The era of the traditional annual performance evaluation is coming to an end. The trend of turning away from this generally unpopular and mostly inefficient HR process is clearly illustrated by the recent cases of major companies such as Adobe, Microsoft, Accenture and Deloitte. And that's just the beginning.
Abandoning other so-called "best practices" that cost a lot of money and have no real impact on corporate performance will follow. According to the CLOmedia website, competency models will be the first to go.
Why competency models?
Competency frameworks started to develop in the US in 1960s and 70s. Their aim is to link individual performance with corporate objectives by assigning each role a set of certain clearly defined competencies. If employees lack a competency, they must be trained to adopt it. And what do you get at the end of the whole process of determining and developing competencies? Nothing else but the aforementioned performance evaluation.
Over the years it became clear that the acquisition of managerial competencies does not necessarily mean that a manager is competent. There is no proven direct relation between competencies and job performance. The result of applying competency models is management and leadership development done in a very limited, mechanical way.
Fundamental shortcomings of competency models
1. Competencies can't cover the entire managerial role. A good manager is good because he has certain competencies he is able to balance with behavior, skills, and other factors.
2. Competencies are general skills regardless of the particular situation or person. Every worker actually needs different skills for different situations.
3. Competency models focus too much on the past and present needs at the expense of future needs.
4. Competency models focus only on measurable behavior and neglect other factors.
Do you use competency models in your company? What are the results? What do you think could replace competency models?
-kk-