Is there a competency magic number?
I am currently working with my company developing leaders based on 16 separate competencies. This seems like too much. How many would be "right"? I believe I can pair it down to eight, but would this be prudent? Is there a magic number? (asked Sarah in the LinkedIn Group SIOP-The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology).
Senthil Athiban's Response
In my opinion, there is no magic number. It depends upon the role one is expected to play in an organization and the nature of the organization. Clear role analysis will indicate what competencies are required for a particular role. Having said that, I would like to add that it si better if the number of competencies are kept at a minimum number of five to eight. These need to be mutually exclusive competencies without much overlapping and with clear definitions. This will help the role holder to know what exactly he/she must have or develop for role effectiveness. During performance reviews also the reviewer will find it easy to review the performance in the backdrop of competencies. But clear understanding of the concept "competency", in contrast to qualities, attitudes, aptitudes etc is a must while going for competency mapping. Inclusion of behavioural indicators for each competencies required is also a must.
Stuart Tan on Senthil Athiban
@Senthil, I think you nailed it. *Mutually exclusive* competencies is a good way to define it. Those 30+ that I saw (in an organization I had worked with) had overlapping competencies in different areas. Unfortunately, I they don't have the means to test the validity of those competencies. This means that while the employees are busy trying to up their KSAs in the competency area, there's really no one tracking transfer effects back to organizational results. So... @Thuy Hoang, I'd agree to point - the essential ones need then to be justified on the assumption that they are more significant to the job performance than others.
No comments:
Post a Comment