A purpose-led approach towards the development of competency frameworks

WIPAKO ® Winterthur interprofessional training concept “communication and cooperation in health professions”: concept, development process and implementation

“…In the absence of existing interprofessional final competencies for health care professions in Switzerland, the Canadian framework model [ 13 ] was chosen as the starting point, even if it cannot be assumed that it is directly transferable to the Swiss context [ 6 ]. The comparison with other relevant competency catalogs and the joint formulation and reformulation of the approved competencies and goals by all participating professions enabled a context-related validation [ 43 ], which should ideally be extended to other stakeholders in the future professional practice. Developing a common understanding of the competencies and goals to be addressed across the various professions seems fundamental to the curricular positioning of the various professional training programs.…”

“…The content of the training strictly focused on the topics of communication and interprofessional cooperation. Based on the definitional contextuality of competencies [ 43 ], [ 45 ], [ 46 ], the increase in the acquisition of competencies over the three years of study is achieved through an increasing complexity of (practical) situations [ 43 ]. The first-time teaching of (competence) basics as a prerequisite for the later acquisition of interprofessional competencies (e.g., [ 42 ]) is not planned in this way, since the former is a prerequisite at the beginning of the program (part of the aptitude test).…”

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

“…Doing so may provide developers with kinds of organizing frameworks, including the role of underlying philosophical positions, assumptions, commitments and what counts as evidence of rigour and validity. Second, those developing frameworks should consider three when developing a framework in order to align purpose with process: “binary/continuum; atomistic/holistic; and, context-specific/context-general” (Child and Shaw 2019). These arguments require developers to explicitly consider the scope or intended use of the framework (which will inform their validity arguments); the level of granularity (which will inform their methods and alignment); and, the contexts in which the framework may be enacted (which will inform the degree of contextual specificity required in the development process).…”

“…If we integrate organizing frameworks of these kinds and associated arguments into guidelines, it may lead to better alignment between intended uses, methods and sequences such that they are deemed “fit for purpose”. This shifts the emphasis from what or how many methods were used – since any one method can be aligned with more than one purpose – to the theoretical and functional alignment of methods with the rationale for development and intended uses (Child and Shaw 2019). Until implementation of these types of guidelines, we suggest that interpretation of the utility and validity of outcomes (i.e., competency frameworks) may be more variable or less certain (Arundel et al 2019; Child and Shaw 2019; Simera et al 2008).…”

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

“…How a profession conceptualizes competence (e.g., degree of granularity from atomistic to holistic/integrated) will influence how developers decide to represent competence in a framework (26). Developers will need to consider the level of granularity desired in the framework (22), balancing enhanced precision (atomistic) against competency in dynamic contexts (holistic) (22,27). Atomistic frameworks risk introducing a reductionist, decontextualized approach to complex professional practice and the assumption that the linear accumulation of items assembles neatly again to inform competence.…”