Difference between revisions of "Competency loss risk assessment"
(→Description) |
(→Description) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
[[File:1248_tab03.png|500px|thumbnail|right|FIG. 5. Competence loss risk assessment.]] | [[File:1248_tab03.png|500px|thumbnail|right|FIG. 5. Competence loss risk assessment.]] | ||
| − | Step 1 — | + | Step 1 — Competences mapping; |
Step 2 — Competences matrix development; | Step 2 — Competences matrix development; | ||
Step 3 — Competence loss risk assessment; | Step 3 — Competence loss risk assessment; | ||
Revision as of 11:08, 23 August 2013
,
Contents
Definition
Competency loss risk assessment is A process to evaluate the risk of loosing competency in an organisation Source: [[]]
Summary
One paragraph.
Description
The current section will consider the impact of knowledge loss on the organization and the resulting impact on organizational competency, in other words, the ability to function safely and efficiently.
Section 4 provides methodology and tools to address specific knowledge loss associated with individual experts nearing retirement or employees transferring, receiving promotions or leaving the organization (or industry) for other reasons.
Competence loss risk assessment (CLRA) can be easily implemented for the organizations with well-defined process and HR structure. This approach shows management links between business goals of the organization, processes, sub-processes, competences needs and available human resources.
Competence loss risk assessment shown in Figure 5 is a five step process:
Step 1 — Competences mapping; Step 2 — Competences matrix development; Step 3 — Competence loss risk assessment; Step 4 — Actions implementation. Step 5 – Results evaluation
Step 1 — Competences mapping
This step focusing on collecting initial information is needed for the following competency loos risk assessment. The phase includes determination of key elements:
- Business goals of the organization;
- Processes (sub-processes) supporting business goals;
- Competences needed for successful running processes;
- Available HR.
Nuclear organizations managers create competency mapping shown in Figure 8 on the basis of identification of organization structure, organizational processes, sub-processes and required competences for them. Competence map defines connections between business goals of the nuclear organization and individual knowledge of employee through processes, sub-process, competences and available workforce positions. While creating competence mapping it is useful to take into account any information helping to identify organizational competences (organizational functions, guidance, responsibilities, workforce positions, job descriptions, etc.). On this stage mapping approach will help managers to understand the most important and even critical competences of nuclear organization without deep analysis implementation.
Step 2 — Competences matrix development
On this step nuclear organizations managers create competency matrix in compliance with available HR (staff). The matrix shows demand on competences on the rate of one person covers one competence. Though the practices usually are different, at the same time employee can possess several competences, which are overlapping. This gives nuclear organizations reserve of competences what is very important for successful performance. Managers should take into account all available staff and determine their competences, define which are overlapping. Such approach will provide reflection of current situation, helps to identify competences gaps in specific areas and answered what kind of HR staffing needed for covering them, taking into account new demands. Providing the correction actions on the early stage is proactive response to future risks. It is important to underline that employees can possess knowledge, skills and experience which cover several organizational competences.
Step 3 — Risk assessment
Nuclear organizations managers provide assessment of future competency gaps due to changes in organizational structure, personnel rotation, ageing and retirement. Analysis result is the same matrix but focusing on future impacts on organizational competences. At the same time managers can define key experts in the different fields, which are close to retirement or leaving organization and can propose experts for corrective actions on tacit knowledge identification, transfer and preservation or in another words put expert to a low-level analysis called KLRM which is described in chapter 4.
Step 4 — Action
Based on the assessment results, managers should develop a strategic plan addressing organizational competence (knowledge) loss and perform corrective actions Corrective actions mainly can be focused on:
- Determination of prioritized list of competences at risk;
- Critical positions detection;
- Detection of key expert at risk (employees and their critical knowledge and competences);
- Development of substitution plan (reserve) for key employees which are going to leave organization;
- Pairs mentor-successor forming and development of individual plans for knowledge transfer;
- Start of knowledge risk assessment for the critical knowledge identification in accordance with Section 4.
Step 5 — Process efficiency evaluation
The process evaluation highlights the areas of inefficiency. Decomposition of KLRM complex procedures into its component parts helps to highlight the weak areas and identifies the opportunities for improvement. .The efficiency evaluation should be focused on:
- Plan for periodical review (periodically/annually);
- KPIs/metrics set up, e.g.:
- number of experience reports
- quality of experience reports (scale 1-5)
- number of interviews (debriefings)
- ratio of experts at risk and experts evaluated (interviewed)
- number of on-the-job trainings / succession plans
- number of experts at risk (high risk of loss)
- number of knowledge at risk (high risk of loss)
- number of knowledge transfers into the training materials / technical documentation
- number of KM portal / database visits
- The crieteria for corrective action can be, for example less than 70% of the plan fulfilment
- Process self-assessment revision (periodically / annually);
- Periodic updating of KLRM internal policy documents and relevant procedures;
- Periodic updating of KLRM templates, forms and questionnaires’;
Source: Practical Approaches to Risk Management of Knowledge Loss in Nuclear Organizations
References
[1]
