the behaviors required to improve both individual and organizational effectiveness and focus development on those competencies required for successful performance. 


Goals of Multi-source Feedback

Clearly defined goals and objectives will help guide the adoption of a Multi-source Feedback process and enable you to determine whether it is successful. Organizations typically use 360 degree feedback for one of two reasons:

• To support learning and development activities
• To enhance the performance appraisal process

Before deciding on the objectives for Multi-source Feedback in your organization, it is vital to consider your organization’s culture. 360 / Multi-source Feedback is more likely to be successful when openness, mutual trust and honesty are an integral part of the organizational culture and there is a genuine desire for performance improvement. This is especially true if the results are used to support the performance appraisal process.

The purpose of feedback, whether it is for development or as part of a performance appraisal process, will influence the way the process is implemented. For example, if used for performance appraisal purposes:

• Participation in the process is likely to be mandatory
• It is likely to be carried out annually
• The individual’s manager is likely to be involved in follow-up action
• Decisions on how the feedback links to reward (e.g., bonuses; salary increases; etc.) need to be clear

Having defined the goals of your 360 Multi-source Feedback process, it then becomes possible to define and develop a system and process for achieving these goals.  The next in this blog series reviews best practices in defining your process and the resources needed to ensure effective implementation.

Sources

DTI. (2001). 360 Degree Feedback: Best Practice Guidelines. Downloaded from: www.dti.gov.uk/mbp/360feedback/360bestprgdlns.pdf‎
Maylett, T. (2009). 360-Degree Feedback Revisited: The Transition From Development to Appraisal. Compensation & Benefits Review, 41(5), 52–59.
Morgeson, F. P., Mumford, T. V., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Coming Full Circle: Using Research and Practice to Address 27 Questions About 360-Degree Feedback Programs. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 196–209.

---

Want to learn more? Get the Guide!

This guide reviews the best practices for 360 degree feedback, beginning with establishing 360 feedback goals, to process design, project delivery and software platform selection. It also includes a 360 degree feedback checklist for a successful implementation.

Scarcity of Talent – A Key and Consistent Concern

Business leaders around the world have expressed concerns about the growing scarcity of qualified talent to fill vital roles within their organizations.

In a 2012 survey of global leaders (Lloyd’s Risk Index) conducted by The Economist and Lloyd’s  of London, “talent and skills shortages” ranked as the second most pressing concern for CEO’s and corporate leaders trailing “loss of customers” by a small margin.  In a survey of 1,605 HR Professionals around the world, Towers Watson found that 72 percent of the respondents reported difficulty in attracting and retaining the high-potential and critical-skill employees necessary to increase their global competitiveness.

So why are companies so worried about the scarcity of talent and how do competencies impact the most pressing needs of a talent management program?

Challenges to be addressed

A survey conducted by the Human Resource Executive magazine in 2012 reported that the biggest challenges faced by their readers were:

• Ensuring employees remain engaged and productive (34%)
• Retaining key talent as the economy recovers (33%), with 91% reporting that they are moderately to extremely worried about losing their top talent when the recovery takes hold
• Developing leaders (32%, up from 28% in the previous year)
• Aligning people strategies with business strategies (30%)

HR leaders understand that they need to protect their knowledge base – in other words, the valuable talent with the competencies required to maintain their company’s competitive edge in the marketplace.  Key to this are the use of strategies to boost employee retention that focus on communication, as well as training and career development that directly address the competencies needed to achieve both individual and organizational success.

Measuring & Managing the Impact

The impact on the bottom-line of not having good talent management strategies in place is underscored in a recent study conducted by the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) and Charted Institute of Management Accountants entitled Talent Pipeline Draining Growth: Connecting Human Capital to the Growth Agenda.  A noteworthy 43% of the CEOs, CFOs and HR directors surveyed said their companies have missed financial goals in the past 18 months because of inadequacies in human capital management.  Almost the same number (40%) indicated that shortcomings such as insufficient systems, processes or management information have hindered their ability to innovate.  In a commentary on the study (See Human Resource Executive, November 2012), Arleen Thomas, AICPA senior vice-president for management accounting, noted that, “Ideas are the currency of the knowledge economy, so human capital must be managed as rigorously as financial capital.”  “It is clear from our research that many companies are falling short of their potential because they lack thorough, relevant information about their people to support effective strategy, hiring and training decisions.”

The key to addressing these challenges is to have a solid framework for managing people based on the competencies needed to drive organizational success.  By understanding and clearly articulating the competency standards, organizations can build talent management strategies focused on hiring, training, developing, managing and retaining the human capital needed to achieve the organization’s vision and strategic goals.

HR leaders must understand what is important in their business and translate this into the competency and talent management  metrics that are aligned with the business requirements, including such things as ability to fill key positions, ability for the organization to resource growth initiatives, ability to address critical skills gaps and the strength of succession management within the organization.  While historical data are helpful, to be of true value the analytics gathered should be anticipatory and predictive nature, so that key decisions can be made to address talent requirements before they become a problem.  Beyond this, HR Analytics should demonstrate the return on investment for the talent management programs, processes, systems and tools that have been, or will be implemented.

All of this underscores the need for competency-based management programs supported by technology and tools that enable organizations to more effectively manage their human capital, as well as make evidence-based decisions that enhance and protect the organization’s most important asset – their valued talent.   Based on my experience, companies can develop highly quality “paper-based” tools and processes for managing their talent; but, these are unwieldy for employees, managers and HR staff to use effectively.  Data cannot be easily consolidated and analyzed for strategic decision-making, and information on the talent of the organization becomes quickly out-dated because of the difficulty in maintaining “paper-based” information and processes.  Early adopters of competency-based management quickly became frustrated, not because the processes were flawed, but because they lacked the systems for managing and updating the competencies and competency profiles, as well as for using the competencies in a systematic way to manage their human capital.    Having an effective competency management system is essential for success.

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.

Designing A Competency-Based Talent Management Framework: Selecting A Software System

Part 7 of 7 of the CompetencyCore^TM Guide to Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

This is the sixth in a seven part series that looks at key decisions in designing and implementing a competency-based talent management (CbTM) framework:

1. Some Basic Definitions
2. Defining the Goals and Evaluating the Impact of your Initiative
3. Competency Structure and Types
4. Importance of Defining your Competency Architecture
5. Developing Job Competency Profiles
6. Project and Change Management
7. Key Decisions in Selecting a Software System

Throughout this series, we have been discussing key decisions in designing and implementing a competency-based talent management framework.  In particular, we have addressed the importance of defining the goals of the system and establishing a competency architecture that fits with the critical success criteria for your framework.

We then discussed some of the typical approaches and methods for defining the Job Family Competency Profiles, as well as governance, project and change management considerations that need to be taken into account when designing and developing your framework.

But for all of this to be successful, it is important to have a software system that supports the design, development, delivery and ongoing maintenance of your Competency Framework.

Why a competency management software system is important

Designing, developing, implementing and maintaining a competency framework is difficult to do in a paper-based format.  It can quickly become unwieldy and out of control if not managed through a competency management software system.

As a case in point, in one national organization in Canada it was decided that they would maintain and publish their competency library and job competency profiles through MS Word documents.  The organization was large and complex and their employees were located in almost every village, town, and city across the country.  The job family competency profiles consisted of the general competencies needed for success as well as highly technical and detailed competencies.  In addition, while the organization had a base library of competencies, it needed to develop and publish technical competencies unique to their organization.

All competencies were defined on a five-level proficiency scale with multiple behavioral indicators for each level of each competency scale.  Naturally, as the competencies and job competency profiles were developed, changes were identified.  Eventually, it became almost impossible for the organization to reflect later changes in the competencies in all the job competency profiles that had already been developed.  The organization eventually gave up trying to make changes to the competencies.  If this organization had had a competency management software system like CompetencyCore, this situation could have easily been avoided.

 What to look for in a system

•  A system with existing well-researched competency content

This includes a library of the general competencies as well as technical / professional competencies that are suited to your organization.  These days, it is not necessary or even advisable to develop your competencies from scratch.  It can take years to develop high-quality competencies.

Reputable vendors will have lists of competencies that are generally found in many different types of jobs as well as technical / professional competencies that are typical to functions or areas within the organization (e.g., IT; HR; Finance; etc.).  And, it is also possible to acquire libraries that are specific to industry sectors (e.g., Oil & Gas, Police and Security, Banking, etc.).

Vendors often also have standard job competency profiles available that reflect the job duties / tasks typically required in jobs within specific functional areas as well as industry sectors.  These can then become the starting point for use within your organization, editing and adjusting them to fit the unique requirements of your organization.

• Software that supports the standardized implementation of competencies

If you have a software system that supports the adoption, editing and publishing of the competencies and job competency profiles, it becomes easier to ensure that HR professionals, managers and employees are accessing a uniform and approved set of competencies and job competency profiles across the organization.  This becomes increasingly important as organizations go national or global.

• A system configurable to your competency structure / architecture

The software housing your competencies and job competency profiles should be configurable to your architecture.  The structure of the competencies can vary – for example, they can be defined in scales that reflect the level of proficiency needed across jobs within the organization, or include both positive and negative behavioural indicators.  In our library, the competencies are typically formatted on a four to five level proficiency scale.

The system should also support the grouping of the competencies according to your architecture (e.g., Core, Job Family General and Technical / Professional, etc.) as well as the Job Families within your organization.

The bottom line is that the software should be easily adjusted to meet your unique organizational needs and competency structures.

• A system that supports integration and ongoing changes and updates

As noted in the case example above, it is very important, especially in large complex nationally or globally distributed organizations, to have system that can be accessed by users in all locations and can be updated and published simultaneously throughout the organization.

These are only a few of the elements that you should look for in a competency management software system.  Follow this link  for more information on the CompetencyCore solution.

---

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.

Part 6 of 7 of the CompetencyCore^TM Guide to Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

This is the sixth in a seven part series that looks at key decisions in designing and implementing a competency-based talent management (CbTM) framework:

1. Some Basic Definitions
2. Defining the Goals and Evaluating the Impact of your Initiative
3. Competency Structure and Types
4. Importance of Defining your Competency Architecture
5. Developing Job Competency Profiles
6. Project and Change Management
7. Key Decisions in Selecting a Software System

In the previous blog in this series we walked through the process of identifying the competencies that contribute to success in jobs and the whole organization.  However, to have a successful program, all stakeholders must see the value for competency-based talent management for them.   

The bottom line is that you must craft a communications plan, change and project a management approach that shows the various stakeholders – employees, supervisors, senior leaders, as well as human resources – what’s in it for them.

Communication and Change Management

Throughout every stage of your competency initiative it is important to communicate the goals, benefits and expected outcomes for all stakeholders. This can be achieved through processes specifically designed for this purpose (e.g., employee orientation sessions, newsletters, e-mails, etc.) as well as through the ongoing processes that are part of the overall project plan (e.g., competency profiling focus groups).

If employees, managers and other stakeholders understand the benefits of the tools and feel they have contributed to the development process, there will be a higher chance for project success.
Starting with HR processes that are less ‘threatening’ (e.g., training/learning programs, career development) are most likely to minimize potential resistance and maximize the likelihood of successful implementation. Subsequent steps can gradually move to areas that more directly impact employee performance reviews, compensation, promotion and advancement.

KEY DECISIONS:

• How will the competency initiative be communicated? At what point? Through which vehicles? By whom?
• What are the key messages? What is the focus of the business case?
• Will you seek out high need areas to address first, demonstration projects or “quick wins”?

Project Management and Governance 

Competency initiatives can fail to have the desired results for a number of reasons. Some of the major obstacles to success include: lack of effective sponsorship; resistance to change; failure to involve key stakeholders; loss of momentum; lack of required training; and inadequate project management.

The biggest challenge we see in organizations is not managing the initiative as a “project” with a beginning, middle and end.  Too frequently, organizations assume that the HR Department can undertake an initiative like this “off the side of their desk”, without due consideration for the extra effort and time that it will take.  This is a recipe for failure.  There must be clearly defined governance and project management structures in place, with appropriate resources assigned and clear time lines, division of responsibilities as well as identified outcomes and deliverables.  Organizations also have to have a clear plan to transition to a normal ongoing process for managing and updating the competency profiles. 

KEY DECISIONS:

• What are the barriers to success and how will you address them? What are the areas of strength and how will you leverage them?
• Will a steering committee be used to guide the competency initiative? If so, who will participate in the committee?
• Will resources be assigned to manage the initiative?
• Do you need to use external consulting resources to support stages of the project?
• Do you intend to use expert panels? If so, what are the criteria for identifying suitable experts? What will their role be in the profiling process?
• Do you intend to use champions? At what level will they operate and what is their relationship to the steering committee and expert panels?
• Who will approve the competency profiles?
• How will business leaders be involved in implementing competency profiles?
• What are the timelines for various stages of the initiative?

---

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.

i>

Webinar Wrap Up -- Everything you wanted to know about Competencies, (but were afraid to ask)

A few days ago, Lorraine McKay, HRSG’s Senior VP of Business Development, led a webinar that highlighted some real life examples of the role that competencies play in talent management. To download the recording of the webinar, you can follow this link.

This lively webinar focused on real-life examples of what competencies are and how they are used as part of a talent management program.  When competencies are used as part of an overall talent management strategy, they can translate the organizations strategic vision into specific employee behaviors which will have a direct impact on the overall business results.

And that is not even the best part. When you use competencies, you are giving your employees a roadmap that shows them how their behaviors or actions can contribute to the strategic vision and goals of the organization. When you involve your workforce in the vision of the organization, they become more than just employees – they become partners.

In case you missed it, here is that link again to the webinar. Have a listen, review the slides.

---

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.

Eight ways to improve your selection interviews

It’s a common theme that you’ll find repeated over and over in recent research—interview reliability and validity can be greatly improved by adding structure to the interview process. This is terrific news, but it does beg the question—in practical terms, what exactly does it mean to add structure to an interview? Below are eight ways you can add structure to your selection interviews, and in so doing, make it more much likely that you’ll identify the most suitable candidate for the job.

1. Develop job-related interview questions. The extent to which an interview focuses on the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) required in the job is probably the single most important factor in determining the success of that interview. Competency profiling—a form of job analysis—provides a clear definition of the KSAOs required for successful job performance. Basing your interview questions on competency profiles (or tasks identified in an alternative form of job analysis), ensures that those questions are job related. Research on interviews dating back to the 1980s demonstrates very clearly that interviews based on job analysis have higher levels of validity than interviews lacking such a basis (e.g., McDaniel et al., 1988).
2. Use the same interviewers. When the same interviewers interview all of the job applicants for a particular job, research has shown that the validity of the interviews improves significantly (Huffcutt & Woehr, 1999).
3. Train interviewers. We’re not born effective interviewers, any more than we’re born with an innate knowledge of Microsoft Office. When interviewers are trained, subsequent interviews are more reliable and valid (Conway et al., 1995; Huffcutt & Woehr, 1999).
4. Establish a standard process of evaluation. Scoring guides are a key method for adding structure to the interview process. Research has found that scoring guides with behavioral benchmarks improve interview reliability and validity (Macan, 2009). 
5. Use panel interviews. Interestingly, the research on the validity of panel interviews is more mixed than might be expected. Although panel interviews are often expected to increase rater reliability and validity, some research has shown the opposite (e.g., McDaniel et al., 1994). This area of research is still evolving, and it’s possible that these mixed findings can be traced back to the failure of previous research to distinguish between various key factors, such as the methods used in a reaching decision (e.g., simple averaging versus consensus decision making; Macan, 2009). But if the jury is still out on the relative validity of panel versus individual interviews, panel interviews are the clear winner when it comes to perceived fairness and for this reason they are often favored.
6. Take notes during the interviews. Research has shown that note taking by interviewers significantly improves interview validity (Huffcutt & Woehr, 1999). This evidence dovetails nicely with company policies that require interviewers to take notes in case of subsequent dispute.
7. Limit access to supplementary data. Research has repeatedly shown that giving interviewers access to supplementary material about an applicant—anything from test scores to references—reduces interview validity (Barrick et al., 2008). It seems that despite our best intentions, it’s all too easy to form an impression about a candidate before the interview has even begun. Restricting the amount of supplementary data available to the interviewer is one way to prevent this from happening.
8. Make consistent use of a decision model. Once applicants have been assessed on the KSAOs required in the job, a decision has to be made as to who to hire. Applying an explicit, pre-defined rule when deciding among interviewed applicants improves the validity of the decision-making process (Heneman et al., 2000).

---

HRSG is a leader in competency-based recruitment and selection solutions and training. Contact us today to find out how we can help you.

---

Want to learn more? Download a Best Practice Guide to Improve the Effectiveness of your Interviewing Processes
Compared to unstructured interview approaches, the behavioral interview approach greatly increases your chances of making the best selection decisions. Download this guide to learn how to interview candidates to gather critical information about candidates’ past performance and accomplishments that you can use to predict their performance and accomplishments in the job that you are filling.

Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework: Developing Job Competency Profiles

Part 5 of 7 of the CompetencyCore^TM Guide to Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

This is the fifth in a seven part series that looks at key decisions in designing and implementing a competency-based talent management (CbTM) framework:

1. Some Basic Definitions
2. Defining the Goals and Evaluating the Impact of your Initiative
3. Competency Structure and Types
4. Importance of Defining your Competency Architecture
5. Developing Job Competency Profiles
6. Project and Change Management
7. Key Decisions in Selecting a Software System

In the previous blogs we provided some basic definitions for competencies and competency-based talent management.  We also discussed the importance of defining an architecture or blueprint for defining your competency framework that will ensure the success of your competency framework in both the short and long term.

In this blog we will examine the whole process of defining Job Competency Profiles according to the Competency Architecture that you have defined, and the key decisions that you will need to make.

Job Competency Profiles

A competency profile specifies the competencies and levels of proficiency that are required for successful job performance for each job in your organization.  The different layers and types of competencies incorporated within the Job Competency Profile will be dictated by your competency architecture.  Using the competency architecture shown in the previous blog, the competency layers could include: Core Competencies; Job Family Competencies; as well as Job Specific Competencies.  Depending on the job, Leadership competencies could also be incorporated.

To help ensure that competency profiles are easy to use, best practice organizations limit the number of competencies included in each profile to around 12 competencies. For example, an organization might choose to have 12 competencies per profile: 3 core competencies, 5 to 6 job family competencies, and 3 to 4 technical competencies. Here's a sample profile to illustrate this concept.

The more uniform the work of a particular job group, the greater the chances that a limited number of competency profiles can be applied within that group. The less uniform the work, the greater the potential need for a variety of job competency profiles.

KEY DECISIONS

• What are the distinct job families and job groups?
• Are there any job families that are not associated with one specific functional organizational area (e.g., Administrative Support) as opposed to ones that are (e.g., Finance)?
• What types of competencies will be included in a profile?
• How many competencies will each profile contain?
• How many competencies of each type will be included in the profile?
• Can general or technical competencies differ across roles in the same job group?
• Do individuals in leadership positions require leadership competencies in addition to, or instead of Job Family competencies?"

Competency Profiling

The main steps involved in competency profiling are:

1. Conducting background research and preparation
2. Identifying critical competencies
3. Validating critical competencies
4. Documenting and reporting the process and results

There are various ways you can identify critical competencies required for successful job performance. These methods can be used individually or in combination within the 4 step process:

• Holding expert panels—using a card sort exercise or critical incident brainstorm: Expert panels are groups of individuals who know and understand the job or jobs within a job family, and represent the interests of the whole job group.  They are trusted by the organization, representative of the whole job family (e.g., geography; organizational area; etc.) and good job performers.  The group is led through a structured competency profiling / job analysis process by an expert in job competency profiling with the focus on the identification of the key competencies at the proficiency levels required.  There various structured techniques that can be used (e.g., voting; card sorts; critical incident; etc.), but the focus is always to get the group to come to a consensus on the key competencies required for success in the job or job group.

• Conducting surveys—asking job incumbents and supervisors to identify key competencies: Surveys are often employed in situations where there are  a large number of employees within a job group or job family, and the organization wishes to ensure that a cross-representative sample of employees or supervisors is polled.  The results are compiled and often reviewed by Expert Panels to establish the Job Competency Profiles.  This approach is also used in situations where the employees may be widely dispersed geographically, such as in a global company.

• Conducting behavioral event interviews—using responses to interview questions to elicit competencies: This is an in-depth approach to exploring the competency requirements of jobs by conducting interviews with job holders and / or their supervisors, asking them to provide specific examples of events that either resulted in either highly successful or unsuccessful performance.  The questions are typically structured to gather information about the anticipated competencies needed in the job.  The results of the interviews are coded according to the competencies and proficiency levels needed for effective performance.  This approach is more labour intensive and typically used when there are not many employees performing in the job – e.g., executive level positions.

• Reviewing worker materials and outputs—usually in combination with another method: This approach provides information about the complexity of the tasks involved in the job and the types of skills / abilities that may be needed (e.g., Attention to Detail; particular Technical / Professional Competencies).  As noted, this technique is most often used in combination with other methods.

KEY DECISIONS

• Will you need to customize the profiles provided in the CompetencyCore framework to address the range of jobs and culture of your organization?
• Will core competencies need to be identified; if so, how, with whose input and at what point in the process?
• What methodology will be used for developing and validating profiles?
• Is broader consultation required beyond an expert panel?  If so, how much consultation, with whom, and through what vehicle?
• How will senior management be involved in providing input or approving results? Interviews, focus groups, e-mail questionnaire?
• Is union involvement required?

One of the key requirements for a successful competency initiative is ensuring that effective project management, communications and change management strategies and techniques are used throughout the development and implementation process.  The next blog addresses this topic.

---

Sign up to our blog’s mailing list through the form on the right-hand side to receive the rest of the series in your inbox.

HRSG is a leader in Competency-based Talent Management solutions. Contact us today to find out how we can help you.

---

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.

Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework: Defining your Competency Architecture

Part 4 of 7 of the CompetencyCore^TM Guide to Designing a Competency-based Talent Management Framework

By Ian Wayne, M.Sc and Suzanne Simpson, PhD, C. Psych.

This is the fourth in a seven part series that looks at key decisions in designing and implementing a competency-based talent management (CbTM) framework:

1. Some Basic Definitions
2. Defining the Goals and Evaluating the Impact of your Initiative
3. Competency Structure and Types
4. Importance of Defining your Competency Architecture
5. Developing Job Competency Profiles
6. Project and Change Management
7. Key Decisions in Selecting a Software System

Competency-based talent management is an approach for managing talent that defines the competencies required for organizational success, and provides a framework for ensuring employees are hired, developed, promoted and generally managed according to these competencies.

Prior to launching your competency initiative, it is important to establish a competency architecture that will work for your organization. 

Competency Architecture
A competency architecture provides the structure for designing and using competency profiles to support competency-based talent management. It is possible to define different structures and each organization needs to identify the architecture that best meets its needs. There are three basic criteria for defining a competency architecture:

1. It should include all the competencies that employees need, now and in the near future, to ensure your organization can achieve its vision and support its values.
2. It should support all of the intended uses of the competencies (e.g., recruitment and selection; learning and development; performance management; and career development).
3. It should be easy to use.

A typical competency architecture is made up of:

• Core Competencies: These are general competencies that all employees must possess to enable your organization to achieve its mandate and vision. They describe in behavioral terms the key values of your organization and represent organizational strengths that help your organization differentiate itself from its competitors.

• Job Family Competencies: These are competencies shared by a “family” of functionally related jobs. A Job Family is a group of jobs that have common functions / duties and form a logical group for acquiring resources and managing careers. They can include jobs within a specific functional area of the organization (e.g., Finance Department) or they can incorporate groups of jobs across functional areas (e.g., Administrative jobs distributed throughout the organization).

Job Family Competencies describe those competencies that are common for jobs within a particular job family, and can include both General as well as Technical Competencies.  For example, specific Technical Competencies for Accounting could be incorporated for all jobs in a Financial Administration job family, as well as some of the General Competencies (e.g., Analytical Thinking; Attention to Detail).

• Job Specific Competencies: These are competencies needed to perform effectively in a specific role or subset of roles beyond those included in the set Job Family Competencies.  Once again, these can include both Technical and General Competencies, but most often include specific Technical Competencies needed for effective performance in a job or role.  For example, Auditing may be needed only in a subset of jobs in a Financial Administration Job Family.

• Leadership Competencies: These are competencies required of the leadership levels of the organization.  They define the leadership requirements to achieve the vision, values and strategic direction of the organization. They can be defined as a job family or form a separate layer in the architecture.

The image below illustrates how a competency architecture can be built on the vision, values and strategic priorities of your organization.

KEY DECISIONS

• What is the basic structure of your competency architecture?
• What end uses will your competency architecture support – e.g., learning and development; recruitment & selection; etc.?
• Will there be a set of core competencies? If so, how will they be identified?
• What are the distinct job families and job groups?
• How will you treat leadership competencies – will they be embedded in each Job Competency Profile, or will they be treated as a separate set of competencies needed by leaders within the organization?

Competency Applications
Competencies have many potential applications, including: recruitment and selection; learning and assessment; performance management; career development and succession management; and human resource planning.

As noted in the previous section, the way in which the competencies will be used will influence your competency architecture – for example, career development and succession management are more easily supported by competencies that incorporate proficiency levels or scales, such as those in the CompetencyCore libraries of General and Technical Competencies.  In this way, jobs can be mapped in terms of the levels of proficiency needed for each competency.

As an example, a Help Desk Agent may need to display the behaviors shown at Level 3 proficiency on the Client Focus competency scale whereas an executive responsible for setting service standards and ensuring quality service delivery would need Level 5 behaviors on the same competency.

Proficiency scales help you compare requirements across jobs, which is especially useful when determining potential career paths within the organization.

KEY DECISIONS

• How will competencies be used in the short and long term - e.g., recruitment and selection; learning and assessment; performance management, etc.?
• Which will be the first application?
• Will there be a staged approach to implementation? If so, which job group or job level will go first?
• Will you need to develop specific tools and processes to support intended applications (e.g., competency assessment; interview question banks)
• To what extent will managers and employees need training?

Building from the Competency Architecture, the next blog in this series describes the steps and process for developing job competency profiles / models.

---

The next blog in this series will describe steps and process for developing job competency profiles / models. Sign up to our blog’s mailing list through the form on the right-hand side to receive the rest of the series in your inbox.

HRSG is a leader in Competency-based Talent Management solutions. Contact us today to find out how we can help you.

---

Want to learn more? Competency-based Talent Management, or CbTM, is the best practice for defining job requirements and building effective HR programs to develop skilled, engaged and productive workforces. Download this Best Practice Guide to learn how competencies can increase workforce effectiveness and improve business practices.