Adventure Activities Review Implementation Project
Specific Project Outcome 4
Scoping Report for an investigation into the appropriate levels and measures
of competency for adventure and outdoor commercial sector instructors and
guides in New Zealand.
Outdoors New Zealand - Sue Gemmell
June 2012.
1
Contents
Contents
Page 2
Executive Summary
3
Introduction
5
Section One: Sector Context
6
Workplace profile
6
Adventure Activities review: Consultation Responses
7
SEHORC Qualification position statements and discussion
7
Health and Safety and Employment (Adventure Activities) Regulations
8
Qualifications
8
Registration boards
9
Summary
10
Section Two: Explanation of terms
11
Competence
11
The Job
12
Measures of competence
12
Qualifications
14
Levels of competence
16
Summary
18
Section Three: Discussion
Summary
19
21
Section Four: Recommendations
22
Acknowledgements
25
Bibliography
25
Appendix 1 Statements of competence
28
2
Executive Summary
This report scopes the issues associated with competence assurance in the NZ outdoor and
adventure tourism sector.
The purpose of this paper is to inform the Department of Labour regarding further
investigation on the appropriate levels and measures of competency for adventure and
outdoor commercial sector instructors and guides.
Outdoors New Zealand has drawn on established research as well as extensive consultation
with people and organisations within and outside the industry in the preparation of this
report.
This scoping report:



Discusses and clarifies key concepts within the context of the commercial adventure
and outdoor sector
Identifies and discusses the issues which need to addressed
Makes a number of recommendations for next steps in the process.
The key points are:
Competence is critical to safety. In NZ there are few requirements to prove it.
Staff competence is one of the most important components of a safety management
system yet in NZ there are few requirements to provide proof of it. This results in a lack
of information about competence of staff in the sector and a perceived gap in the safety
management framework.
The first step in addressing this issue is to ensure a common understanding and approach
to competence assurance.
It is generally accepted that to be assured of staff competence it needs to be described,
measured and recorded.
Staff must be assessed as competent to do the whole job. It is the operator’s responsibility to
do this and to collect evidence of the outcome.
Qualifications provide an excellent measureof transferable competencies and must be
considered within an organisational competence assurance system.
A qualification confirms that an instructor’s or guide’s performance has been compared
withand has met a common standard. However employing qualified staff does not
negate an operator’s responsibility to monitor and further develop competency in the
contextual and practical setting of their operation.
There are a number of sector lead initiativesthatcould provide components of a sector
wide competence assurance model.
When there is heightened risk of harm there is an increased need for competence assurance
and more robust measures of competence are required. In these situations there should be
an agreed standard for poof of competence.
Finally support should be provided to operators to ensure:


They are aware of their obligations under the HSE Act.
They are aware of the strengths and limitation of qualifications.
3


They understand their role in strengthening the skill base and reputation of the
sector.
They have the skills and/or resources to assure staff competence.
Recommendations
Steps that will move us towards a safety management framework that provides sector
assurance of staff competence are:
1. Set agreed standards for proof of competence for those activities already
identified as having higher levels of risk and are covered under the Adventure
Activities Regulations
2. Develop a risk assessment tool that will provide guidance to operators and
legislators around activities that have heightened inherent risk.
3. DoL in partnership with Outdoors NZ and TIA establish closer working
relationships with bodies that are providing registration systems..
Within these relationships scope the development of a licencing/ practicing
certificate system.
4
Introduction
Outdoors New Zealand is the confederation of organisations with an interest in outdoor
recreation and education in New Zealand. It aims to advance the development of outdoor
recreation and safe participation through leadership and support.
Outdoors New Zealand has been asked to contribute towards a best practice assurance
system for the commercial adventure and outdoors sector.
This need was highlighted in the Review of Risk Management and Safety in Adventure and
Outdoor Commercial Sectors in NZ 2009/10 (the Adventure Activities Review).
Outdoors New Zealand and the Tourism Industry association (TIA) are supporting the
implementation of key recommendations in the Adventure Activities Review. Outdoors New
Zealand secured this three-year project with the Department of Labour (DOL) in July 2011.
This scoping report is an initial step in the project. The goal of this scoping project is to
provide the Department of Labour with strategies for further investigation into appropriate
levels and measure of competence for commercial adventure and outdoor instructors and
guides.
This report is broken into four sections:

Section One: The sector context
It is important to have a thorough understanding of the workforce, drivers, structure
and culture of the sector and its varied approaches to qualifications and
competence. This section explores the diverse character of the sector and looks at
challenges and opportunities when it comes to assuring the competence of the
sector as a whole.

Section Two: Explanation of terms
What does competence mean within the context of the adventure tourism and
commercial adventure sector? The starting point for discussion is a common
understanding of terms. This section explores competence, measures of
competence, levels of competence and qualifications.

Section Three: Discussion
This section clarifies the key factors that need to be addressed. It looks at four key
questions within the context of the commercial adventure and outdoor sector:
1.
2.
3.
4.

What is staff competence?
What do we need to assure?
In what situations do we need to assure it?
How do we assure it?
Section Four: Recommendations
This section recommends steps that need to be taken before a sector wide
competence assurance model can be established.
5
Section One: The Sector Context
This section explores the diverse character of the sector and looks at challenges and
opportunities when it comes to assuring the competence of the sector as a whole.
Workforce Profile
The Skills Active Sector Strategic Training Plan includes a description of the outdoor and
adventure tourism sector workforce profile. The plan suggests a complex sector that is
characterised by a highly mobile and relatively young workforce. Incomes are low and there
are a wide variety of working arrangements. Seasonal work is common(see table 1).
Table 1: Outdoor and Adventure Tourism Sector Workforce Profile
Age:
Young work force.


24% of instructors and guides are under 25 years of age.
The average age of employees is between 21 and 25 years.
Gender:
Instructors and guides are predominantly male, (69% male)
Ethnicity:
Approximately 85% of instructor and guides are European/pakeha
Income:
Median income for the sector is low. In 2006 the median guide income was
$25,600.
Work status:
Variety of working arrangements: full time, part time, self employed and
seasonal labour. Short term staff may be employed to cover seasonal
peaks. Some staff are paid on a “per trip” basis.
Job mobility:
There is a high level of staff turnover among field staff (50% of instructional
staff moved on within 2 years).
Business size:
The average business size in the sector is small – a recent Outdoors NZ
survey indicates that 49% of businesses employed fewer than 5 staff
including the owner.
Adapted from Skills Active Sector Strategic Training Plan 2011 -2015.
This unique sector profile has implications for staff competence and, therefore, safety.
Employees face a number of barriersto training and measuring staff competence, including:




Small businesses are less likelyto have the internal capability or capacity to train
staffbeyond what they perceive to be the essential skills required.
Cost of training for and gaining qualifications can be prohibitive to the small business
owner as well as the outdoor self-employed contractor.
Business pressures and the variety of qualifications available make it difficult for
operators to be clear on, or train staff to, a nationally recognised standard.
Businesses who employ seasonally and/or have high turnover mayhave difficulty
keeping longitudinal organisational knowledge. They may also have less incentive to
invest in their staff through costly or time consuming training programmes.
The diversity of activities offered by someorganisationscompounds these issues.
6
The characteristics of the workforce are likely to adversely affect commitment by both staff
and employees to train and gain qualifications beyond what they perceive to be essential
skills.
Absence of clarity around measures of competence in theHealth and Safety and
Employment Act (1993) (HSE Act) means some employees choose to use qualifications and
some do not. In some pockets of the NZ outdoor and adventure sector there is aversion to
credentialing as evidence of competence. This mixed use of the qualifications may be due
to one or more of the following:







Poor understanding of qualifications available (due to their number and variety)
Variable regard for the available qualifications and or qualifying systems
Cost of assessment
Access to assessment
Mismatch between an available qualification and the operator’s job requirements
Lack of qualifications for some activities.
Attitude to qualifications by staff and employers due to:
o Sector profile
o Business drivers, goals, culture and working conditions
o Diversity of activities offered.
Despite this thereare indicators that an increasing number of people are opting to use
qualifications. A recentNZOIAmembership survey showed a 45% increase in the number of
their assessments since 2010.
Adventure Activities Review: Consultation responses
There was strong agreement across all respondents that one of the most important
principles that underpin well-managed risk is:
1. Staff with appropriate training, skills, experience, qualifications and attitude.
 Ensuring staff have the knowledge and experience to deal with changing
operating conditions, and the ability to make sound decisions.
Competence is considered critical to help mitigate risk. However, there are mixed opinions
about the use of qualifications to adequately measure competence.
Sir Edmund Hillary Outdoor Recreation Council (SEHORC):
Qualification Position Statements and Discussion
In 2011 SEHORC requested that Outdoors NZ, Skills Active, YMCA, NZOIA and MSC each
provide a statement that outlined their position on qualifications. Although the position
statements had significant differences they also shared core principles. These are
summarised as follows.





People who take leadership positions in the outdoors, should have a suitable level
of competence and experience for that role.
To assure leaders have competence it must be measured.
Qualifications are a legitimate way of providing evidence of competence.
Qualifications acknowledge that an individual’s performance has been assessed
and that the performance demonstrated during the assessment reached or
exceeded a stated standard.
Qualifications provide an independent, consistent way of gauging competence to a
nationally agreed standard.
7
Some organisations thought that


In high-risk situations an externally assessed nationally recognised qualification is
the primary reassurance of staff competence.
Where high risk is involved direction should be provided to operators regarding
minimum qualification requirements.
One organisation also suggested that a sensible rating approach could be developed. This
could be applied to activities in different contexts and guide the requirement for leaders to
hold qualifications.
Health and Safety in Employment (Adventure Activities)
Regulations 2011
The Adventure Activities Regulations came into effect in November 2011. They require
operators who provide adventure activities to undergo a safety audit and become
registered. Adventure activities are defined in the regulation as being activities that are
designed to deliberately expose participants to a risk of serious harm that must be managed
by the operator.
The range of activities covered by the regulations is considerably more limited than was
initially signaled. The consequence of this is that the number of operators who will be
directly impacted by the regulations is less than anticipated.
The Department of Labour’sstrategic approach to workplace health and safety has changed
in recent years. The focus is on creating strong sector partnerships. They are actively
engaging with the sector to supporting education, grow safety leadership, develop
capability and build knowledge.
Qualifications
In 2006 the Outdoors NZ Qualification Alignment Project identified that there was confusion
around the wide variety of qualifications available to the sector. At this time a number of
recommendations were made to the sector, including the rationalisation and alignment of
qualifications. Steps were taken to address the issue.
In 2009 NZOIA, Skills Active and the Mountain Safety Council entered into an agreement to
work in partnership to:
“Further their joint efforts to align national standards, qualifications and assessment
for the outdoor sector, in areas of joint scope, in order to provide clear training
pathways:
1. To reduce duplication of services;
2. To increase accessibility to training and qualifications; and
3. To effect a highly skilled and capable sector for the safest possible, high
quality outdoor experiences for the people of Aotearoa New Zealand.”
The partnership achieved some success. The foundation step of a qualification pathway has
been developed and the value of a registration board has been communicated.
In 2011 the tripartite partnership was dissolved. Skills Active and the Mountain Safety
Council continue to work towards these goals in partnership but NZOIA has chosen to work
independently.
8
Findings from the Adventure Activities Review indicate that the situation remains much as it
was in 2006. There continues to be a mismatch between what the sector requires in terms of
safety competencies and the training and qualifications provided.There is also a confusing
array of training and qualifications across the sector and across activities(2009 Adventure
Activities Review).
In recent years the government, NZQA and TEC, have identified qualification issues across all
sectors. The government has implemented a process to reduce the number and overlap of
Level 1-6 qualifications by 2015 and‘The Targeted Review of Qualifications’(TRoQ) has been
initiated to achieve this. The objective is to ensure a system that is easy for both learners
and employers to understand and engage with. These reviews are scheduled to take three
to four years to complete, between 2011 and 2014.
The targeted review of sport and recreation qualifications began in February 2012. This
review will cover 180 qualifications including those covered under the following subfields.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Golf
Surfing/Surf Life Saving
Sport and Recreation
Coaching
Community Recreation
Diving
Outdoor Leadership
Fitness/Personal Training
Skydiving
Snowsport
Registration Boards
One of the initiatives started as part of the NZOIA, Skills Active and MSC Tripartite
agreement was the NZ Outdoor Registration Board (NZORB).
NZORB was established in 2007 to be an industry owned registration board. It was, and
continues to be, managed by NZOIA as an NGO within the outdoor recreation sector. It
provides a public register of current leaders, instructors and guides who hold qualifications
provided by NZOIA and by NZOIA in conjunction with SKOANZ, WWNZ and NZSS. It operates
as a licensing system for NZOIA award holders.
When the tripartite Memorandum of Understanding expired in 2011, Skills Active, with
assistance from NZ Recreation Association (NZRA), offered to administer an industry-owned
and governed registration body.
The NZ Register of Recreational Professional (NZRRP)will have mechanisms to allow
registration of qualifications across the entire recreation sector, including the outdoors. It
will be a public database on which individuals could choose to register their
recreation/outdoor qualifications.It will also show the currency of their skills and
experience.
The NZRRP will be owned and run by the whole ‘recreation’ sector and managed bya
governance board.
These registers have the potential to provide information and assurance about the
competence of the sector as a whole.
9
Summary
In 2009/10, the Adventure Activities Review found that gaps in the safety management
framework allow businesses to operate at different standards than those generally
accepted.
The Adventure Activities Review stated the need to be sure that activities involving
heightened inherent risk are being managed safely and that preventable accidents will not
occur.
Competence assurance is a crucial component of any effective Safety Management System
(SMS). Competence of instructors and guides is considered by many to be the single most
important factor in the safety of led outdoor adventure activities.
Credentialing and/or qualifications can provide evidence that a described standard has been
demonstrated.
However,in the NZ outdoor recreation sector thereis mixed use of the qualifications as a
competence assurance tool.
Business drivers, goals, culture and working conditions vary across the sector. These affect
attitudes, by both staff and employees, to training and assurance of competence. A
qualification framework with a large number of similar awards also impactsattitudes to
credentialing as a measure of competence.
The mixed use of qualifications might be acceptable if there was sector wide confidence
that all operators have the capability, resources and commitment tomeasure against
accepted standards. Currently this level of confidence does not appear to exist.
The scope of the DoL Adventure Activities Regulations is limited. As the regulations do not
cover all adventure activities, competence of all instructors and guides providing outdoor
adventure experiences cannot be assured purely through the legislation. However, this is a
starting point and there is the potential to tighten requirements for credentialing for
operations covered by the regulations in the future.
The DoL national approach to workplace health and safety is to reduce the requirement for
legislation by encouraging increased sector engagement and leadership. The DoL are
unlikely to impose further regulatory requirements. The strategies adopted regarding staff
competence (whatever they are) will need to be developed and driven by the outdoor and
adventure activity community.
There are a number of initiatives already underway that may provide opportunities for and
pathways to sector wide assurance of competence.The most significant of these are:



Qualification review through TRoQ
NZOIA qualification review process
NZRRP and NZORBregistration systems
The effectiveness of these will depend on the level of sector engagement with and
commitment to the process.
10
Section Two: Explanation of Terms
Competence
The term competence has many different meanings and the definition is widely debated in
management and organisational development literature.
The simplest meaning is the ability of an individual to do a job properly. Usually competence
also includes skills, knowledge and behaviours.
For the purpose of this report competenceis defined asthe ability to apply knowledge, skills
and behaviours to perform activities within an occupation. Competence implies that an
individual can function to the standard expected for employment and has the ability to do a
job under a variety of conditions. It includes both technical and people skills and is specific
to the job, environment, situation and duty. Competence is attributed to the individual.
Worsnop (Bowen-Clewly, 2012) suggests that the concept of competence should encompass
four elements:

The requirement to perform individual tasks (repeatedly to a set standard);

The requirement to manage a number of different tasks within a job;

The requirement to respond to irregularities and breakdowns in routine;

The requirement to deal with the responsibilities and expectations of the work
environment, including working with others.
Capper (Bowen-Clewly, 2012)suggests that another element should be added:

The requirement to handle continuous learning in a constantly changing work
environment.
For the purpose of this report this additional element is considered to be more than
competence and is referred to later under reflective expertise.
A competencematrix is a set of defined standards that provide a structured guide to enable
the identification, evaluation and development of skills, knowledge and behaviours of an
individual employee. Competencies are specific standards within the matrix.
A competency matrix is specific to a job within an organisation. Each job within an
organisation will have a matrix; these can be combined into an organisational competence
framework.
Ajob will have specific tasks conducted in specific environments and situations.
Responsibility for defining the job and developing the competency matrixmust rest with the
workplace. However, within a competency matrix there are likely to becompetencies that
cross over with other jobswithin an organisation and with nationally agreed standards.
A competency matrix is likely to include separate competencies related to knowledge skills
and behaviours. For example:

Knowledge competence – possessing the appropriate work related knowledge and
the ability to put this to effective use, e.g.:
o Organisational policy and procedure
o Daily operations
o Safety management procedures
o Crisis plan
11



o Risk management
o First aid
Functional competence – the ability to perform specific work related tasks
effectively e.g.,
o Instructing/ guiding an activity
o Communication
o Literacy
o Planning / delegation/ implementing
o Judgement/ decision making
o Physical fitness
Personal or behavioural competence – the ability to adopt appropriate, observable
behaviours in a work related situation e.g.,
o Self confidence
o Interpersonal skills
o Professional presentation
o Self development
Values and ethics – the possession of appropriate personal and professional values
and the ability to make sound judgements upon these in work related situations e.g.,
o Adherence to the law
o Personal moral code
o Adherence to professional codes
o Client centeredness
(adapted from Cheetham and Chivers (1998))
It is unlikely that any one tool will be able to measure all competencies within a job.
The job
For the purpose of this report the term jobconsists of duties, responsibilities and tasks that
an individual is expected to perform as detailed in their job description. It refers to a whole
rather than a specific activity within the whole.
For example consider a caving instructor. Doing this job at Workplace X will differ from
doing the job at Workplace Y.The activity (caving instructor) however has common
transferable components. These have been described in a qualification.
Measures of competence
In order to prove due diligence and meet the requirements of the HSE Act an organisation
needs to demonstrate that instructors and guides meet required levels of competence.
There are a number of methods and approaches to do this. They usually require someone to
collect evidence, evaluate it and make a decision regarding the match between the
competencies demonstrated and those described in the competency matrix. Finally, the
decision needs to be published in some way.
Collection of evidence is crucial in order to:
1. Ensure the instructor and guides have the level of competence they claim.
2. Enable managers to deploy instructors and guides appropriately and effectively.
3. Meet the requirements of the HSE Act to provide evidence post accident that
appropriate measures were taken to ensure that competent people were deployed.
12
There are many types of evidence but it usually falls under three broad categories; a
description, a product or a performance. The table below provides some examples of each
category.
A description





Interviews
Client feedback
Discussions
Answers to questions
Reflection on performance
A product






Checklist
Workplace logs
Workplace Reports
Experience log books
Client feedback
Written assignments
A performance





Demonstrations
Observation performing the everyday job
Simulations
Photos
Videos
Ideally evidence should be gathered under realistic conditions, there should be a range of
sources of evidence and there should be a number of performances.
Evidence can be gathered in a formal way at specific one off structured events or through
ongoing informal observations and discussions throughout employment. External collection
tends to provide the former and internal collection can more easily monitor performance
over time.
Once the evidence has been collected it needs to be evaluated. There are three approaches
to evaluation:
1. Comparison to previous performance (self referenced).
2. Comparison against a standard (criterion referenced).
3. Comparison against the performance of others (norm referenced). This is usually
used to rank or sort performances.
The approach used most frequently when evaluating staff competence is comparison
against a standard.
To have credibility the evidence needs to be evaluated by someone with expertise in the
competencies described.
At the end of the evaluation process a decision needs to be made. Whether the instructor or
guide meets the standard desired or not? Theresult can be published in a formal or informal
way and could be a simple workplace checklist. Other ways to publish the result are a
statement of competence (see appendix 1), orawarding a credential.
Within a job competence matrix there will be numerous tools used to measure
competencies (see Diagram 1: Job Competence Matrix)
13
Diagram 1: Job Competence Matrix
Competenci
es
Qualificati
on Z
Statement
of
competence
Qualificati
on Y XX
Qualificatio
n X
Workplace
checklist
Qualifications as a measure of competence
BusinessDictionary.com defines qualification as capacity, knowledge or skill that matches or
suits an occasion, or make someone eligible for a duty, office, position privilege or status.
Qualification denotes fitness for purpose through fulfilment of necessary conditions.
A more simple definition is an attribute that must be met or complied with and that fits a
person for something.
Both of these definitions refer to the end product. For this report it would be better to
consider a qualification as an “off the shelf” package that includes:






Description of the agreed standard required for competencies that are shared across
the sector.
The type of evidence that is required
How evidence will be collected
Who is permitted to collect and evaluate the evidence
How the result will be published
How the qualification fits within a larger competency pathway.
Please Note: this description does not include the programme of training that leads to a
qualification.
As with any “off the shelf” package a qualification is unlikely to be a perfect match to all the
competencies required by an organisation. They may measure more or less than the
organisation requires. However the advantages of using one are:






They contain a nationally agreed standard
There is a national system of some kind that assuresconsistency
The standards described have transferability across the sector
They save the time and effort required to develop measurement material internally
Evidence has been evaluated by a sanctioned assessor
If they are externally assessed they provide external assurance of competence and
save internal assessment time and resources.
14

They provide a method for small to medium businesses that would otherwise have
difficulty accessing rigorous assurance.
Instructors and guides holding qualifications are likely to start a new job with competencies
that are not required for that job and with competency gaps that will require training. A
clear understanding of the qualification that a staff member has and how it lines up with the
competency requirements makes providing training to fill the gaps an easier process.
Other approaches to the measure of competence
There is a growing acceptance that qualifications do not always equal competence (see
Table 1). Many groups recognise this by requiring a registration or licensing process for
membership of their associations, which can only be gained by demonstration of
competence.The mechanisms by which this is assessed vary, but competence is usually
demonstrated on – job. Almost all the groups require evidence of on-going, satisfactory
performance as a component of the evidence of competence (Bowen Clewley, 2012)
Table 1 Hierarchy of Workplace Competence (Bowen-Clewley, Capper 1998)1
In training
Capable2
Competent
Expert
Learns and
practises new skills
Performs specific
tasks within a
simulated or
provider based
environment
Performs a range of
tasks to a specified
standard consistently
and meets other
competence
requirements in a
performance
environment
Develops new
methodologies and
routinely advises/
trains/ supervises
others
COGNITIVE SKILL
Insufficient
experience to
identify patterns or
occurrences
Understands
patterns and what
situations are likely
to occur
Identifies patterns of
recurring events and
applies them correctly
in most situations
Identifies when
existing knowledge
is inadequate for
current situation/s
and develops new
patterns and tests
hypotheses
SAMPLE
CREDENTIAL
None
1st qualification
Professional Institute
membership/registrati
on
Professional
Institute fellowship
LEARNING STAGE
This model focuses on actual performance in the workplace and requires a collection of
evidence approach to assessment.
Vaughan and Cameron (2009) noted that the achievement of a qualification is no longer
viewed by industry as the culmination of learning, but rather the starting point for learning
1
This model has been designed based on the material gathered from theorists in both assessment
and cognition. It draws heavily on the work by Berryman in the area of cognitive theory and from the learning
theories of Vygotsky and Senge.
2
The term is based on research and practice used within the Canadian Rescue Services that validates
the view that simulated and provider based performance is an unreliable indicator of actual workplace
performance where the variables change from situation to situation.
15
within a community of practitioners. This community of practice will shape the ongoing
learning and development of its participants.
The Ministry of Building and Housing has recently implemented a scheme that incorporates
some of these concepts. It aims to ensure that people in the building industry who are
responsible for the building work done are competent and accountable, so that homes and
buildings are designed and built right the first time.
The scheme is competency based. Competent designers, builders and tradespeople with a
good track record can have their skills and knowledge formally recognised, whether they are
trade-qualified or not. However, the emphasis on education and training will increase. From
2015 it is proposed that licensing will be qualifications-based.
The Department of Building and Housing administers the scheme, including:
• Developing licensing standards.
• Managing assessment.
• Issuinglicense ID cards for those who meet the relevant standards.
• Managing the public register of Licensed Building Practitioners (LBPs).
A Registrar appointed by the Department decides on licensing applications (based on
assessors’ recommendations), and administers the LBP online public register of
practitioners. LBPs are listed on the online public register along with details of their licenses.
There are strong parallels between the level of assurance required by the Ministry of
Building and Housing and those recommended in the Adventure Activities Review.
Levels of competence
The term “levels of competence” is misleading. It implies that there is a sliding scale of
competence against a single set of competencies. This is not the case.
In a criterion referenced approach there are no levels of competence, people either meet
the standard or not.
Levels do exist when comparing jobs. Most jobs have a development pathway from simple
to complex. Competence can be described at points along this pathway. For example, the
outdoor leadership pathway could include supervisor, leader, instructor and senior
instructor. NZQA’s level descriptors from 1 - 8 also provide an example of this.
Each of the different levels on a career pathway will have a separate set of described
competencies. Individuals can be competent or not at each of these levels.
Levels also exist within the process of skills acquisition. Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1980) have
offered a model of professional development that plots an individual's progression through
a series of five levels: novice, advanced beginner, competent, proficient, and expert.
Other authorsdiscuss a model that progresses through four stages: unconscious
incompetence, conscious incompetence, conscious competence and unconscious
competence. Many of these also add a fifth stage called reflective competence.
In the novice stage a person follows rules or plans, has little situational perception or
discretionary judgment. They are unaware of what they don’t know.
Competence develops with experience and is seen in individuals who demonstrate good
background knowledge alongsidea standard of work that is fit for purpose. Competent
individuals can cope with complexity but only through deliberate planning.
16
Expertise is characterized by a fluid performance. Experts display an intuitive grasp of
situations so there is no longer heavy reliance on rules, guidelines or maxims. There are two
pathways that experts can take: Reflective expertise requires self-awareness, intentional
consideration and reflection on decisions. Complacent expertise is the trap of an expert who
is not reflective and risks becoming blind to areas of incompetence.
There is a gradual transition from a rigid adherence to taught rules and procedures through
to a largely intuitive mode of operation that relies heavily on deep, implicit knowledge (see
Diagram 2: Competency Acquisition Model).
The ability to intentionally develop judgment relies on time spent reflecting on the decisionmaking process. Reflective competence implies a continuous learning-in-action approach.
Self-assessment is occurring regularly and performance is modified based on new
information gained from each experience.
Diagram 2: Competency Acquisition Model
Novice,
Unaware,
Incompetent
Complacent
Competence
Expert
Reflective
Competen
ce
Complacency
Mindfulness
Learner,
Aware,
Incompetent
Proficient
Automatic
Competence
Deliberate
Competence
Adapted from Richards and
Schimelpfenig2010
It can be argued that a person embarking on a new position will follow the model to some
extent. The speed with which a new employee moves through the model and the level they
attain will depend on a number of factors. These include:





Transferable skills and knowledge they enter with
Their personal commitment to development
Their attributes
The organisation’s requirements
The organisations commitment to training and support.
17
Summary
Competence:
For the purpose of this report competenceis defined as the ability to apply knowledge, skills
and behaviours to perform activities within an occupation. Competence implies that an
individual can function to the standard expected for employment and has the ability to do a
job under a variety of conditions. It includes both technical and people skills and is specific
to the job, environment, situation and duty. Competence is attributed to the individual.
The job
For the purpose of this report the term job consists of duties, responsibilities and tasks that
an individual is expected to perform as detailed in their job description. It refers to a whole
rather than a specific activity within the whole.
Measures of competence.
The approach most frequently used when measuring staff competence is comparison of
performance against a common standard.
To have credibility the comparison needs to be made by someone with expertise in the
common standard described.
Qualifications are a valuable measurement tool in a competency assurance process.
However qualifications do not always equal job competence. A registration or licensing
process that recognises on -job training and development may provide an
additionalcontextual approach to competency measurement.
Levels of competence
Career development, and skill acquisition pathways create the illusion of levels of
competency. However in standards based assessment levels of competence do not exist. An
individual is either competent to do a job or not.
18
Section Three: Discussion
In 2009/10, the Adventure Activities Review found that gaps in the safety management
framework allow businesses to operate at different standards than those generally
accepted.
The Adventure Activities Review stated the need to be sure that activities involving
heightened inherent risk are being managed safely and that preventable accidents will not
occur.
Competence of instructors and guides is widely considered to be the single most important
factor in assuring the safety of led outdoor adventure activities.
A method commonly used to describe, measure and record competence is qualifications. In
other countries (UK and France) and for some activities in the NZoutdoor commercial and
adventure tourism sector (e.g. rafting) qualifications are mandatory.
For most outdoor commercial and adventure tourism activities in NZ gaining a qualification
is voluntary. Some activities do not have qualifications.
In the absence of a mandatory system the sector relies on individual operators to provide
assurance that their staff are competent. The methods they use to do this and the standards
that they set are, to a large degree, self-determined. This approach does not mean that the
levels of competence are unsatisfactory.
For some activities there are clear qualification pathways and competence assurance
systems are already in place.
Evaluation of workplacecompetence assurance systems occurs if an organisation undertakes
an audit(or a regulatory body investigates them). The audit process will evaluate the system
and check that it is being applied. Audits can also evaluate the suitability of the system to
match the requirements of the job. However in the absence of standardised measures this
can be difficult and subjective. Evaluating the quality of competence assessment is outside
the scope of an audit.
Except for those activities covered by the Adventure Activities Regulations audits are
voluntary.
Currently there is no empirical data that can be used to evaluate the state of competence in
the sector.
The logical approach would be to survey the sector. The problem with that is thatthere is
limited objectiveinformation to collect. What could be collected is unlikelyto provide an
answer to the question, “are outdoor and adventure instructors and guides competent to
do the job they are employed to do?”
An alternative approach is to assume that there are likely to be gaps in competence
assurance anddevelop a model that would fill these gaps. This would also provide
information about the state of competence in the sector.
Questions arising from this that will be addressed here are
1.
2.
3.
4.
What is staff competence?
What do we need to assure?
When do we need to assure it?
How do we assure it?
19
The Adventure ActivitiesReview report hints at qualifications as the solution to these
questions. This scoping exercise has considered a range of approaches.
1. What is staff competence?
Competence, levels of competence and measures of competence have been described in
Section Two above.
The key factors mentioned above are;






Competence is the ability to apply knowledge, skills and behaviours to perform
activities within an occupation.
Competence fora jobwill contain a variety of different competencies.
Some of these may be common to standards described in qualifications.
Some of these will be unique to the job and the operation.
Competence requires maintenance. It is not a static, one-dimensional end
product but rather an ongoing multi layered process.
Individuals may demonstrate expertise for some competencies within a matrix
but may be a novice at others.It is important for operatorsto recognise that
expertise in a few competencies does not equal whole jobcompetence.
2. What do we need to assure?
The position of this report is that competence is specific to a whole job and that operators
need to be assured at a whole job level.
Within a job there will be transferable and non-transferable competencies. The transferable
competencies can be described in common standards (e.g. qualifications).
The employer is must address the non-transferable and contextual competencies.
This leads to two questions
1. How much of the transferable component is reflected in qualifications?
2. How do we assure anything that’s left over?
There are two positions that could be considered.
To ensure safety an instructor or guide needs competence for the whole job. We need to
see instructor or guide performing the job in context, rather than in isolated parts. All of the
transferable components should be reflected in the qualifications and they should be
assessed in context.
Assurance is only required for the elements of the job/ role that are critical for
safety.Certain competencies are more important to safety than others. These should be
reflected in qualifications.
The cost and time required, at both a national and operational level, to develop a sector
wide model that could assure either of these positions would be high. Even when
considered within the scope of the Adventure Activities Review it is suggested that a smaller
scale solution should be sought as a first step.
3. When do we need to assure it?
The review document suggests that assurance is required for activities with heightened
inherent risk. The Adventure Activities Regulations have attempted to ring-fence this in their
definition of adventure activity and the activity schedule.
Others suggest that the following situations also require heightened levels of scrutiny;
20




When instructors or guides work for/with organisations who operate in either
geographical or professional isolation.
When instructors and guides enter the sector for the first time.
When instructors and guides change jobswithin an organisation.
For managers who deploy instructors and guides to the field.
4. How do we assure it?
In order to prove due diligence and meet the requirements of theHSE Act, an organisation
needs to demonstrate that instructors and guides meet required levels of competence.
There are a range of methods and approaches to do this.
Expecting staff to achieve qualifications is one way to provide evidence that performance
has beenmeasured and evaluated. Qualifications provide many advantages over other
measures of competence. The most significant of these is assessment against a nationally
agreed standard.
However, qualifications are unlikely to measure all the competencies required by an
organisation. Qualifications alone will not prove that whole job competence has been
measured.
Competence assurance is not an issue unique to the outdoor sector. TheDepartment of
Building and Housing in NZ have recently implemented a well researched model that could
provide direction for the outdoor community.
The outdoor sector has three new registration systems, the Adventure Activities
Regulations, NZORB and NZRRP. Thesepresent an opportunity to add value to a competency
model. A combined approach is more likely to ensure instructors and guides of all activities
in the adventure and outdoor commercial sectorare competent.
Summary
Staff competence is one of the most important factors in a safety management system yet
in NZ there are few requirements for proof of it. The absence of a common approach to
competence measures leads to a perceived shortage of competent staff in the sector.
The first step is to develop a competence assurance model that will address this perception.
An initial step towards this would be to look at jobs that expose clients to a heightened level
of risk and decide what competencies need to be assured at a sector level.
Qualifications provide a sound measure of competence. When combined with a registration
system there is an opportunity tocollect and track information about the competence of the
sector and encourage a community of current practitioners.
The focus of this report has been on instructors and guides. Attention must also be given to
the competence of those who manage staff deployment and those who assess competence.
Support could be provided to operators to ensure:



They are aware of their obligations under the HSE Act.
They are aware of the strengths and limitation of qualifications.
They understand their role in strengthening the skill base and reputation of the
sector.
21
Section Four: Recommendations
Section four recommends what needs to be addressed during the next stage of this project.
It suggests approaches for each recommendation, including linking with other sector
initiatives.
Steps that will move us towards a safety management framework that assures staff
competence are:
1. Set agreed standards for proof of competence for those activities already
identified as having higher levels of risk and are covered under the Adventure
Activities Regulations.
As stated in section threean initial step towards competence assurance is to look at jobs
that expose clients to a heightened level of risk and decide what competencies need to be
assured at a sector level.
The position of this report is that competence relates to the whole job. The operator must
ensure and document whole job competence.
The sector needs to decide on a system that ensures operators are applying an acceptable
standard.Part of that system will include direction on what is measured. Two options have
been identified in this report.


A sector wide system that stipulates evidence of competence at whole job level
A sector wide system that stipulates evidence of competencies critical to safety.
The first stage of this investigation will be to prepare a proposal for sector consultation.
If the sector selects whole job competencies operators would need to develop competency
frameworks. These would need to be mapped against available qualifications to:


Select the qualifications that are the best fit for purpose.
Develop other measures where gaps are identified.
If the sector selects competencies critical to safety a competency framework would need to
be developed. These would need to be mapped against qualifications to see if:



Qualifications are fit for purpose.
New qualifications are required.
Other measures are appropriate.
It is likely that some of this framework will be included within the Activity Specific
Guidelines.
As the Adventure Activities Regulations have already identified activities that have
heightened risk it seems appropriate to begin work on the activities identified in the
schedule.
The sector is entering into a major qualification review process. There is an opportunity to
address the question of “what is measured” as part of this process.
Within this process there is also an opportunity to direct attention towards defining the
competencies required for deploying staff.
22
2. Develop a risk assessment tool that will provide guidance to operators and
legislators around activities that have heightened inherent risk.
The review document suggests that assurance is required for activities with heightened
inherent risk. In order to apply assurance measures to activities within this category we first
need to identify what they are.
This report recommends that tools are developed that will rank an activity based on the risk
associated with it. Activities at different thresholds could be assigned different
requirements for assurance of competence. Those with higher levels of risk would have
more stringent requirements. In some cases mandatory requirements might be set.
This is a sizable piece of work however an initial scan has identified risk assessment tools in
use in other sectors. Davidson, G. (2009) has alsodeveloped a rating system specifically for
the outdoor sector that would provide a starting point.
The outputs from this piece of workmay be range of tools, including one that evaluates the
activity andothers that evaluate other factors. For example,AALA use a prioritisation system
to rate the frequency of inspections and the period of licence validity. Factors they consider
are:





Number and vulnerability of participants at risk.
Number and type of activities offered.
Turnover of staff.
Pressure on in-house training provision.
Arrangements depending on temporary facilities.
Use of the tools should be promoted, and reinforced/recommended through the
regulations, the audit process, and the generic and activity specific guidelines.
These toolscould have significant usefulness in the sector. The following are areas where
they may add value:






Providing direction for qualification requirements.
Assisting with setting audit cycles.
Assisting with regulation development and review.
Providing focus areas for provision of training, information and support.
Providing focus areas for qualification development.
Providing focus areas for information collection.
3. DoL in partnership with Outdoors NZ and TIA establish closer working
relationships with bodies that are providing registration systems. Within
these relationships scope the possibility of developing a licencing/ practicing
certificate system.
Competence assurance is not an issue unique to the outdoor and adventure activity sector.
Otherhigh-risk sectors have confronted this issue and havedeveloped strategies to manage
it. The Department of Building and Housing has recently introduced a licencing system. This
may provide a model that could be adapted and applied within the outdoor and adventure
sector.
There is an opportunity for the DoL to scope the appropriateness of a licencing system for
theoutdoor and adventure sector. An investigation of the model used by the Department of
Building and Housing would inform this exercise.
23
NZOIA has a registration system that acts to licence NZOIA award holders. Skills Active will
have registration systems that will hold records for a wide variety of qualifications within
the recreation sector. These have the potential to be the starting point for a licencing
system.
There is an opportunity for the DoL to engage with thegoverning boards of these sector
driven registration systems and identify common goals and barriers. Together they could
develop strategies to best meet the needs of the sector and DoL.
24
Acknowledgements
Marcus Bailie,
Head of Inspection, Adventure Activities Licensing Service, UK
Liz Bowen Clewley
Principal, Competency International Ltd
Mike Boyes,
Associate Professor, Otago University NZ
Ross Clapcott
Chief Advisor, Tourism Strategy Group
Robyn Cockburn
Director, Lumin
Kaye Messerli
Mentor, Best Practice Workplace Learning
Lecturing staff at CPIT
Project Advisory Group members.
Bibliography
Allan, S. (2006). Practical Outdoor Leader Qualifications DRAFT Recommendation. Paper
presented as part of the Outdoors NZ Qualification alignment project.
ATTTO (2011).Key findings of 2011 Tourism Workforce Survey.Retrieved
fromhttp://www.attto.org.nz/news/key-findings-of-2011-tourism-workforce-survey
Bowen – Clewley, L. (2002).Professional Conversation as an assessment tool for recognition
of current competence. Presented at the International Association fro Educational
Assessment (IAEA) Conference in Hong Kong 2002.
Bowen – Clewley, L., Doherty, J., Farley, M., Rowe, R., & Russell, L. (2008).So what does
being qualified” really mean? A critical perspective on a growing trend of “credentialism”
and its relevance in workplaces in the 21st century. Paper provided by Competency
International Ltd, Wellington NZ.
Bowen – Clewley, L. (2012).Competency based training and assessment – An ongoing
review. Paper provided by Competency International Ltd, Wellington NZ.
Campbell, L.M. & Murray T.S. (1996).Assessment of competence.British Journal of General
Practice 46, 619 – 622.
Chapman, S.R. (2011).Illuminating the Assessment practices of teachers in NZ Outdoor
Education Tertiary Programmes. A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Education at Massey University NZ.
Cheethan, G. &Chivers, G.(1999). Professional competence: harmonizing reflective
practitioner and competence-based approaches. InDeveloping the Capable Practitioner
(1999) by O’Reilly, D., Cunningham, L. and Lester, S. (eds) Kogan Page. Retrieved from
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/resources/heca/heca_cp18.pdf
Cheetham, G. &Chivers, G. (2005). Professions, Competence and Informal Learning.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 337. ISBN 1-84376-408-3. Reprinted from Eraut,
25
Michael (1994). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London: Falmer Press.
p. 124. ISBN 0-7507-0330-X.
Davidson, G. (2009). Factors Likely to Accentuate Serious Harm.The FLASH Rating.A Risk
Communication Tool.Retrieved from http://www.nzoia.org.nz/assets/images/FLASH%20%20Risk%20Comms%20V9.pdf
De Coi, J., Herder, E., et al (2007).A model for competence gap analysis. Retrieved from
http://www.l3s.de/~herder/research/papers/model_for_competence_gap_analysis.pdf
Department of Labour (2010).Report on the gap analysis of risk management and safety
provisions in the adventure and outdoor commercial sectors in New Zealand. Version 5.
Department of Labour.
Developing a competency Framework – Linking company objectives and personal
performance. Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newISS_91.htm
Dreyfus, S. E.&Dreyfus, H. L. (1980). A Five-Stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in
Directed Skill Acquisition. Washington, DC: Storming Media.
Lester, S. (?). Novice to Expert: the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition. Retrieved from
http://www.sld.demon.co.uk/dreyfus.pdf
eCompiance management systems inc (2008).Safety Update: How do you measure
competence. Retrieved from http://www.ecompliance.ca/club-zero/archive/20100504How-Do-You-Measure-Competence.html
Evans, A. (2008).Competency assessment in Nursing. A summary of literature published since
2000. Retrieved from
http://www.edcan.org/pdf/EdCancompetenciesliteraturereviewFINAL.pdf
Liao, A. (2011).Outdoor Recreation Qualifications Survey 2011. Prepared for Skills Active.
Retrieved from
http://www.skillsactive.org.nz/assets/news%20&%20events/outdoorrecqualsurvey2011.pdf
Malloy, C.L. &Uman, G.C. (2005).Measuring Competency: understanding the tradeoffs of
different assessment strategies. Retrieved from
http://www.vitalresearch.com/pdf/VR_Measuring_Competency_Brief_February_2005.pdf
NZQAAssessment tools and practices. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nzqa.govt.nz/providerspartners/assessment-and-moderation/assessment-of-standards/genericresources/assessment-tools-and-approaches/
NZQA (2001).Learning and Assessment, A guide to assessment for the National
Qualifications Framework. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/Providers-andpartners/Assessment-and-moderation/Assessment-of-standards/learningassessment.pdf
Palmer, K. (2006).An evaluation of Instructional Staff training and Assessment for the Sir
Edmund Hillary Outdoor Pursuits Centre of NZ. A paper prepared for assessment of unit
standards 19629 and 9685. Personal correspondence.
26
Position statements on qualifications from YMCA, Skills Active, NZOIA, MSC, EONZ
presented to SEHORC May 2011. Personal correspondence.
Richards, G. &Schimelpfenig, T. (2010).Comments on the levels and measures of
competence. Article for the NOLS staff newsletter November 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.nols.edu/nolspro/pdf/JudgementandDecisionMakingCommentsontheLevelsofExpertiseModelSchimelpfenig-Richards.pdf
Skills Active (2012).Draft Sector Strategic Training Plan.Personal correspondence.
Teodorescu, T. (2006).Competence versus Competency, What is the difference.Performance
Improvement45(10), 27–30 Nov/ Dec 2006
Trinder, J. C. (2008).Competency standards – A measure of the quality of a
workforce.TheInternational Archives of the Photogrammetry, remote sensing and Spatial
Information Sciences.Vol.XXXVII Part B6a (165 -167), Beijing 2008.
Vaughan, K.& Cameron, M. (2009).Assessment of Learning in the Workplace: a background
paper. Report Prepared for the Industry Training Research Federation Network.
Worsnop, P. (1993).Competency Based Training: How to do it - for Trainers
Wojtczak, A. (2001). Evaluation of Learning Outcomes. Assessment methods and
measurement instruments working review. August 2001. Retrieved from
http://www.iime.org/documents/elo.htm
27
Appendix 1
Statements of competence
Statements of competence are a tool used by the UK Adventure Activities Licensing Agency
(AALA). They are useed to fill the gaps between the qualifications available the
requirements of the job. They are also useful for situations where no qualification exists.
A copy of the principles that AALA suggests should be applied to statements of competence
and two modified examples are described here.
Statements of Competence – Principles & Worked Examples
Reproduced from the AALA
1. Wherever possible, Statements of Competence should:
a. Be signed by a suitably experienced and qualified industry expert. This person is
free to determine the format of the SoC;
b. Describe what was seen, or is known, and comment on its adequacy. This is the
evidence on which the Statement of Competence is based. The aim of a SoC is to
recognise competence relevant to the employee’s likely deployment. For this
reason SoCs are not generally transferable from one provider to another;
c. Be in simple language;
d. Avoid referring to the suitability of anything other than skills that the industry
expert is qualified to assess. They should (generally) only make judgements
about their technical skills, and anything that the Industry expert actually saw.
The rest (e.g. the apparent suitability to work with a particular client group, etc.)
remains the responsibility of an employer (or similar) to ascertain;
e. Not make predictions about the future
f. State the opinion of the Industry expert as to whether the evidence seen on the
day supported the view that the candidate was capable of performing the set
tasks adequately
g. State what this opinion is based on. There is no fixed format and ultimately it is
up to the industry expert and the employer to determine the basis for the SoC
and to record it as part of the statement. This might take various forms as shown
in the examples below;
h. Indicate the date, venue and where appropriate a description of the client group
and the conditions;
i.
Be signed and dated and include any relevant qualification;
j.
Any restrictions such as venue, time of year, or duration of validity etc., which is
felt necessary, should be clearly stated.
28
Example Statements of Competence
Example 1: Observation of an activity session.
On Saturday 16 May 2004 I watched Jenny Jones run an introductory combined
canoe/kayak session for a boisterous but well behaved group of 8 14 year olds. The session
took place at Lake ABC on a typical May day, with a mix of sunshine and some showers and
light winds.
I previously had taken an opportunity to talk to Jenny about her own canoeing/kayaking
experience and her teaching experience.
Jenny competently ran an enjoyable and safe session, getting the young people to switch
between kayaks and canoes, and covering the necessary skills for each. She finished the
session with a short ‘journey’ around the shore line an old jetty and back, and a fun ‘wet
session’ at the very end.
In my opinion she ran the session in line with nationally accepted standards of good
practice. She carried with her (and had in the near-by minibus) appropriate incident and
emergency equipment, including a sensible stock of spare clothes and equipment.
There were no untoward incidents during the session so following the session I asked her to
rescue a capsized and seemingly frightened kayaker (me!) and a swamped open canoe. She
performed both with competence. I posed a few common incident scenarios to her and her
response was again in line with nationally accepted expectations.
Jenny had a nice rapport with her group, and maintained a nice balance between being
informal and maintaining good group control. She also had a good repertoire of games and
exercises which kept the more able suitably occupied. This allowed those who were
struggling enough time to developed necessary confidence and skills.
She told me afterwards that she did not decide exactly how she would end the session until
well into it, and described several options she had, depending on how the group were
coping, and what they wanted to do.
In my opinion the skills I saw were well above those necessary for operating introductory
canoeing/kayaking sessions at this and similar venues.
Johnny Wilde,
NZOIA Level 1 Kayak
NZOIA level 1 Canoe
20 May 2004.
29
Example 2: Signed induction check list
Employee Name: Jasper Jones
Activity: Climbing at XYZ Crag
Induction checklist
Item 1:
Kitting up at the centre (including instructor kit)
Item 2:
Group management on the approach to (and return from) the crag.
Item 3:
Harness and helmets session.
Item 4:
Rigging climbs 1, 2 and 3
Item 5:
The general layout of XYZ Crag (with particular attention to suitable routes
and descents) and its use in various weather conditions.
Item 6:
Instructor belaying.
I am satisfied that the above named instructor can satisfactorily do all of the above tasks at
XYZ Crag
Additional comments:
Signed: Jack Bee
Date: 02.04.26
Qualifications:NZOIA Rock 2
Peer Belaying Endorsement
I am additionally satisfied that the above named instructor can satisfactorily supervise one
or more students (at the discretion of the session leader) as they belay.
Additional Comments:
Signed: Jack Bee
Date: 02.04.26
Qualifications:NZOIA Rock 2
30