What a good question to start of a debate!
Is this a meaningful and useful question? To be such, the concept of
'competencies' would need to be robust. Surely, after all that has been
written about the problems with the concept, it should be now clear that
there are major conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and practical
flaws with the whole project of 'identifying (managerial) competencies'?
What is your own definition of a competency? How does the concept of a
competency relate to the concept of performance? As (presumably) a
competency is not a visible entity, how do you go about identifying one?
How do you ensure that the competencies in your list are not duplicated,
or don't overlap, etc?
Are you assuming that whatever constitutes competent managerial
performance in one context would similarly constitute competent
performance in another? If so, why?
Thank you for starting the debate on the validity or otherwise of the
concept of managerial competency.
Len
L.Holmes@unl.ac.uk
Len Holmes, The Business School,
University of North London
Holloway Road, London N7 8DB
tel (+44)(0)171 753 5349
--Len Holmes <L.Holmes@unl.ac.uk>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>