scholarly journals Six steps in the right direction: guiding the development of competency frameworks in healthcare professions.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Batt ◽  
Brett Williams ◽  
Madison Brydges ◽  
Matthew Leyenaar ◽  
Walter Tavares
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Step Model ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Healthcare Professions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Framework Development ◽  
Selection Of

The development of competency frameworks in healthcare professions is characterised by potentially inadequate descriptions of practice, variable developmental approaches, and inconsistent reporting and evaluating of outcomes. This may be in part due to limited existing guidance, which neglects broader contexts, lacks organising frameworks, and fails to provide guidance on selection of methods. To address such concerns, this paper first outlines a ‘systems thinking’ conceptual framework by which to conceptualise and describe clinical practice when developing competency frameworks. This is achieved through combining Ecological Systems Theory and complexity thinking to identify, and explore the contexts and components of clinical practice. The ‘systems thinking’ conceptual framework is then integrated into a six-step model for developing competency frameworks that synthesises and organises existing advice. The six steps include (1) identify practicalities (e.g. purpose, scope, detail, timeline), (2) identify influencing contexts and factors using ‘systems thinking’, (3) use aligned mixed-methods, (4) translate data into competency frameworks, (5) report processes and outcomes, and (6) plan to evaluate, update and maintain the competency framework. The model provides a logical organising structure of principles to guide assumptions and commitments when developing competency frameworks. Additionally, the model affords the flexibility required when exploring professional practice across varying contexts, and suggests employing mixed methodological approaches that are aligned with purpose and scope. The model acknowledges changing and complex contexts, considers existing guidance, and adds a unique and complementary means to conceptualise and improve the competency framework development process.

scholarly journals A Six-Step Model for Developing Competency Frameworks in the Healthcare Professions

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Batt ◽  
Brett Williams ◽  
Jessica Rich ◽  
Walter Tavares
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Methodological Choices ◽  
Step Model ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Healthcare Professions ◽  
Framework Development

Competency frameworks are developed for a variety of purposes, including describing professional practice and informing education and assessment frameworks. Despite the volume of competency frameworks developed in the healthcare professions, guidance remains unclear and is inconsistently adhered to (perhaps in part due to a lack of organizing frameworks), there is variability in methodological choices, inconsistently reported outputs, and a lack of evaluation of frameworks. As such, we proposed the need for improved guidance. In this paper, we outline a six-step model for developing competency frameworks that is designed to address some of these shortcomings. The six-steps comprise [1] identifying purpose, intended uses, scope, and stakeholders; [2] theoretically informed ways of identifying the contexts of complex, “real-world” professional practice, which includes [3] aligned methods and means by which practice can be explored; [4] the identification and specification of competencies required for professional practice, [5] how to report the process and outputs of identifying such competencies, and [6] built-in strategies to continuously evaluate, update and maintain competency framework development processes and outputs. The model synthesizes and organizes existing guidance and literature, and furthers this existing guidance by highlighting the need for a theoretically-informed approach to describing and exploring practice that is appropriate, as well as offering guidance for developers on reporting the development process and outputs, and planning for the ongoing maintenance of frameworks.

scholarly journals A Six-Step Model for Developing Competency Frameworks in the Healthcare Professions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Batt ◽  
Brett Williams ◽  
Jessica Rich ◽  
Walter Tavares
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Methodological Choices ◽  
Step Model ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Healthcare Professions ◽  
Framework Development

Competency frameworks are developed for a variety of purposes, including describing professional practice and informing education and assessment frameworks. Despite the volume of competency frameworks developed in the healthcare professions, guidance remains unclear and is inconsistently adhered to (perhaps in part due to a lack of organising frameworks), there is variability in methodological choices, inconsistently reported outputs, and a lack of evaluation of frameworks. As such, we proposed the need for improved guidance. In this paper we outline a six-step model for developing competency framework that is designed to address some of these shortcomings. The six-steps comprise [1] identifying purpose, intended uses, scope, and stakeholders; [2] theoretically informed ways of identifying the contexts of complex, ‘real-world’ professional practice, which includes [3] aligned methods and means by which practice can be explored; [4] the identification and specification of competencies required for professional practice, [5] how to report the process and outputs of identifying such competencies, and [6] built-in strategies to continuously evaluate, update and maintain competency framework development processes and outputs. The model synthesizes and organizes existing guidance and literature, and furthers this existing guidance by highlighting the need for a theoretically-informed approach to describing and exploring practice that is appropriate, as well as offering guidance for developers on reporting the development process and outputs, and planning for the ongoing maintenance of frameworks.

scholarly journals A Six-Step Model for Developing Competency Frameworks in the Healthcare Professions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Batt ◽  
Brett Williams ◽  
Jessica Rich ◽  
Walter Tavares
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Methodological Choices ◽  
Step Model ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Healthcare Professions ◽  
Framework Development

Competency frameworks are developed for a variety of purposes, including describing professional practice and informing education and assessment frameworks. Despite the volume of competency frameworks developed in the healthcare professions, guidance remains unclear and is inconsistently adhered to (perhaps in part due to a lack of organising frameworks), there is variability in methodological choices, inconsistently reported outputs, and a lack of evaluation of frameworks. As such, we proposed the need for improved guidance. In this paper we outline a six-step model for developing competency framework that is designed to address some of these shortcomings. The six-steps comprise [1] identifying purpose, intended uses, scope, and stakeholders; [2] theoretically informed ways of identifying the contexts of complex, ‘real-world’ professional practice, which includes [3] aligned methods and means by which practice can be explored; [4] the identification and specification of competencies required for professional practice, [5] how to report the process and outputs of identifying such competencies, and [6] built-in strategies to continuously evaluate, update and maintain competency framework development processes and outputs. The model synthesizes and organizes existing guidance and literature, and furthers this existing guidance by highlighting the need for a theoretically-informed approach to describing and exploring practice that is appropriate, as well as offering guidance for developers on reporting the development process and outputs, and planning for the ongoing maintenance of frameworks.

scholarly journals The development of competency frameworks in healthcare professions: a scoping review

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan M. Batt ◽  
Walter Tavares ◽  
Brett Williams
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Significant Degree ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Healthcare Profession ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Healthcare Professions ◽  
Framework Development

BackgroundCompetency frameworks serve various roles including outlining characteristics of a competent workforce, facilitating mobility, and analysing or assessing expertise. Given these roles and their relevance in the health professions, we sought to understand the methods and strategies used in the development of existing competency frameworks.MethodsWe applied the Arksey and O’Malley framework to undertake this scoping review. We searched six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, and ERIC) and three grey literature sources (greylit.org, Trove and Google Scholar) using keywords related to competency frameworks. We screened studies for inclusion by title and abstract, and we included studies of any type that described the development of a competency framework in a healthcare profession. Two reviewers independently extracted data including study characteristics. Data synthesis was both quantitative and qualitative.ResultsAmong 5,710 citations, we selected 190 for analysis. The majority of studies were conducted in medicine and nursing professions. Literature reviews and group techniques were conducted in 116 studies each (61%), and 85 (45%) outlined some form of stakeholder deliberation. We observed a significant degree of diversity in methodological strategies, inconsistent adherence to existing guidance on the selection of methods, who was involved, and based on the variation we observed in timeframes, combination, function, application and reporting of methods and strategies, there is no apparent gold standard or standardised approach to competency framework development.ConclusionsWe observed significant variation within the conduct and reporting of the competency framework development process. While some variation can be expected given the differences across and within professions, our results suggest there is some difficulty in determining whether methods were fit-for-purpose, and therefore in making determinations regarding the appropriateness of the development process. This uncertainty may unwillingly create and legitimise uncertain or artificial outcomes. There is a need for improved guidance in the process for developing and reporting competency frameworks.

scholarly journals Development and Validation of a New Competency Framework for Athletic Therapy in Canada

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-86
Author(s):  
Mark R. Lafave ◽  
Jeffrey M. Owen ◽  
Breda Eubank ◽  
Richard DeMont
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
Common Language ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Athletic Therapy ◽  
Framework Development

Context Competency-based education (CBE) is entrenched in educating health professionals in Canada. CBE is a framework that identifies desired performance characteristics in training competent, entry-level health professionals. Objective To update, develop, and validate a new Canadian Athletic Therapists Association (CATA) framework for athletic therapy education. Design Framework development occurred in 4 phases and was developed through a multistage process that involved a scoping review (phase 1) and consensus methodology (ie, a blending of modified Ebel and modified Delphi consensus methods; phases 2–4). Patients or Other Participants Phase 2: a total of 7 experts (program directors) from each Canadian accredited institution. Phase 3: a total of 14 experts (1 program director and educational expert from each accredited institution). Phase 4: a total of 7 experts (program directors) and 246 certified members of the CATA. Main Outcome Measure(s) Each phase consisted of a systematic process with 80% consensus agreement set a priori. In phase 1, a scoping review was conducted to identify common terminology that could be used to guide the framework development process and to identify competency frameworks used by other health professional organizations. Phase 2 consisted of adopting a common language that would serve to keep the expert group on the task at hand and avoid confusion. In phase 3, frameworks used by other health professional organizations were evaluated and used to determine the validity of the old CATA framework. In phase 4, the old CATA framework was updated and a new framework was developed and validated. Results In phase 1, the result of the scoping review yielded 368 papers, of which 5 were used to propose a common language for phase 2 and 9 highlighted competency frameworks used by other health professions for comparison in phase 3. In phase 3, the expert group voted unanimously to adopt and adapt the CanMEDS framework (ie, roles). In phase 4, the new CATA competency framework was validated, and most competencies achieved consensus. Competencies that did not achieve consensus in the first round of voting underwent face-to-face discussions via videoconferencing. After discussions, the remaining competencies were revised, and all newly worded competencies achieved consensus. Conclusions The resultant framework was validated, and most competencies achieved consensus. The new athletic therapy competency framework outlines the 165 competencies resulting from this methodical process and will hopefully facilitate interdisciplinary communication and practice.

scholarly journals New ways of seeing: supplementing existing competency framework development guidelines with systems thinking

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan M. Batt ◽  
Brett Williams ◽  
Madison Brydges ◽  
Matthew Leyenaar ◽  
Walter Tavares
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Framework Development

scholarly journals Stakeholder Engagement in Competency Framework Development in Health Professions: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Breanna Lepre ◽  
Claire Palermo ◽  
Kylie J. Mansfield ◽  
Eleanor J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Total Yield ◽  
Health Professions ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Competency Framework ◽  
Competency Development ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Competency Frameworks ◽  
Framework Development

Competency framework development in health professions has downstream implications for all relevant stakeholders, from the professionals themselves, to organisations, and most importantly end users of services. However, there is little guidance related to what stakeholders might be involved in the competency development process, and when. This review aimed to systematically review literature related to competency framework development methodology in health, to identify the breadth and purpose of key stakeholders commonly involved in the process. Studies were identified using five electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and ERIC) and a search of websites of organisations involved in curriculum or regulation using keywords related to competency frameworks. The total yield from all databases was 10,625 results, with 73 articles included in the final review. Most articles were from Australia (30%) and were conducted in the nursing (34%) profession. Unsurprisingly, practitioners (86%) and academics (75%) were typically engaged as stakeholders in competency framework development. While many competency frameworks were described as patient-focused, only 14 (19%) studies elected to include service users as stakeholders. Similarly, despite the multi-disciplinary focus described in some frameworks, only nine (12%) studies involved practitioners from other professions. Limiting the conceptualisation of competence to that determined by members of the profession itself may not provide the depth of insight required to capture the complexity of healthcare and address the needs of important stakeholder groups. Future methodology should attempt to engage a variety of relevant stakeholders such as external health professions and the community to match professional education to health service demands.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=128350

scholarly journals Blockchain Software Selection as a Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Problem

Computers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 120
Author(s):  
Galina Ilieva ◽  
Tania Yankova ◽  
Irina Radeva ◽  
Ivan Popchev
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Compromise Solution ◽  
Software Selection ◽  
Fuzzy Environment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Weighting Coefficients ◽  
Complicated Task ◽  
New Framework ◽  
Selection Of

Increased consumer requirements for quality, safety and traceability of goods in supply chains has accelerated the implementation of blockchain during the COVID-19 pandemic. The right choice of blockchain software is a complicated task and an important prerequisite for successful deployment. In this study, we propose a conceptual framework for group multi-criteria selection of blockchain software in fuzzy environment according to organization needs and experts’ judgements. The applicability of the new framework has been verified through an illustrative example for ranking blockchain systems. The evaluations of compared alternatives were calculated by using measurement of alternatives and ranking according to the compromise solution (MARCOS) method. The robustness of the new framework was proven by sensitivity analysis in which two (crisp and fuzzy) MARCOS models with two different sets of weighting coefficients were compared.

Dialectics, Rhetoric, and Functional Issues in Early Modern Hungarian Religious Disputes. Polemics Research in a Long Reformation Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-244
Author(s):  
Csilla Gabor
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Typical Form ◽  
The Right

The study deals with 16th and 17th century Hungarian printed polemical works considering religious disputes a typical form of communication in the age of Reformation and Catholic renewal. Its conceptual framework is the paradigm or research method of the long Reformation as an efficient assistance to the discovery and appreciation of early modern theological-religious diversity. The analysis examines several kinds of communication which occurs in the (religious) dispute, and explores the rules and conventions along which the (verbal) fighting takes place. Research shows that the opponents repeatedly refer to the rules of dialectics refuting each other’s standpoints accusing them of faulty argumentation, i.e., the wrong use of syllogisms. Dialectics is, namely, in this context not the ars with the help of which truth is found but with which evident truth is checked and justified in a way that the opponents can also be educated to follow the right direction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document