Volume 9 issue 1 Nuclear Future
of conducting team competence assessments. The need for team competence is recognised in a number of publications, for example the HSE [6] states: ‘competence is the continuing ability of individuals and teams to perform reliably the Major Accident Hazard elements of their roles, responsibilities and tasks, and for this to be demonstrable.’ However, the rest of the guide addresses individual competence. This is because the human performance approach requires that the objective is broken down into tasks and roles. Individuals are then assessed against the roles and the assumption is that if all individuals are competent then the team will be competent. This is likely to be true, but it is an over-simplification that can create problems in an industry where there is a skills shortage and the luxury of picking fully competent individuals for all roles in a team is not viable in all cases. The reality is that so long as all the members of the team collectively have all the competencies required for the task, then given effective leadership of the team, this will be a satisfactory outcome. Using the people-centric database approach it is a simple task to check that all the subject matter areas comprising the task are covered by the collective competence of the team.
Conclusion The move to a people-centric competence model would bring a number of benefits for the nuclear industry as well as benefits for employers and individuals. It enables the integration of attitudinal attributes and a set of key competencies for all staff that underpin industry-specific and specialist competencies. It leads to the possibility of the standardisation of SQEP assessments for specific roles across the industry. It enables the full integration of the SQEP process into the performance and development system to create a lifelong learning
approach to competence management. It also enhances the ALARP concept by enabling a risk-based approach to the staffing of tasks such that the most competent people are assigned to the highest risk tasks. Finally it allows a team competence assessment to be conducted to ensure the team is able to deliver the overall task or project. Such a change in approach will take time and needs careful testing
and investigation. Initially Atkins and UCLan are developing this approach to allow the UK supply chain to identify the training required to be ‘fit for nuclear’. Longer term, NSAN, on behalf of the industry, is leading a project to enhance the Nuclear Skills Passport to cover all aspects of individual competency – adding the E of SQEP.
David Whitmore is Engineering & Technical Director at Atkins Nuclear
References 1. Training and Assuring Personnel Competence T/AST/027- Issue 3
2. IAEA TechnicalReport Series 380, IAEA, Vienna, 1996
3. Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning (2006/962/EC)
4. Developing and Maintaining Staff CompetenceRailway Safety Publication 1
5. Developing and Maintaining Staff Competence – Comparisons with Rail Industry Experiences. John P Baker and Paul Durrant.
6. Competence assessment for the hazardous industries HSE Research report 086 2003
SQEP 53
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