What is the difference between competence and expertise

In the support practitioner domain, it is interesting to see that coaches think similar features apply to their own profession; indeed, an orientation to which they might aspire [ 42 ]. As eloquently stated by Smith and colleagues [ 43 ] p. Of course, a much wider range would be used in an expertise approach; for example, the development of more self-driven, autonomous approaches to development.

For the present, however, we outline the understanding and development of declarative reasoning as an exemplar focus that may effectively address our identified four-part curriculum of judgment, elaboration, flexibility and decision making. Significantly, fewer factors are considered but in a lot more detail, with the underpinning rationale of decisions and choices explicitly explored. With regard to the weighting issues highlighted earlier, only key factors are considered, whilst other, less important aspects are examined only if they impact on these core issues.

Once again, there is already a good start in this direction; for example, the recent work by Kahneman and Klein [ 48 ] on the blending of systematic analysis and skilled intuition. Significantly, this approach offers a means to enhance aspects of expertise that seemingly play no role in the existing evaluative structures of competency.

Moreover, the existence of a strong literature base [ 49 ] means that application of expertise would be more strongly grounded than the competency-based models that represent the pillars of effective practice at least as it is currently defined.

As a means of briefly demonstrating the differences underpinning the approaches considered, consider the evaluation process to be followed with a coach under a competency or an expertise focus. In contrast, an expertise-focused evaluation would consider the processes and meta-processes associated with these target behaviours. Exploring the why of a behaviour, the reasoning underpinning its selection and use, candidates would also be asked about alternatives; namely, what other options were considered, why they were rejected, and what would need to change for a different option to be taken [ 50 ].

Through this focus on decision making, training routes would therefore help to develop the aforementioned thinking structures, adaptability and critical analysis that will allow practitioners to prosper in their dynamic and complex and eventually unsupervised applied environments. Furthermore, specific reference to underpinning principles e.

Such approaches would seem essential if trainees are to go beyond clear knowledge that X means Y towards the more subtle blending and elaboration necessary for professional practice [ 51 ]. As another example, we would highlight the use of validated measures of reflective thinking, once again using a range of simulations, which are highly predictive of effective clinical thinking and decision making later in training [ 52 ]. In concluding this brief overview, we should stress that not all practitioners who utilise a competency-based approach are guilty of the problems identified in this paper.

As with so many prescribed methods, these approaches are, as we have observed, used solely for guidance while the assessment process encourages broader and extra evaluation debate so as to offer formative direction to the candidate. Accordingly, in support of more effective professional practice and skilful practitioners across the board, we would hope that an expertise-based approach would be encouraged as more of a core modus operandi rather than an infrequent and unregulated extra.

Indeed, our message is that competency approaches are just too simplistic for all but the most basic of roles and responsibilities apparent in the sports world.

As an alternative, the expertise approach seems to fit better with the characteristics of professionalism, even going beyond the definition of competence as distinguished throughout this paper from competency to evaluate and facilitate capacities for more elaborative and adaptive thinking, judgment and growth. Of course, this is inherently more complex matching the situations it is designed to test for but the complexities are both lower on difficulty and higher on reward than staying with the existing, albeit well-established, system of competency-based evaluation.

Finally, we should stress that the differences between competence and competency evaluations are far from simple semantics. The first has a well-grounded and theoretically consistent basis while the second seems to have emerged from administration-heavy assessment systems see, for example, the criteria applied by the UK Coaching Certificate, BASES sport science accreditation, or SESNZ sport science accreditation [ 1 , 2 , 24 ], with little or no theoretical or empirical support.

Accordingly, we hope that this paper has presented a strong case for change. From a sports perspective, expertise and professional judgment and decision making have already been well-examined in sport psychology [ 53 , 54 ], coaching [ 26 ], and strength and conditioning [ 55 ], and therefore provide a strong base from which these approaches can be exploited.

There are also, notably, training and evaluation methods already available in the public domain [ 27 ]. As a consequence, we hope that bodies responsible for professional development and evaluation recognise and harness this evidence base and lead the long-overdue, widespread shift from competency-driven to expert practice across the spectrum of science, medicine and coaching in sport. British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences.

Supervised experience competency profile. Accessed 11 Nov UKCC level 1 guide. Accessed 12 Nov Cogn Technol. Google Scholar. Girot EA. Graduate nurses: critical thinkers or better decision makers? J Adv Nurs. Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes. Med Educ. PubMed Article Google Scholar. General Medical Council. Accessed 22 Oct Sports Coach UK. Level 1 generic mapping template. Internal planning document applied to UK Coaching awards.

Fletcher D, Maher J. Toward a competency-based understanding of the training and development of applied sport psychologists. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol. Article Google Scholar. Martindale A, Collins D. But why does what works work? A response to Fifer, Henschen, Gould, and Ravizza. Sport Psychol. Jones RL, Wallace M. Another bad day at the training ground: coping with ambiguity in the coaching context.

Sport Educ Soc. Hatano G, Inagaki K. Two courses of expertise. Child development and education in Japan. New York: WH Freeman; Kiely J. Planning for physical performance: the individual perspective. Oxford: Elsevier; Chapter Google Scholar. Strength Cond J. Guiding principles and recommendations for the assessment of competence. One reason skills and competencies come up in so many business conversations is that management wants to understand which employees have the skills or competencies they need to succeed — and for the company to succeed.

An employee skill matrix or employee competency matrix can help to pinpoint where individuals or teams have the skills or competencies that management desires. It is a grid that visualizes the required and available skills and competencies in a team. Where there are important skills gaps, you may want to provide training opportunities to introduce or shore up those skills.

Competency gaps generally require a longer-term approach to close them. Someone can have a beginner, intermediate or advanced level of proficiency for the desired competency. Moving to the next level may require a series of experiences designed to give employees a chance to take on increasing levels of responsibility or visibility in their jobs over time.

Of course, you can create your own employee skill matrix or employee competency matrix. It will also produce reports at a push of a button to provide the visibility you need, whenever you need it. Your email address will not be published. Developing and improving competences starts with setting clear goals. And that would be a shame! As an employee, you can do a lot yourself to hone your skills and competences.

As an employer, you should encourage your staff to undertake some form of ongoing professional development by giving them or financing their training. Non-work-related skills, competences, and qualities are also key to how someone functions and behaves on the work floor. As their name suggests, they clearly and concisely provide a complete picture of all skills, competences, and qualifications in a matrix layout.

The left-hand column lists all your staff members by name, and the top row lists the foremost skills they require to carry out a particular task. Moreover, nothing is stopping you from flipping these around — tasks, jobs, or skills in the left-hand column and names along the top row.

For years now, organizations have been creating skills matrices in spreadsheets, such as MS Excel. This is certainly an option, but not always the most useful or simplest way to do things. Spreadsheets soon become highly complex, unworkable in terms of version management, and extremely prone to error — in other words, pitfalls at every turn.

A well-structured, multi-level competency defines each of these elements in terms that allow managers and HR professionals to observe and recognize these behaviors. Below are a few ways that an organization can use competencies:. Adding competencies to job descriptions competency-based job descriptions helps unify all descriptions and positions across the organization under a common framework. By linking interview questions to competencies, candidates can now be asked questions that help demonstrate their experience in a specified competency area.

These are called competency-based interview questions or behavioral interview questions. Close competency gaps and build career paths for employees. When your competencies mapped to every job, there can be total transparency on which specific behaviors and skills, at what levels, your employees need to demonstrate in order to progress their careers internally or even reach their dream job. Regardless of your industry or organizational size, using competencies can help you be better prepared to do the following:.

Below is a table showing additional competency examples based on the type of competency and the related competency definition. A competency framework is a competency system implemented within an organization. A competency architecture describes a simple set of rules that help you select competencies for every job in a consistent way.

It describes how the competency profiles will be designed for your entire organization, including the format for displaying the competency profile and the content for the profile. Having a competency architecture serves as a blueprint that ensures each job profile is built the same way and relates to other job profiles across the organization logically and predictably.

Job-family competencies : These competencies are shared by a specific group of jobs that perform common functions and form a logical group for development.

Job-specific competencies : These competencies define what is required to perform a specific job. A competency profile is a selection of competencies with specified proficiency levels required for successful performance in a particular job.

Below is a competency profile example for a Project Assistant position:. Client Focus. Achievement Orientation. Skills are an important part of any job profile. Well-defined, multi-level competencies are designed to provide a strong but flexible foundation that links every HR activity. This starts by incorporating them into employees' job descriptions quality job description software can help with this task. For further info on that, register to see a demo of our CompetencyCore software.