Competence audit in industrial production
companies
A handbook for the preparation, execution and usage
of competence management in production work
on the basis of the CM ProWork tool
Alexander Schletz
1
, Andrea Koren
2
, Dr. Elmar Witzgall
3
1
Fraunhofer Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation;
2
Institut für
Arbeitswirtschaft und Technologiemanagement der Universität Stuttgart;
3
wissen-koennen.de
Developed within the EU Leonardo project
CM ProWork Transfer
DE/08/LLP-LdV/TOI/147120
Contents
1 The concept of competence development and competence management
pursued by the tool .............................................................................................. 3
2 What and how does the tool measure?................................................................ 5
3 Which statements / evaluations / causality attributions are possible?.................. 8
4 Implementation methods; possibilities of linking up with standard management
systems for quality, environmental protection, employment protection.............. 10
5 Combination with other systems of competence illustration............................... 13
6 Linkages to organisational and company development..................................... 14
7 Participation and Sustainability.......................................................................... 17
8 Use for company practice.................................................................................. 18
9 Application scenarios of a competence audit with CM ProWork from a company
perspective ........................................................................................................ 20
10 Competence audit with CM ProWork – Quo vadis?........................................... 23
Literature.................................................................................................................. 25
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 3
1 The concept of competence development and compe-
tence management pursued by the tool
Basically, CM ProWork is an operative tool. It does not offer strategies or measures,
but data that can be used as a basis for a strategic competence management in pro-
duction and industrial companies.
This data in the first place applies to the individual skills and readiness of (semi-
skilled, trained and specialized) workers in completing tasks and work processes.
Collective skills must / can be derived from the individual data. Distinct leadership
tasks of foremen or production leaders are captured only in part.
The competence development model of CM ProWork is – just like the tool – task and
work process oriented. Competences and the respective competence values there-
fore develop depending on
? the range of tasks (number and nature of assigned responsible tasks)
? the complexity / difficulty of assigned tasks
? the respective responsibility profundity (partial assignment to full responsibility)
? the level of task proficiency
? the behaviour in a context of task related learning demands
? the behaviour in a context of process and company related cooperation and
communication demands
? the behaviour in a context of different interests and needs in a cooperative
working process.
These development dimensions correlate on the one hand with classic work organi-
sation strategies: job enlargement, job enrichment and partly autonomous group
work. As it explicitly incorporates enhancement processes and tasks on the one hand
and learning demands with regard to changes on the other hand, the model can well
be integrated into continuous improvement processes (CIP) and respectively oriented
standard management systems.
Personnel development strategies that aim at general personality traits and espe-
cially on soft skills are in contrast almost not supported. Possibly problematic over-
lappings exist in the field of pay programmes. Conflicts can arise, if the task compe-
tence shows higher values than the (task oriented) evaluation of the workers sug-
gests. These discrepancies are tool specific in so far as the task inventory used is
much more differentiated than the one the pay programme is based on. This way it
can become obvious which achievements are expected but not considered in pay-
ment.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 4
The tool therefore is not suited for personnel assignment strategies that in the first
place aim at keeping labour costs low and a flexible exchange of (cheap) production
workers.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 5
2 What and how does the tool measure?
The tool measures demand orientated. The competence constructs used apply to
task oriented demands on the one hand, to working process oriented demands on
the other hand. In both cases it was tried to establish a relationship with the compe-
tence dimensions Knowledge, Capability and Readiness. The way in which these
demands were transformed into competence categories and how the respective val-
ues are created varies (see figure 1).
INPUT TOOL OUTPUT
CALC
Task responsibility
Task mastery
Task knowledge
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
Task accountability
Task capability
Knowledge level
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
Figure 1: Input and output structure of the CM ProWork software tool
The so-called task-related competences are calculated by the tool. Basis for the cal-
culations is input on objective task and assignment characteristics that themselves
were derived from task analysis instruments. The theoretical basis is the work psy-
chological activity regulation theory. The calculation takes place with respect to a
standard task inventory that is included in the tool and which can be adjusted within
certain limits. In the calculation mainly input on standard tasks or these tasks them-
selves are considered. Even through the input of relatively many self-defined tasks
the user can only take little influence on the results.
The so-called process-related competences symbolize differently developed behav-
iours in the working process, of which learning readiness has the closest link to task
competences regarding contents. The other process-related competences are also
based for the most part on working psychological theories on collective action. The
values of the process-related competences must be entered directly by the user of
the tool (according to an interval, at least ordinal scale). Objective task characteristics
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 6
that could serve as basis for the calculation as in the case of task-related compe-
tences were not known during the development of the tool.
Task-related
competences
Abilities of the workers
acquired by taking over responsibilities
and conducting work tasks
Abilities and readiness of the workers for
cooperation, communication and continuous
learning in the work process
Process-related
competences
Task-related
competences
Abilities of the workers
acquired by taking over responsibilities
and conducting work tasks
Abilities and readiness of the workers for
cooperation, communication and continuous
learning in the work process
Process-related
competences
Cooperation
readiness
Learning
readiness
Task
mastery
Task
responsibility
Social
Competence
Communication
competence
Task
knowledge
Figure 2: The CM ProWork competence model
The value differentiation in the output is the same in both cases and relatively rough
(four levels without mean value and without interim values; minimum value 1 / maxi-
mum value 4). This rough gradation is volitional as the tool is thought to be used also
by low qualified workers on the shop floor. Through the calculation procedure smaller
evaluation mistakes in the task competencies (concerning assignment and task
characteristics) are counterbalanced to a large extent.
The instrument was so tested mainly on face validity, although in some cases there
were VERA-P measurement results available as external references. Moreover, the
calculation model was stress and sensitivity tested and adjusted accordingly several
times. It can be assumed that particularly the values of task-related competences
highly correlate with each other. This can be regarded as no problem as long as cer-
tain realities in production – well-qualified people get a greater number and more dif-
ficult tasks and can develop better with them – are rendered sufficiently correct
(which can be assumed so far). In addition, expert judgements from the production
managers, HR managers and workers involved in pilot testing have been integrated
to assess the instrument’s validity. The values and reports generated by CM Pro-
Work have been judged as plausible and comprehensible in almost every case with
very few particular exceptions. This refers to the absolute values of the competence
report and especially to the differentiation between workers displayed by the tool.
Furthermore, it was shown that cross-links between EQF descriptors and compe-
tence dimensions of the CM ProWork tool are strong enough with regard to content
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 7
to conduct a plausible identification of empirical competence profiles with the EQF
levels. Therefore, with the help of the CM ProWork tool a validation of results from
non-formal and informal learning can be achieved.
The implementation cases so far show that high competence values are rather rare.
Regarding task-related competences, it can be precluded that maximum values may
well be reached in all three categories. This would mean that a highly capable worker
is employed as utility man. Concerning process-related competences, very different
value profiles can arise that correlate only weakly with the task-related competence
values.
A competence value of 2 may be considered already a relatively good value for
workers in working environments with low competence furtherance. According to the
experiences so far, all values of 3 must be regarded as really good; values of 4 are
reached only by very few workers.
It occurs that formally unqualified workers achieve similarly high values in certain
categories as professionally qualified workers. Results of this kind are correct in the
sense that not formal qualification but competences are measured and a competence
development in the working process under advantageous conditions can lead very
far. However, professional qualification is expected to affect the values of task capa-
bility, task knowledge and learning readiness.
In order to depict collective competences of work groups or work systems, the indi-
vidual values of groups of workers can be used as a calculation basis (average val-
ues with standard deviations). The recognition of the emergence effect of collectives
(the whole is more than the sum of its parts) is thereby not possible. In order to sim-
plify the interpretation of group analyses, it is advisable to calculate and depict per-
centaged value sums for task-related and process-related competences.
A special and simplified possibility of competence measurement offers the function of
“position fitness” provided in the position report of the CM ProWork software tool. In
order to assign positions (=lists of tasks) to adequately competent workers, the fit-
ness of a worker to handle the task requirements of a certain position is calculated on
a decimal scale. This calculation includes only the input on task capability and ap-
plies to positions that have been defined in advance only. The “position fitness” func-
tion has proven to be of particular interest for the practical use of the software tool by
production managers.
According to the experiences so far, the tool is able to depict workers’ competences
with adequate validity and in a differentiated fashion. The measurement results can
be well understood by executives in production. A comparably capable instrument for
production is not known to date.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 8
3 Which statements / evaluations / causality attributions
are possible?
The causal structure “constructed” by the tool can be sketched as follows:
Task responsibility
?
quantity: many tasks
quality: different tasks
complexity: difficult tasks
Task mastery
?
learning
qualification
experience
Task knowledge
?
responsibility for difficult tasks and related
learning / teaching activities
Learning readiness
?
individual learning motives and learning
culture
Cooperation readiness
?
individual / collective abilities, motives, and
working culture
Communication compe-
tence
?
individual / collective abilities, motives and
working culture
Social competence
?
individual / collective abilities and motives /
conflict culture
Figure 3: Factors assumed to influence the competences measured with CM ProWork
The sketch shows that inferences cannot only be drawn to the competence level but
also to the organisation with its culture, change dynamics and history. Especially the
following examination and interpretation lines (not exhaustive) appear worthwile:
? Which competence profiles show the current state of which group of workers,
which show one ore more desired states?
? What effect does the job design concept pursued have on the “competence
capital“, i. e. the collective competences of a work group or work system?
? Which development potentials does the “competence capital” offer for ambi-
tious job design concepts?
? Where does the “competence capital“ (of groups / departments / companies)
stand in comparison?
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 9
? Is there a culture of “organized irresponsibility”, or is there a strong asymmetry
in task responsibility?
? Is there a culture of “organized learning reluctance”?
? Do qualification measures lead to measurable effects / do they reach their ad-
dressees?
? Do organisational measures lead to measurable effects / do they reach their
addressees?
? What deficits in process-related competences can be identified among the pro-
fessional personnel / among the semi-skilled workers?
? At which deficits can / should trainings on soft skills start?
Which flexibility reserves does the production staff offer?
? Is the process, quality and productivity management adequately anchored
within the task profiles of the workers?
? Which learning and development potentials does the production staff offer?
? What statements can be used for agreement of objectives/performance ap-
praisals; can the effect of agreement of objectives/performance appraisals be
understood with the help of the tool?
Questions that must be posed within a competence audit in the narrower sense are
excluded here.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 10
4 Implementation methods; possibilities of linking up
with standard management systems for quality, envi-
ronmental protection, employment protection
CM ProWork is a stand-alone software application. Input and results are saved in an
MS Access database. Many results can be exported to MS Excel and processed fur-
ther there.
The databases can be saved and accessed de-centrally or centrally. As the tool is
conceptualized as an everyday tool for de-centrally employed production managers
(as foremen), it would be best if in every production manager office there is a version
of the application installed and a strategically sensible system for database manage-
ment implemented that is accepted throughout the company.
As the tool collects and saves employee-related data, implementation of CM
ProWork in most cases requires the participation of the work council. The approval of
the work council can more easily be achieved if
? it is made clear that no general employee related data is collected (in contrast
to most other competence management systems)
? the workers are not only informed, but also able to participate actively in the
data collection process
? applying CM ProWork includes a procedure to positively integrate the results
of the tool into job references and other similar documents, so that these
document not only formal qualifications but also an individual workers’
achievements from learning on the job (cf. Witzgall 2009, S. 118 ff.)
Under certain circumstances, an anonymous data input can be thought about in the
beginning.
A great number of basically important tasks for quality and productivity management
have already been integrated into the task inventory of the tool. In course of the CM
ProWork Transfer project, the task inventory for batch production settings was ex-
tended by tasks on occupational health and safety and environmental protection.
These will later also be integrated into the inventory on discrete parts production. The
possibility to adjust and extend the task inventory allows for an easy linkage to stan-
dard management systems. Furthermore, the adaptability of the task inventory also
allows to depict the competences and assignments of specialists employed within the
production process.
Using the functions on position and position fitness, explicit links can be drawn that
for example show which workers have already excelled in the field of the respective
task. Together with the results of process-related competences “cooperation and
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 11
communication readiness” fitting candidates for trainings and instructions can be
found.
The facets of a competence audit with CM ProWork described here make up a flexi-
ble concept that allows for a standardized analysis for a number of interesting ques-
tions. It focuses on worker competences on an individual level and/or the level of col-
lectives (work groups or work systems).
The audit might be used for the following exemplary scenarios:
? competence-based evaluation of production departments or companies
? benchmarking of the competence potential of production departments as a ba-
sis for continuous development processes
? competence potential of organisational units as information basis for the plan-
ning of technical, organisational or personnel interventions
? individual and group related analyses of strengths and weaknesses
? detailed planning basis for qualification and training measures in production
? evaluation of the effects of personnel related, organisational or technical inter-
ventions on worker competences
In addition to an analysis of the fulfilment level of current competence demands, the
CM ProWork competence audit offers the possibility to align and evaluate the devel-
opment of employee competences with medium and long-term company goals. This
helps to avoid competence shortages which might possibly hinder successful imple-
mentation of department or company strategies. The comparison of current compe-
tence values with future competence demands leads to possible starting points for
development measures that should be discussed and prioritized by production lead-
ers and personnel department. The effects of these developmental measures can
than be tracked with the competence audit embedded into a systematic and regularly
executed competence management.
Standardized audit processes follow a more or less fixed process scheme. It not only
purports the measurement criteria and procedures but also the evaluation procedures
and the way in which measures are deduced. Nonetheless, competence audits can
differ depending on the result expectancies and execution circumstances of the par-
ticular companies. Therefore it does not appear sensible to develop a detailed and
closed process model a la ISO 9000. As a general scheme for a competence audit
the so-called Deming cycle is suggested (cf. Figure 4). The Deming cycle contains
planning, analytical, evaluating, changing and correcting partial processes arranged
in a circular working scheme. Companies are generally familiar with this basic
scheme:
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 12
Analysis
Optimisation
Competence
audit
Planning
Data collection
Figure 4: Competence Audit with CM ProWork visualized as Deming cycle
Employee competences determine the potential productivity and innovativeness of
organisational units. Therefore it can be assumed that differences in the competence
values go along with differences in company success. The interpretation of compe-
tence audits can therefore be related to pertinent index numbers as work productivity,
scrap rate, processing time, accident rate, but also the number of suggestions for im-
provement, absenteeism, or employee job satisfaction. In many cases these numbers
are already available and are implemented into the company controlling system in the
form of key performance indicators cockpits.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 13
5 Combination with other systems of competence illus-
tration
In the following discussion of options two types of combination possibilities must be
differentiated:
(a) combination of methodologically contrastive procedures
(b) combination of complementary procedures
Combinations of CM ProWork according to (a) can be critical; they should be very
well considered. It is possible to generate incompatible or in rare cases opposing re-
sults that can no longer be explained by common sense but only by a methodological
specialist. In a combination of CM ProWork with competence measurements aiming
at general personality characteristics it should always be noted that the two proce-
dures measure different things! Especially critical is the combination with procedures
on the basis of competence catalogues, because in these cases very similar or iden-
tical terms can emerge that might be easily confused.
In contrast, combinations according to (b) are uncritical and in many cases appropri-
ate. CM ProWork version 3.0 offers the possibility to emit individual related data and
results. In comprehensive competence illustrations, these CM ProWork results
should be complemented with information on educational training and professional
background. Generally biographic competence illustrations serve well as amend-
ments to CM ProWork as they provide exactly the information that does not become
obvious in the tool (which only works result oriented).
For this reason, a combination with the EUROPASS CV is also very adequate. Dur-
ing the project it could be shown that cross-links regarding content between the EQF
descriptors and the competence dimensions of the CM ProWork tool are strong
enough to enable plausible classifications of competence profiles into EQF levels
(Witzgall, 2010). With help of the CM ProWork tool a validation of results from non-
formal and informal learning can therefore be conducted that is especially useful for
workers without relevant professional qualification. Alternatively, special competence
proofs can be designed which illustrate the result oriented as well as the biographical
data in a consistent format (cf. chapter 9.5 in Witzgall 2009, S. 118 ff.). In this con-
text, the CM ProFiler tool developed within the project must be mentioned, which by
means of input on 20 competence values for workers allows for the creation of a
standardised profile on professionally acquired competences which can also be used
further in the EUROPASS CV. The CM ProFiler is available for free on
www.cmprowork.eu.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 14
6 Linkages to organisational and company development
Through its export functions to MS Excel, the tool possesses a universally applicable
software interface. The databases themselves are manipulable in MS Access as well.
This (unofficial) possibility is critical though, because it can lead to a bias in the re-
sults.
Regarding the “systematic-functional” interfaces, there is first of all the question of the
whole purpose of competence audits in production. Wikipedia states on quality audits
in general:
Quality audits are performed to verify conformance to standards through review of objective evi-
dence. A system of quality audits may verify the effectiveness of a quality management system.
This is part of certifications such as ISO 9001. Quality audits are essential to verify the exis-
tence of objective evidence showing conformance to required processes, to assess how suc-
cessfully processes have been implemented, for judging the effectiveness of achieving any de-
fined target levels, providing evidence concerning reduction and elimination of problem areas
and are a hands-on management tool for achieving continual improvement in an organization.
To benefit the organization, quality auditing should not only report non-conformances and cor-
rective actions but also highlight areas of good practice and provide evidence of conformance.
In this way, other departments may share information and amend their working practices as a
result, also enhancing continual improvement.
Competence audits in this sense only make sense if, first, a decided interest in “pro-
duction competence capital” exists and, second, the development of such a capital is
goal oriented and can be evaluated according to these goals constantly.
Possible goals with reference to company development could be:
? comparing assertion of competence capital in production units as basis for
continuous further development
? comparing assertion of competence capital as basis for planning of technical,
organisational or personnel politic interventions
? comparing assertion of competence capital as basis for estimation of effects of
technical, organisational, personnel politic interventions
? comparing assertion of competence capital with the purpose of evaluating
production departments or companies (within a corporate group…)
With reference to organisation development:
? comparing different production concepts as basis for a standardisation of pro-
duction concepts
? tracing effects of an implementation of standard management systems (quality
and others)
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 15
? decreasing / increasing span of control
? implementing new payment and award systems
? increasing / decreasing the percentage of skilled workers
? planning of competence conducive resources
? planning of qualification and training measures in production
? enhancement of cooperation with Federal Employment Agency (recruiting,
qualification of workers)
If the data is updated regularly (about once every six months), competence audits
can start off from the following functions of CM ProWork (cf. Table 1):
? Competence report (including task and process competences). On this interpre-
tation, a lot has already been said. One important issue is the development of tar-
get ideas, e. g. in the form of minimum or standard profiles; otherwise only weak
spots can be interpreted that do not consider potentials (cf. Witzgall 2009, p. 91 ff.
and 102 ff.).
? Position report: the measurement of position fitness is rougher but it allows for a
setup of very precisely tuned analyses and evaluations concerning the company.
A detailed description can be found in Witzgall 2009, p. 115 ff.
? Learning relevance report: in this report there are also several audit relevant
measurement and interpretation possibilities. Changes in learning relevance of
tasks can for example show the broad success of measures in competence en-
couragement; changes in person related learning needs are suited for micro
analyses. On this, also cf. Witzgall 2009, S. 97 ff.
The basic problem that cannot be solved globally is the still possible incompatibility of
competence structures and data produced in CM ProWork on the one hand and
other procedures on the other hand. In competence audits this problem must at least
be reflected and its potential effects should be contemplated.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 16
Table 1: Competence Audit with CM ProWork: possible use cases
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
s
o
f
w
o
r
k
e
r
g
r
o
u
p
s
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
s
o
f
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
W
i
t
h
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
/
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
o
f
a
l
l
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
o
f
a
g
r
o
u
p
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
:
f
o
r
t
a
s
k
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
?
N
a
m
e
:
C
O
M
P
E
T
E
N
C
E
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
O
F
A
G
R
O
U
P
(
2
v
a
l
u
e
s
)
A
s
f
o
r
w
o
r
k
e
r
g
r
o
u
p
s
b
u
t
t
a
k
i
n
g
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
v
a
l
u
e
s
o
f
a
l
l
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
.
?
N
a
m
e
:
C
O
M
P
E
T
E
N
C
E
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
O
F
A
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
2
v
a
l
u
e
s
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
i
n
t
h
e
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
f
i
e
l
d
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
“
t
a
s
k
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
”
a
n
d
“
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
”
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
G
R
O
U
P
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
W
i
t
h
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
s
y
s
t
e
m
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
i
n
t
h
e
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
f
i
e
l
d
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
“
t
a
s
k
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
”
a
n
d
“
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
”
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
f
i
t
n
e
s
s
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
a
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
f
i
t
n
e
s
s
f
o
r
a
(
p
r
e
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
)
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
F
L
E
X
I
B
I
L
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
v
a
l
u
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
r
e
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
a
l
l
t
a
s
k
s
a
n
d
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
a
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
?
T
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
a
l
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
c
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
R
E
L
I
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 17
7 Participation and Sustainability
The difficulty of employee participation was commented above already. Independ-
ently of this there is the question of how far it is possible and sensible to effectually
and sustainably establish something like competence management (including com-
petence audits) without a real participation of the persons concerned.
The employees and especially the directly assigned executives principally dispose of
enough possibilities to avoid the application of the instrument and the use of a com-
petence audit. Especially if the data input and the evaluation are fragmentary, not
exact enough and without regular updates, the value of the reports is questionable.
The executives here depend upon their input being to some degree consensually co-
ordinated; otherwise the output can be questioned.
The interface worker/executive is therefore a highly critical point in a competence au-
dit, and the participation of the employees in this case should be especially well
planned, supported and observed.
A good proceeding could be to build teams of personnel developers, production ma-
nagers and a number of workers that operate the implementation and usage proc-
esses. This way interface difficulties can be identified and probably solved more eas-
ily. The collaboration in these teams should of course be voluntary on the workers’
level. Budding executives can exhibit their potential in such teams especially well.
In companies with a good cooperation and learning culture it is also possible to be-
stow the data input and maintenance directly upon the work groups – implying a
good technical preparation and support of course. This proceeding offers the advan-
tage of direct integration and validation. A possible disadvantage could be the vary-
ing good / objective evaluation results.
Competence development is a protracting and contradictory process not only on the
individual but also on the collective and organisational level. Competence audits as
parts of this process are out of place in companies that are short term oriented and
just “keep on existing” in times of crisis. On the other side, the interest of companies
and corporate management in such an instrument can be distinct.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 18
8 Use for company practice
How competent are the employees of different production units in handling their
working tasks and what potential do they have for coping with upcoming changes?
Are the competences of the employees, compared with other comparable companies
rather low, average or highly distinctive?
Where are special strengths, where are needs for development?
What are the reasons for differences in the competence values between persons or
organisational units, and where should competence development measures therefore
start sensibly?
How effective were the development measures and what competence growth was
achieved?
A CM ProWork competence audit supports companies in the systematic answering of
this and similar questions. It enables companies to transparently illustrate, systemati-
cally analyze and professionalize the further development of competences needed
and established in production work. It offers the chance to directly involve production
units and the workers employed there in the competence development and thereby
the strategic implementation of the whole company. The operative implementation of
the approach described here is based on the use of the »CM ProWork« software so-
lution that is described in more detail in part 4.
In contrast to other common competence management tools, CM ProWork focuses
on worker groups that are often not primarily integrated into personnel development
measures. The procedure permits the systematic collection and promotion of individ-
ual and group related competences and can therefore be used for person as well as
organisation related competence development concepts. A systematic collecting and
promotion of individual and group related competencies helps companies to keep
their productivity, quality and flexibility competitive and to meet the innovation de-
mands of the markets. In order to assure process stability and personnel assignment
flexibility in everyday work, competence shortages must be avoided. Only with com-
petent workers the chances of technological and organisational change can be opti-
mally utilized.
Apart from statements on the competence values of individual workers, the CM
ProWork competence audit also allows for aggregated interpretations on the compe-
tence potential of entire organisational units. A systematic, longitudinally designed
competence management offers valuable information for production management, for
operational personnel developers and human resources managers: it reveals
strengths and learning needs, documents developments and thus enables a well-
directed orientation of operational personnel and organisation development. The ad-
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 19
vantages of the competence audit in industrial production companies with CM
ProWork at a glance:
? Integrating workers into operational competence management
? Comprehensive overview of current competences, strengths and learning
needs of workers in production units
? Internal, corporate and international competence benchmarking – on individual
and organisational level
? Demonstration of interfaces between competence development, organisation
development and company development
? Efficient application of resources through concrete hints on learning needs
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 20
9 Application scenarios of a competence audit
with CM ProWork from a company perspective
CM ProWork allows for interpretations on the level of individual workers or entire or-
ganisational units in cross-sectional and longitudinal manner.
Analysing individual competences and competence development
What are the individual task-related and process-related competences of a worker?
What are his strengths, what his learning needs? How does he perform with his com-
petences compared to his reference group? How have the competences of an em-
ployee developed over time? These are exemplary questions for a person related
competence audit with CM ProWork. For this purpose, the individual competence
values can be compared with the average value of a reference group in a profile
comparison; for example, the group of workers with formally equivalent qualification
within the examined organisation unit For this, a profile for the reference group must
be set up that includes the group’s average value and the respective deviation of val-
ues within the group. In addition, the values for worker competences might be com-
pared and analyzed in a longitudinal design.
This can be illustrated in the following example. The relative strengths of worker A, a
professional worker in the final assembly of Muller GmbH, are among his task-related
competences – all three task-related competences show values above average com-
pared to the reference group of professional workers in final assembly. Potential de-
velopment fields are however found in the field of cooperation readiness and social
competence – here the values are significantly below average. If these development
fields are addressed as such depends on in how far these comparably low values go
along with actual losings in cooperative task coping or if employee and company aim
for development goals that require a higher level of social competence and/or coop-
eration readiness. On the background of his high task-related competence, it could
be considered to assign worker A as an internal tutor for the orientation of new em-
ployees or as a trainer for internal training measures in the future. These tasks how-
ever require a higher degree of social competence – among others – that worker A
does not yet fully dispose of. Also a future activity of worker A as group speaker or
coordinator would potentially ask for a further development of his social competence.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 21
Task mastery
Task responsibility
Task knowledge
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
1 2 3 4
low very high rather high rather low
competence profile A (employee, worker group, work system)
competence profile B (employee, worker group, work system)
exemplary representation exemplary representation
Figure 5: Exemplary illustration of a competence profile comparison
Analysing the competences and competence development of work
groups and/or work systems
To what degree does a work group or work system dispose of the required employee
competences to successfully cope with the current complex production demands?
What is the potential to competently deal with changes in these demands as well? In
which work groups or systems is a high competence potential available, where is the
competence potential rather low and what are possible reasons for these differ-
ences? How have the competences developed in the course of time? In order to an-
swer these and similar questions, the interpretations from a competence audit of
work groups or work systems can be consulted. These are values on the task- and
process-related competences of a work group or work system in the sense of a com-
petence potential.
e is the
competence potential rather low and what are possible reasons for these differ-
ences? How have the competences developed in the course of time? In order to an-
swer these and similar questions, the interpretations from a competence audit of
work groups or work systems can be consulted. These are values on the task- and
process-related competences of a work group or work system in the sense of a com-
petence potential.
The task- and process-related competence potential of a work system or group is de-
termined by the formation of an average value across the respective values of all as-
sociated workers. These average group values of task- and process-related compe-
tences can be drawn on for particular strength-and-weakness analyses, the compari-
son with other work groups or systems or a longitudinal development analysis. In this,
information on the mean variation of competence values within the individual work
groups or systems must be considered. This can also be illustrated in an example (cf.
Figure 6).
The task- and process-related competence potential of a work system or group is de-
termined by the formation of an average value across the respective values of all as-
sociated workers. These average group values of task- and process-related compe-
tences can be drawn on for particular strength-and-weakness analyses, the compari-
son with other work groups or systems or a longitudinal development analysis. In this,
information on the mean variation of competence values within the individual work
groups or systems must be considered. This can also be illustrated in an example (cf.
Figure 6).
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 22
G 1 G 2 G 3 G 4 G 5
M
e
a
n
v
a
l
u
e
Group / Work System
Task-related competence
potential
Process-related competenc
potential
l
o
w
V
e
r
y
h
i
g
h
h
i
g
h
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
1
2
3
4
exemplary representation exemplary representation
Standard deviation
Figure 6: Exemplary illustration of a comparison of task- and process-related competences between
work groups or work systems
In this example, the discrepancies in values of task- and process-related compe-
tences in work groups 3 and 4 as well as the overall low competence values com-
pared to the other work groups (WG) are striking. Possible reasons for the low proc-
ess competences should be identified here. For this purpose, among others a com-
parison with WG 5, where significantly higher average values of process-related com-
petences are found (even at almost identical task-related competence as in WG 4), is
recommended. Moreover, the mean variation in this WG is very low – the majority of
workers there achieved values at the top of the scale, while the distribution especially
of the process competences in WG 3 and WG 4 is very heterogeneous; it seems,
there are rather workers with elevated competence values on the one hand and
workers with basic values on the other hand there. Can these differences be traced
back to the qualification level of the respective workers employed there or might they
result from the way of process design in the sense of workers in WG 3 and WG 4 not
(yet) having had the possibility to develop these competences to a higher degree due
to a different work organisation? In part, the homogeneity of competence values in
WG 5 hints at this. Possible reasons for differences in competence values as well as
starting points for respective interventions become clearer only through further analy-
ses though – the competence audit CM ProWork can offer an important and system-
atic information basis for this.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 23
10 Competence audit with CM ProWork – Quo vadis?
CM ProWork is a tool that offers many and sensible data, but cannot make state-
ments on possible or necessary measures on competence development “at the push
of a button”. CM ProWork can therefore at best be a useful tool for an operational
competence management. The ability of CM ProWork to provide valid cross-sectional
and longitudinal data must be especially emphasized in this context.
Competence audits are basically “product audits“, as the “product” competence is
registered in its respective value, evaluated and considered in its development. It is
not a system or process audit in the sense of ISO 9000. There is a risk of term confu-
sion here. Product audits can refer to individual objects or groups of objects. This can
be applied to the “product” competence as well, although there are certain important
differences in contrast to object products:
? Competences are psychic potentials and not final characteristics
? The competences of work groups or systems as collective competences are
not the mere sum of individual competences but must rather be seen as social
potentials
? Psychic as well as social potentials can principally be judged only in their de-
velopment and with regard to their interaction with impact factors. Every cross-
sectional comparison of competences is therefore of limited validity.
The trial to evaluate or compare the competences of collectives (work groups, work
systems) is only legitimate if the respective collectives are comparable as well. Col-
lectives suitable for a competence audit are:
? Natural, informal small groups
? Communities of Practice
? Formal teams and work groups
? The social entirety of all persons that pursue a common goal in an organisa-
tional system
Due to the efforts connected with the use and maintenance of the CM ProWork tool,
its implementation only makes sense within a systematic and long-term scheduled
competence management in production.
Audits can be very sensible procedural elements of such a “sustainable” manage-
ment system. They make sense, especially if developments are observed and influ-
enced. The challenge here is to develop meaningful and realistic goals suitable for
the respective case of application. The heterogeneity of industrial production compa-
nies regarding labour organisation is too high to formulate general authoritative
goals. Also, with respect to the analysis and the deduction of possible and suitable
interventions, no generic advice in the sense of a schematic guideline of actions can
be given. In contrast, these steps – just as the goal definition itself – require a deep-
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 24
ened knowledge and understanding of the relationship between designing production
processes and competence development of employees in industrial production (cf.
Figure 7). The question of how an adequate balance between demands of an indi-
vidual case study and generally valid and action-guiding recommendations can be
found could not yet be answered.
Figure 7: Conceptual and practical challgenges to the CM ProWork competence audit concept
Require extensive knowledge about
production processes, competence
development and their interrelation
Analysis
Optimisation
Competence
audit
Planning
Data collection
Goals and
assessment criteria
Update data, calculate
values and display
results
Assessment of goal attainment,
causal analysis and
interpretation
Planning of interventions,
implementation and
evaluation
What are meaningful
and attainable goal
values?
Approaches of linking the CM ProWork competence audit to existing management in-
formation systems could be thought of here as well. Employee competences deter-
mine the productive achievement potential of work groups and systems. Therefore it
can be assumed that differences in competence values go along with differences in
operational success. As shown above, collective competences could also be related
to common key performance indicators as productivity, improvement suggestions,
absenteeism or employee job satisfaction. This would allow to analyze the interrela-
tion between employee competence development and more proximal company suc-
cess factors and thereby economically exemplify the impact of employee competence
on corporate success.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 25
Literature
Witzgall, E. (2009): Kompetenzmanagement in der industriellen Produktion. Das Tool
„CM ProWork“. Renningen: Expertverlag.
Witzgall, E. (2010): Kompetenzdarstellung mit dem CM ProWork-Tool. Möglichkeiten
und Ergebnisse der Einordnung in den Europäischen Qualifikationsrahmen.
doc_393961787.pdf
companies
A handbook for the preparation, execution and usage
of competence management in production work
on the basis of the CM ProWork tool
Alexander Schletz
1
, Andrea Koren
2
, Dr. Elmar Witzgall
3
1
Fraunhofer Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation;
2
Institut für
Arbeitswirtschaft und Technologiemanagement der Universität Stuttgart;
3
wissen-koennen.de
Developed within the EU Leonardo project
CM ProWork Transfer
DE/08/LLP-LdV/TOI/147120
Contents
1 The concept of competence development and competence management
pursued by the tool .............................................................................................. 3
2 What and how does the tool measure?................................................................ 5
3 Which statements / evaluations / causality attributions are possible?.................. 8
4 Implementation methods; possibilities of linking up with standard management
systems for quality, environmental protection, employment protection.............. 10
5 Combination with other systems of competence illustration............................... 13
6 Linkages to organisational and company development..................................... 14
7 Participation and Sustainability.......................................................................... 17
8 Use for company practice.................................................................................. 18
9 Application scenarios of a competence audit with CM ProWork from a company
perspective ........................................................................................................ 20
10 Competence audit with CM ProWork – Quo vadis?........................................... 23
Literature.................................................................................................................. 25
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 3
1 The concept of competence development and compe-
tence management pursued by the tool
Basically, CM ProWork is an operative tool. It does not offer strategies or measures,
but data that can be used as a basis for a strategic competence management in pro-
duction and industrial companies.
This data in the first place applies to the individual skills and readiness of (semi-
skilled, trained and specialized) workers in completing tasks and work processes.
Collective skills must / can be derived from the individual data. Distinct leadership
tasks of foremen or production leaders are captured only in part.
The competence development model of CM ProWork is – just like the tool – task and
work process oriented. Competences and the respective competence values there-
fore develop depending on
? the range of tasks (number and nature of assigned responsible tasks)
? the complexity / difficulty of assigned tasks
? the respective responsibility profundity (partial assignment to full responsibility)
? the level of task proficiency
? the behaviour in a context of task related learning demands
? the behaviour in a context of process and company related cooperation and
communication demands
? the behaviour in a context of different interests and needs in a cooperative
working process.
These development dimensions correlate on the one hand with classic work organi-
sation strategies: job enlargement, job enrichment and partly autonomous group
work. As it explicitly incorporates enhancement processes and tasks on the one hand
and learning demands with regard to changes on the other hand, the model can well
be integrated into continuous improvement processes (CIP) and respectively oriented
standard management systems.
Personnel development strategies that aim at general personality traits and espe-
cially on soft skills are in contrast almost not supported. Possibly problematic over-
lappings exist in the field of pay programmes. Conflicts can arise, if the task compe-
tence shows higher values than the (task oriented) evaluation of the workers sug-
gests. These discrepancies are tool specific in so far as the task inventory used is
much more differentiated than the one the pay programme is based on. This way it
can become obvious which achievements are expected but not considered in pay-
ment.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 4
The tool therefore is not suited for personnel assignment strategies that in the first
place aim at keeping labour costs low and a flexible exchange of (cheap) production
workers.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 5
2 What and how does the tool measure?
The tool measures demand orientated. The competence constructs used apply to
task oriented demands on the one hand, to working process oriented demands on
the other hand. In both cases it was tried to establish a relationship with the compe-
tence dimensions Knowledge, Capability and Readiness. The way in which these
demands were transformed into competence categories and how the respective val-
ues are created varies (see figure 1).
INPUT TOOL OUTPUT
CALC
Task responsibility
Task mastery
Task knowledge
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
Task accountability
Task capability
Knowledge level
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
Figure 1: Input and output structure of the CM ProWork software tool
The so-called task-related competences are calculated by the tool. Basis for the cal-
culations is input on objective task and assignment characteristics that themselves
were derived from task analysis instruments. The theoretical basis is the work psy-
chological activity regulation theory. The calculation takes place with respect to a
standard task inventory that is included in the tool and which can be adjusted within
certain limits. In the calculation mainly input on standard tasks or these tasks them-
selves are considered. Even through the input of relatively many self-defined tasks
the user can only take little influence on the results.
The so-called process-related competences symbolize differently developed behav-
iours in the working process, of which learning readiness has the closest link to task
competences regarding contents. The other process-related competences are also
based for the most part on working psychological theories on collective action. The
values of the process-related competences must be entered directly by the user of
the tool (according to an interval, at least ordinal scale). Objective task characteristics
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 6
that could serve as basis for the calculation as in the case of task-related compe-
tences were not known during the development of the tool.
Task-related
competences
Abilities of the workers
acquired by taking over responsibilities
and conducting work tasks
Abilities and readiness of the workers for
cooperation, communication and continuous
learning in the work process
Process-related
competences
Task-related
competences
Abilities of the workers
acquired by taking over responsibilities
and conducting work tasks
Abilities and readiness of the workers for
cooperation, communication and continuous
learning in the work process
Process-related
competences
Cooperation
readiness
Learning
readiness
Task
mastery
Task
responsibility
Social
Competence
Communication
competence
Task
knowledge
Figure 2: The CM ProWork competence model
The value differentiation in the output is the same in both cases and relatively rough
(four levels without mean value and without interim values; minimum value 1 / maxi-
mum value 4). This rough gradation is volitional as the tool is thought to be used also
by low qualified workers on the shop floor. Through the calculation procedure smaller
evaluation mistakes in the task competencies (concerning assignment and task
characteristics) are counterbalanced to a large extent.
The instrument was so tested mainly on face validity, although in some cases there
were VERA-P measurement results available as external references. Moreover, the
calculation model was stress and sensitivity tested and adjusted accordingly several
times. It can be assumed that particularly the values of task-related competences
highly correlate with each other. This can be regarded as no problem as long as cer-
tain realities in production – well-qualified people get a greater number and more dif-
ficult tasks and can develop better with them – are rendered sufficiently correct
(which can be assumed so far). In addition, expert judgements from the production
managers, HR managers and workers involved in pilot testing have been integrated
to assess the instrument’s validity. The values and reports generated by CM Pro-
Work have been judged as plausible and comprehensible in almost every case with
very few particular exceptions. This refers to the absolute values of the competence
report and especially to the differentiation between workers displayed by the tool.
Furthermore, it was shown that cross-links between EQF descriptors and compe-
tence dimensions of the CM ProWork tool are strong enough with regard to content
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 7
to conduct a plausible identification of empirical competence profiles with the EQF
levels. Therefore, with the help of the CM ProWork tool a validation of results from
non-formal and informal learning can be achieved.
The implementation cases so far show that high competence values are rather rare.
Regarding task-related competences, it can be precluded that maximum values may
well be reached in all three categories. This would mean that a highly capable worker
is employed as utility man. Concerning process-related competences, very different
value profiles can arise that correlate only weakly with the task-related competence
values.
A competence value of 2 may be considered already a relatively good value for
workers in working environments with low competence furtherance. According to the
experiences so far, all values of 3 must be regarded as really good; values of 4 are
reached only by very few workers.
It occurs that formally unqualified workers achieve similarly high values in certain
categories as professionally qualified workers. Results of this kind are correct in the
sense that not formal qualification but competences are measured and a competence
development in the working process under advantageous conditions can lead very
far. However, professional qualification is expected to affect the values of task capa-
bility, task knowledge and learning readiness.
In order to depict collective competences of work groups or work systems, the indi-
vidual values of groups of workers can be used as a calculation basis (average val-
ues with standard deviations). The recognition of the emergence effect of collectives
(the whole is more than the sum of its parts) is thereby not possible. In order to sim-
plify the interpretation of group analyses, it is advisable to calculate and depict per-
centaged value sums for task-related and process-related competences.
A special and simplified possibility of competence measurement offers the function of
“position fitness” provided in the position report of the CM ProWork software tool. In
order to assign positions (=lists of tasks) to adequately competent workers, the fit-
ness of a worker to handle the task requirements of a certain position is calculated on
a decimal scale. This calculation includes only the input on task capability and ap-
plies to positions that have been defined in advance only. The “position fitness” func-
tion has proven to be of particular interest for the practical use of the software tool by
production managers.
According to the experiences so far, the tool is able to depict workers’ competences
with adequate validity and in a differentiated fashion. The measurement results can
be well understood by executives in production. A comparably capable instrument for
production is not known to date.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 8
3 Which statements / evaluations / causality attributions
are possible?
The causal structure “constructed” by the tool can be sketched as follows:
Task responsibility
?
quantity: many tasks
quality: different tasks
complexity: difficult tasks
Task mastery
?
learning
qualification
experience
Task knowledge
?
responsibility for difficult tasks and related
learning / teaching activities
Learning readiness
?
individual learning motives and learning
culture
Cooperation readiness
?
individual / collective abilities, motives, and
working culture
Communication compe-
tence
?
individual / collective abilities, motives and
working culture
Social competence
?
individual / collective abilities and motives /
conflict culture
Figure 3: Factors assumed to influence the competences measured with CM ProWork
The sketch shows that inferences cannot only be drawn to the competence level but
also to the organisation with its culture, change dynamics and history. Especially the
following examination and interpretation lines (not exhaustive) appear worthwile:
? Which competence profiles show the current state of which group of workers,
which show one ore more desired states?
? What effect does the job design concept pursued have on the “competence
capital“, i. e. the collective competences of a work group or work system?
? Which development potentials does the “competence capital” offer for ambi-
tious job design concepts?
? Where does the “competence capital“ (of groups / departments / companies)
stand in comparison?
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 9
? Is there a culture of “organized irresponsibility”, or is there a strong asymmetry
in task responsibility?
? Is there a culture of “organized learning reluctance”?
? Do qualification measures lead to measurable effects / do they reach their ad-
dressees?
? Do organisational measures lead to measurable effects / do they reach their
addressees?
? What deficits in process-related competences can be identified among the pro-
fessional personnel / among the semi-skilled workers?
? At which deficits can / should trainings on soft skills start?
Which flexibility reserves does the production staff offer?
? Is the process, quality and productivity management adequately anchored
within the task profiles of the workers?
? Which learning and development potentials does the production staff offer?
? What statements can be used for agreement of objectives/performance ap-
praisals; can the effect of agreement of objectives/performance appraisals be
understood with the help of the tool?
Questions that must be posed within a competence audit in the narrower sense are
excluded here.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 10
4 Implementation methods; possibilities of linking up
with standard management systems for quality, envi-
ronmental protection, employment protection
CM ProWork is a stand-alone software application. Input and results are saved in an
MS Access database. Many results can be exported to MS Excel and processed fur-
ther there.
The databases can be saved and accessed de-centrally or centrally. As the tool is
conceptualized as an everyday tool for de-centrally employed production managers
(as foremen), it would be best if in every production manager office there is a version
of the application installed and a strategically sensible system for database manage-
ment implemented that is accepted throughout the company.
As the tool collects and saves employee-related data, implementation of CM
ProWork in most cases requires the participation of the work council. The approval of
the work council can more easily be achieved if
? it is made clear that no general employee related data is collected (in contrast
to most other competence management systems)
? the workers are not only informed, but also able to participate actively in the
data collection process
? applying CM ProWork includes a procedure to positively integrate the results
of the tool into job references and other similar documents, so that these
document not only formal qualifications but also an individual workers’
achievements from learning on the job (cf. Witzgall 2009, S. 118 ff.)
Under certain circumstances, an anonymous data input can be thought about in the
beginning.
A great number of basically important tasks for quality and productivity management
have already been integrated into the task inventory of the tool. In course of the CM
ProWork Transfer project, the task inventory for batch production settings was ex-
tended by tasks on occupational health and safety and environmental protection.
These will later also be integrated into the inventory on discrete parts production. The
possibility to adjust and extend the task inventory allows for an easy linkage to stan-
dard management systems. Furthermore, the adaptability of the task inventory also
allows to depict the competences and assignments of specialists employed within the
production process.
Using the functions on position and position fitness, explicit links can be drawn that
for example show which workers have already excelled in the field of the respective
task. Together with the results of process-related competences “cooperation and
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 11
communication readiness” fitting candidates for trainings and instructions can be
found.
The facets of a competence audit with CM ProWork described here make up a flexi-
ble concept that allows for a standardized analysis for a number of interesting ques-
tions. It focuses on worker competences on an individual level and/or the level of col-
lectives (work groups or work systems).
The audit might be used for the following exemplary scenarios:
? competence-based evaluation of production departments or companies
? benchmarking of the competence potential of production departments as a ba-
sis for continuous development processes
? competence potential of organisational units as information basis for the plan-
ning of technical, organisational or personnel interventions
? individual and group related analyses of strengths and weaknesses
? detailed planning basis for qualification and training measures in production
? evaluation of the effects of personnel related, organisational or technical inter-
ventions on worker competences
In addition to an analysis of the fulfilment level of current competence demands, the
CM ProWork competence audit offers the possibility to align and evaluate the devel-
opment of employee competences with medium and long-term company goals. This
helps to avoid competence shortages which might possibly hinder successful imple-
mentation of department or company strategies. The comparison of current compe-
tence values with future competence demands leads to possible starting points for
development measures that should be discussed and prioritized by production lead-
ers and personnel department. The effects of these developmental measures can
than be tracked with the competence audit embedded into a systematic and regularly
executed competence management.
Standardized audit processes follow a more or less fixed process scheme. It not only
purports the measurement criteria and procedures but also the evaluation procedures
and the way in which measures are deduced. Nonetheless, competence audits can
differ depending on the result expectancies and execution circumstances of the par-
ticular companies. Therefore it does not appear sensible to develop a detailed and
closed process model a la ISO 9000. As a general scheme for a competence audit
the so-called Deming cycle is suggested (cf. Figure 4). The Deming cycle contains
planning, analytical, evaluating, changing and correcting partial processes arranged
in a circular working scheme. Companies are generally familiar with this basic
scheme:
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 12
Analysis
Optimisation
Competence
audit
Planning
Data collection
Figure 4: Competence Audit with CM ProWork visualized as Deming cycle
Employee competences determine the potential productivity and innovativeness of
organisational units. Therefore it can be assumed that differences in the competence
values go along with differences in company success. The interpretation of compe-
tence audits can therefore be related to pertinent index numbers as work productivity,
scrap rate, processing time, accident rate, but also the number of suggestions for im-
provement, absenteeism, or employee job satisfaction. In many cases these numbers
are already available and are implemented into the company controlling system in the
form of key performance indicators cockpits.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 13
5 Combination with other systems of competence illus-
tration
In the following discussion of options two types of combination possibilities must be
differentiated:
(a) combination of methodologically contrastive procedures
(b) combination of complementary procedures
Combinations of CM ProWork according to (a) can be critical; they should be very
well considered. It is possible to generate incompatible or in rare cases opposing re-
sults that can no longer be explained by common sense but only by a methodological
specialist. In a combination of CM ProWork with competence measurements aiming
at general personality characteristics it should always be noted that the two proce-
dures measure different things! Especially critical is the combination with procedures
on the basis of competence catalogues, because in these cases very similar or iden-
tical terms can emerge that might be easily confused.
In contrast, combinations according to (b) are uncritical and in many cases appropri-
ate. CM ProWork version 3.0 offers the possibility to emit individual related data and
results. In comprehensive competence illustrations, these CM ProWork results
should be complemented with information on educational training and professional
background. Generally biographic competence illustrations serve well as amend-
ments to CM ProWork as they provide exactly the information that does not become
obvious in the tool (which only works result oriented).
For this reason, a combination with the EUROPASS CV is also very adequate. Dur-
ing the project it could be shown that cross-links regarding content between the EQF
descriptors and the competence dimensions of the CM ProWork tool are strong
enough to enable plausible classifications of competence profiles into EQF levels
(Witzgall, 2010). With help of the CM ProWork tool a validation of results from non-
formal and informal learning can therefore be conducted that is especially useful for
workers without relevant professional qualification. Alternatively, special competence
proofs can be designed which illustrate the result oriented as well as the biographical
data in a consistent format (cf. chapter 9.5 in Witzgall 2009, S. 118 ff.). In this con-
text, the CM ProFiler tool developed within the project must be mentioned, which by
means of input on 20 competence values for workers allows for the creation of a
standardised profile on professionally acquired competences which can also be used
further in the EUROPASS CV. The CM ProFiler is available for free on
www.cmprowork.eu.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 14
6 Linkages to organisational and company development
Through its export functions to MS Excel, the tool possesses a universally applicable
software interface. The databases themselves are manipulable in MS Access as well.
This (unofficial) possibility is critical though, because it can lead to a bias in the re-
sults.
Regarding the “systematic-functional” interfaces, there is first of all the question of the
whole purpose of competence audits in production. Wikipedia states on quality audits
in general:
Quality audits are performed to verify conformance to standards through review of objective evi-
dence. A system of quality audits may verify the effectiveness of a quality management system.
This is part of certifications such as ISO 9001. Quality audits are essential to verify the exis-
tence of objective evidence showing conformance to required processes, to assess how suc-
cessfully processes have been implemented, for judging the effectiveness of achieving any de-
fined target levels, providing evidence concerning reduction and elimination of problem areas
and are a hands-on management tool for achieving continual improvement in an organization.
To benefit the organization, quality auditing should not only report non-conformances and cor-
rective actions but also highlight areas of good practice and provide evidence of conformance.
In this way, other departments may share information and amend their working practices as a
result, also enhancing continual improvement.
Competence audits in this sense only make sense if, first, a decided interest in “pro-
duction competence capital” exists and, second, the development of such a capital is
goal oriented and can be evaluated according to these goals constantly.
Possible goals with reference to company development could be:
? comparing assertion of competence capital in production units as basis for
continuous further development
? comparing assertion of competence capital as basis for planning of technical,
organisational or personnel politic interventions
? comparing assertion of competence capital as basis for estimation of effects of
technical, organisational, personnel politic interventions
? comparing assertion of competence capital with the purpose of evaluating
production departments or companies (within a corporate group…)
With reference to organisation development:
? comparing different production concepts as basis for a standardisation of pro-
duction concepts
? tracing effects of an implementation of standard management systems (quality
and others)
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 15
? decreasing / increasing span of control
? implementing new payment and award systems
? increasing / decreasing the percentage of skilled workers
? planning of competence conducive resources
? planning of qualification and training measures in production
? enhancement of cooperation with Federal Employment Agency (recruiting,
qualification of workers)
If the data is updated regularly (about once every six months), competence audits
can start off from the following functions of CM ProWork (cf. Table 1):
? Competence report (including task and process competences). On this interpre-
tation, a lot has already been said. One important issue is the development of tar-
get ideas, e. g. in the form of minimum or standard profiles; otherwise only weak
spots can be interpreted that do not consider potentials (cf. Witzgall 2009, p. 91 ff.
and 102 ff.).
? Position report: the measurement of position fitness is rougher but it allows for a
setup of very precisely tuned analyses and evaluations concerning the company.
A detailed description can be found in Witzgall 2009, p. 115 ff.
? Learning relevance report: in this report there are also several audit relevant
measurement and interpretation possibilities. Changes in learning relevance of
tasks can for example show the broad success of measures in competence en-
couragement; changes in person related learning needs are suited for micro
analyses. On this, also cf. Witzgall 2009, S. 97 ff.
The basic problem that cannot be solved globally is the still possible incompatibility of
competence structures and data produced in CM ProWork on the one hand and
other procedures on the other hand. In competence audits this problem must at least
be reflected and its potential effects should be contemplated.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 16
Table 1: Competence Audit with CM ProWork: possible use cases
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
s
o
f
w
o
r
k
e
r
g
r
o
u
p
s
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
s
o
f
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
W
i
t
h
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
/
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
o
f
a
l
l
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
o
f
a
g
r
o
u
p
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
:
f
o
r
t
a
s
k
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
s
?
N
a
m
e
:
C
O
M
P
E
T
E
N
C
E
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
O
F
A
G
R
O
U
P
(
2
v
a
l
u
e
s
)
A
s
f
o
r
w
o
r
k
e
r
g
r
o
u
p
s
b
u
t
t
a
k
i
n
g
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
v
a
l
u
e
s
o
f
a
l
l
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
.
?
N
a
m
e
:
C
O
M
P
E
T
E
N
C
E
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
O
F
A
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
2
v
a
l
u
e
s
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
i
n
t
h
e
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
f
i
e
l
d
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
“
t
a
s
k
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
”
a
n
d
“
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
”
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
G
R
O
U
P
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
W
i
t
h
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
s
y
s
t
e
m
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
c
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
e
i
n
t
h
e
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
f
i
e
l
d
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
“
t
a
s
k
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
”
a
n
d
“
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
”
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
f
i
t
n
e
s
s
v
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
a
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
?
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
f
i
t
n
e
s
s
f
o
r
a
(
p
r
e
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
)
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
F
L
E
X
I
B
I
L
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
?
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
:
v
a
l
u
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
r
e
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
a
l
l
t
a
s
k
s
a
n
d
w
o
r
k
e
r
s
i
n
a
w
o
r
k
s
y
s
t
e
m
?
T
o
t
a
l
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
a
l
l
v
a
l
u
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
c
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
?
N
a
m
e
:
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
R
E
L
I
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
I
N
T
H
E
W
O
R
K
S
Y
S
T
E
M
(
1
v
a
l
u
e
)
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 17
7 Participation and Sustainability
The difficulty of employee participation was commented above already. Independ-
ently of this there is the question of how far it is possible and sensible to effectually
and sustainably establish something like competence management (including com-
petence audits) without a real participation of the persons concerned.
The employees and especially the directly assigned executives principally dispose of
enough possibilities to avoid the application of the instrument and the use of a com-
petence audit. Especially if the data input and the evaluation are fragmentary, not
exact enough and without regular updates, the value of the reports is questionable.
The executives here depend upon their input being to some degree consensually co-
ordinated; otherwise the output can be questioned.
The interface worker/executive is therefore a highly critical point in a competence au-
dit, and the participation of the employees in this case should be especially well
planned, supported and observed.
A good proceeding could be to build teams of personnel developers, production ma-
nagers and a number of workers that operate the implementation and usage proc-
esses. This way interface difficulties can be identified and probably solved more eas-
ily. The collaboration in these teams should of course be voluntary on the workers’
level. Budding executives can exhibit their potential in such teams especially well.
In companies with a good cooperation and learning culture it is also possible to be-
stow the data input and maintenance directly upon the work groups – implying a
good technical preparation and support of course. This proceeding offers the advan-
tage of direct integration and validation. A possible disadvantage could be the vary-
ing good / objective evaluation results.
Competence development is a protracting and contradictory process not only on the
individual but also on the collective and organisational level. Competence audits as
parts of this process are out of place in companies that are short term oriented and
just “keep on existing” in times of crisis. On the other side, the interest of companies
and corporate management in such an instrument can be distinct.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 18
8 Use for company practice
How competent are the employees of different production units in handling their
working tasks and what potential do they have for coping with upcoming changes?
Are the competences of the employees, compared with other comparable companies
rather low, average or highly distinctive?
Where are special strengths, where are needs for development?
What are the reasons for differences in the competence values between persons or
organisational units, and where should competence development measures therefore
start sensibly?
How effective were the development measures and what competence growth was
achieved?
A CM ProWork competence audit supports companies in the systematic answering of
this and similar questions. It enables companies to transparently illustrate, systemati-
cally analyze and professionalize the further development of competences needed
and established in production work. It offers the chance to directly involve production
units and the workers employed there in the competence development and thereby
the strategic implementation of the whole company. The operative implementation of
the approach described here is based on the use of the »CM ProWork« software so-
lution that is described in more detail in part 4.
In contrast to other common competence management tools, CM ProWork focuses
on worker groups that are often not primarily integrated into personnel development
measures. The procedure permits the systematic collection and promotion of individ-
ual and group related competences and can therefore be used for person as well as
organisation related competence development concepts. A systematic collecting and
promotion of individual and group related competencies helps companies to keep
their productivity, quality and flexibility competitive and to meet the innovation de-
mands of the markets. In order to assure process stability and personnel assignment
flexibility in everyday work, competence shortages must be avoided. Only with com-
petent workers the chances of technological and organisational change can be opti-
mally utilized.
Apart from statements on the competence values of individual workers, the CM
ProWork competence audit also allows for aggregated interpretations on the compe-
tence potential of entire organisational units. A systematic, longitudinally designed
competence management offers valuable information for production management, for
operational personnel developers and human resources managers: it reveals
strengths and learning needs, documents developments and thus enables a well-
directed orientation of operational personnel and organisation development. The ad-
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 19
vantages of the competence audit in industrial production companies with CM
ProWork at a glance:
? Integrating workers into operational competence management
? Comprehensive overview of current competences, strengths and learning
needs of workers in production units
? Internal, corporate and international competence benchmarking – on individual
and organisational level
? Demonstration of interfaces between competence development, organisation
development and company development
? Efficient application of resources through concrete hints on learning needs
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 20
9 Application scenarios of a competence audit
with CM ProWork from a company perspective
CM ProWork allows for interpretations on the level of individual workers or entire or-
ganisational units in cross-sectional and longitudinal manner.
Analysing individual competences and competence development
What are the individual task-related and process-related competences of a worker?
What are his strengths, what his learning needs? How does he perform with his com-
petences compared to his reference group? How have the competences of an em-
ployee developed over time? These are exemplary questions for a person related
competence audit with CM ProWork. For this purpose, the individual competence
values can be compared with the average value of a reference group in a profile
comparison; for example, the group of workers with formally equivalent qualification
within the examined organisation unit For this, a profile for the reference group must
be set up that includes the group’s average value and the respective deviation of val-
ues within the group. In addition, the values for worker competences might be com-
pared and analyzed in a longitudinal design.
This can be illustrated in the following example. The relative strengths of worker A, a
professional worker in the final assembly of Muller GmbH, are among his task-related
competences – all three task-related competences show values above average com-
pared to the reference group of professional workers in final assembly. Potential de-
velopment fields are however found in the field of cooperation readiness and social
competence – here the values are significantly below average. If these development
fields are addressed as such depends on in how far these comparably low values go
along with actual losings in cooperative task coping or if employee and company aim
for development goals that require a higher level of social competence and/or coop-
eration readiness. On the background of his high task-related competence, it could
be considered to assign worker A as an internal tutor for the orientation of new em-
ployees or as a trainer for internal training measures in the future. These tasks how-
ever require a higher degree of social competence – among others – that worker A
does not yet fully dispose of. Also a future activity of worker A as group speaker or
coordinator would potentially ask for a further development of his social competence.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 21
Task mastery
Task responsibility
Task knowledge
Learning readiness
Cooperation readiness
Communication competence
Social competence
1 2 3 4
low very high rather high rather low
competence profile A (employee, worker group, work system)
competence profile B (employee, worker group, work system)
exemplary representation exemplary representation
Figure 5: Exemplary illustration of a competence profile comparison
Analysing the competences and competence development of work
groups and/or work systems
To what degree does a work group or work system dispose of the required employee
competences to successfully cope with the current complex production demands?
What is the potential to competently deal with changes in these demands as well? In
which work groups or systems is a high competence potential available, where is the
competence potential rather low and what are possible reasons for these differ-
ences? How have the competences developed in the course of time? In order to an-
swer these and similar questions, the interpretations from a competence audit of
work groups or work systems can be consulted. These are values on the task- and
process-related competences of a work group or work system in the sense of a com-
petence potential.
e is the
competence potential rather low and what are possible reasons for these differ-
ences? How have the competences developed in the course of time? In order to an-
swer these and similar questions, the interpretations from a competence audit of
work groups or work systems can be consulted. These are values on the task- and
process-related competences of a work group or work system in the sense of a com-
petence potential.
The task- and process-related competence potential of a work system or group is de-
termined by the formation of an average value across the respective values of all as-
sociated workers. These average group values of task- and process-related compe-
tences can be drawn on for particular strength-and-weakness analyses, the compari-
son with other work groups or systems or a longitudinal development analysis. In this,
information on the mean variation of competence values within the individual work
groups or systems must be considered. This can also be illustrated in an example (cf.
Figure 6).
The task- and process-related competence potential of a work system or group is de-
termined by the formation of an average value across the respective values of all as-
sociated workers. These average group values of task- and process-related compe-
tences can be drawn on for particular strength-and-weakness analyses, the compari-
son with other work groups or systems or a longitudinal development analysis. In this,
information on the mean variation of competence values within the individual work
groups or systems must be considered. This can also be illustrated in an example (cf.
Figure 6).
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 22
G 1 G 2 G 3 G 4 G 5
M
e
a
n
v
a
l
u
e
Group / Work System
Task-related competence
potential
Process-related competenc
potential
l
o
w
V
e
r
y
h
i
g
h
h
i
g
h
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
1
2
3
4
exemplary representation exemplary representation
Standard deviation
Figure 6: Exemplary illustration of a comparison of task- and process-related competences between
work groups or work systems
In this example, the discrepancies in values of task- and process-related compe-
tences in work groups 3 and 4 as well as the overall low competence values com-
pared to the other work groups (WG) are striking. Possible reasons for the low proc-
ess competences should be identified here. For this purpose, among others a com-
parison with WG 5, where significantly higher average values of process-related com-
petences are found (even at almost identical task-related competence as in WG 4), is
recommended. Moreover, the mean variation in this WG is very low – the majority of
workers there achieved values at the top of the scale, while the distribution especially
of the process competences in WG 3 and WG 4 is very heterogeneous; it seems,
there are rather workers with elevated competence values on the one hand and
workers with basic values on the other hand there. Can these differences be traced
back to the qualification level of the respective workers employed there or might they
result from the way of process design in the sense of workers in WG 3 and WG 4 not
(yet) having had the possibility to develop these competences to a higher degree due
to a different work organisation? In part, the homogeneity of competence values in
WG 5 hints at this. Possible reasons for differences in competence values as well as
starting points for respective interventions become clearer only through further analy-
ses though – the competence audit CM ProWork can offer an important and system-
atic information basis for this.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 23
10 Competence audit with CM ProWork – Quo vadis?
CM ProWork is a tool that offers many and sensible data, but cannot make state-
ments on possible or necessary measures on competence development “at the push
of a button”. CM ProWork can therefore at best be a useful tool for an operational
competence management. The ability of CM ProWork to provide valid cross-sectional
and longitudinal data must be especially emphasized in this context.
Competence audits are basically “product audits“, as the “product” competence is
registered in its respective value, evaluated and considered in its development. It is
not a system or process audit in the sense of ISO 9000. There is a risk of term confu-
sion here. Product audits can refer to individual objects or groups of objects. This can
be applied to the “product” competence as well, although there are certain important
differences in contrast to object products:
? Competences are psychic potentials and not final characteristics
? The competences of work groups or systems as collective competences are
not the mere sum of individual competences but must rather be seen as social
potentials
? Psychic as well as social potentials can principally be judged only in their de-
velopment and with regard to their interaction with impact factors. Every cross-
sectional comparison of competences is therefore of limited validity.
The trial to evaluate or compare the competences of collectives (work groups, work
systems) is only legitimate if the respective collectives are comparable as well. Col-
lectives suitable for a competence audit are:
? Natural, informal small groups
? Communities of Practice
? Formal teams and work groups
? The social entirety of all persons that pursue a common goal in an organisa-
tional system
Due to the efforts connected with the use and maintenance of the CM ProWork tool,
its implementation only makes sense within a systematic and long-term scheduled
competence management in production.
Audits can be very sensible procedural elements of such a “sustainable” manage-
ment system. They make sense, especially if developments are observed and influ-
enced. The challenge here is to develop meaningful and realistic goals suitable for
the respective case of application. The heterogeneity of industrial production compa-
nies regarding labour organisation is too high to formulate general authoritative
goals. Also, with respect to the analysis and the deduction of possible and suitable
interventions, no generic advice in the sense of a schematic guideline of actions can
be given. In contrast, these steps – just as the goal definition itself – require a deep-
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 24
ened knowledge and understanding of the relationship between designing production
processes and competence development of employees in industrial production (cf.
Figure 7). The question of how an adequate balance between demands of an indi-
vidual case study and generally valid and action-guiding recommendations can be
found could not yet be answered.
Figure 7: Conceptual and practical challgenges to the CM ProWork competence audit concept
Require extensive knowledge about
production processes, competence
development and their interrelation
Analysis
Optimisation
Competence
audit
Planning
Data collection
Goals and
assessment criteria
Update data, calculate
values and display
results
Assessment of goal attainment,
causal analysis and
interpretation
Planning of interventions,
implementation and
evaluation
What are meaningful
and attainable goal
values?
Approaches of linking the CM ProWork competence audit to existing management in-
formation systems could be thought of here as well. Employee competences deter-
mine the productive achievement potential of work groups and systems. Therefore it
can be assumed that differences in competence values go along with differences in
operational success. As shown above, collective competences could also be related
to common key performance indicators as productivity, improvement suggestions,
absenteeism or employee job satisfaction. This would allow to analyze the interrela-
tion between employee competence development and more proximal company suc-
cess factors and thereby economically exemplify the impact of employee competence
on corporate success.
Competence audit in industrial producing companies 25
Literature
Witzgall, E. (2009): Kompetenzmanagement in der industriellen Produktion. Das Tool
„CM ProWork“. Renningen: Expertverlag.
Witzgall, E. (2010): Kompetenzdarstellung mit dem CM ProWork-Tool. Möglichkeiten
und Ergebnisse der Einordnung in den Europäischen Qualifikationsrahmen.
doc_393961787.pdf