Nuclear Future Volume 9 issue 1


Identify safety critical systems & those elements


dependent on human performance under various operating conditions


Normal Abnormal Emergency Maintenance Are performance expectations reasonable?


Review/revise the level of operator


error tolerance


Define competencies, set standards &


assessment criteria


Identify appropriate assessment methods


Determine ongoing competence


assessment needs


Conventional competence


assessment model Figure 3: Alternative approaches to the competence model


identification of areas for further development. If the database is updated prior to the performance and development review and used to support the staff development process then the SQEP process is fully integrated with the people development process. This also enables the integration of certain attitudinal aspects


which cannot be recorded in a simple competence assessment database. For example, notes on file regarding an individual’s ability to work effectively in teams could then be returned as part of the competence assessment. (An alternative approach to this is to use the E of the SEKA model to record an individual’s prior experience of working in behavioural contexts, e.g. extent of experience of working in multi-disciplinary teams.)


In practice We have started to adopt the people-centric approach to competence management in Atkins with a standard taxonomy of skills across the business enabling the identification of the most suitable candidates for a given task. We have found this gives significant benefits to bids and project mobilisation by easily aligning people to opportunities. A good example of this is our recent work for the United Arab


Emirates nuclear programme where we were able to mobilise a team of over 40 individuals from across the globe. This approach also helps our people to generate a wider portfolio of potential work. We still have to undertake separate assessments to satisfy our client’s SQEP systems but we are looking to automate this process and even give access to the database to clients such that they would have full visibility of our competence assessments. (There are clearly issues here with protection of personal information if the full SEKA model is used, however, with


52 SQEP


appropriate controls this could be managed such that sensitive personal information is protected.) At Atkins we have developed a tool called MySkills to manage this. Following the introduction of the National Skills Passport (NSP)


by NSAN there is the opportunity to extend the scope of the NSP to embrace competence as well as qualifications (currently the NSP provides a record of all qualifications and training undertaken by people registered under the passport scheme). This would enable the E of SQEP to be added to the NSP, thus providing an industry-wide competence database that would significantly enhance individual licensee SQEP systems by giving full visibility of experience, or competence, gained on other sites. If this was aligned against standard job contexts accepted across the industry and currently being defined by COGENT then the possibility exists for a register of competent people against roles. Atkins is working with NSAN to combine the functionality of


the MySkills tool with the NSP, thus providing a full competence database available to the industry. This is funded under the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills’ Growth and Innovation Fund scheme and should be available for testing in the next few years. In the meantime we are also working with the University of


Central Lancashire (UCLan) to adapt this model to align their comprehensive range of nuclear education and training options to individual learning needs. This is being done specifically to address concerns raised by the UK supply chain that it is not clear what training is required at the various stages of the commercial process to enable them to demonstrate their businesses and their people are ‘fit for nuclear’. Using the people-centric model also creates the possibility


People-centric competence


selection model


Implement additional training or support required


Allocate staff on


roles or tasks on a risk basis


support and


Identify suitable staff from database


Identify (and design) task or role to be undertaken


Compile competence database for all staff


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56