Describes a model of professional competence which attempts to bring together a number of apparently disparate views of competence, including the “outcomes” approach, a key feature of UK National Vocational Qualifications, and the “reflective practitioner” approach, suggested by Schon and now well recognized within professional education programmes.

is a Senior Policy Adviser with the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE), a Department of UK central government. Originally qualifying as a Chartered Engineer, he has been actively involved in vocational training for the past 22 years. He joined the Manpower Services Commission (later to become the DfEE) in 1983, where he became responsible for research into learning technology, especially the application of advanced technologies (including computers and satellites) to training. He later switched his focus to higher levels skills areas and oversaw the development of competence-based`o ccupational standards'' and National Vocational Qualifications in the Management area. He is currently responsible for advising on government policy in the field of management education and professional development. His Doctoral research centred on the acquisition of professional competence.

In an earlier article, published in 1996, the authors described a provisional model of professional competence which attempted to harmonise the "reflective practitioner" paradigm (developed by Schön and now espoused by many professional education programmes) with competence-based approaches. The latter included both the "functional outcomes" approach and the "personal competence" approach. Views on the composite model were sought from readers of this journal. The model was also tested as part of a programme of empirical work across 20 different professions. This paper offers a revised version of the model which takes account of the suggestions made by a significant number of respondents, as well as observations from the empirical work.

Focuses on the nature of professional practice based on research conducted with practitioners via interviews and questionnaires. Aims to determine how practitioners actually tackle professional problem solving. Discusses reflection, specialised knowledge and repertoires of solutions, among other factors, and examines differences in professional practice according to age, gender and membership of various professions. Finds that although specialist knowledge is crucial to successful practice, improvisation is a key factor. Suggests that a combination of applied knowledge and reflection is important in professional practice.

This study presents a theoretical perspective on organizing learning networks in relation to work processes within organizations. Despite the potential wealth in combining various learning and work arrangements, the field seems to be characterized by a single-minded pursuit of highly uniform ways to organize learning and work. The learning-network perspective rejects both a functionalist tool of management approach and a context-independent organizational learning view. Instead, it demonstrates how learning networks are (re-)produced by interactions among employees, managers, training consultants, and other actors, who each have their own theories and strategies in organizing work-related learning. Learning networks can take various shapes depending both on actor dynamics and on work characteristics. The learning-network theory is a descriptive theory that allows employees, managers, training consultants, and other learning actors to understand and develop alternative ways of organizing employee learning in relation to work. An indicative rationale for the key differences between the learning-network perspective and some rival approaches is provided.