Hot Topic
"The matrix Standard is different to other standards because it completely integrates into your daily routines."
Malcolm Hollis LLP
Click here to see what other organisations have to say about the matrix Standard
Element 6 - Not Just a Paper Chase
As a Practitioner I am often asked about the difference between criteria 6b (the competence of staff is maintained and developed to meet service demands) and 6f (staff can describe how they are involved in reviewing their performance and identifying their development needs linked to objectives).
The first thing to be clear about - regardless of which part of the Standard we are thinking about - is that matrix is an outcome based Standard. This means that whilst every organisation will have its own systems and processes in place and supporting documents, these are not prescribed by the Standard nor are they the focus of what an Assessor will be looking for when considering evidence sources whether at a first Assessment or an Accreditation review.
The real focus is what happens as a result of any particular system or process. So, for 6f, for example, there is no requirement to have a formal, documented appraisal or review process as long as staff have some means through which to take part in a discussion about how they are doing in their job, what is expected of them and the training and development needed to support them in their role and the achievement of objectives. This could be achieved in many ways such as an informal job chat, as part of a team meeting or through a formal appraisal process. I have worked with several organisations where this sort of discussion happens in the pub over "a pie and a pint" because this approach suits the culture and ways of working of the people involved.
To meet the Standard, an organisation will need to demonstrate a consistent approach which means that whatever managers’ say is the way that they review performance is reflected by staff. Evidence will primarily be that gathered through interviews with a cross-section of staff who will be asked to describe how they are involved in reviewing their performance and to give examples of what was discussed, what was agreed for the future and any training and development agreed linked to objectives. This may or may not be supported by a review of documentation depending on whether or not the discussion is written down - certainly this is not a requirement of the Standard.
What this means is that there is lots of scope for organisations to meet the criteria in the best way for them - one of the strengths of the Standard is its flexibility in this respect. So what does this mean for organisations thinking about 6b and 6f and how they might develop their existing approach? Whilst there is no requirement to develop formal, heavily documented processes it could be useful to consider how 6b and 6f differ and how existing approaches could be developed to reflect this.
At the heart of element 6 is ensuring that staff are competent to deliver information, advice and guidance and are supported in this role. 6b looks specifically at competence i.e. the knowledge, attitudes, skills and experience needed to deliver information, advice and guidance - how this is monitored and developed to meet the demands of the service. This is really about howsomeone does their job as opposed to what they are expected to achieve (which is the focus of 6f).
To be able to monitor and develop competence the starting point is a definition of what competence "looks like" in your particular organisation and the roles people carry out. I have seen many organisations make a good start at doing this by monitoring staff against a framework of requirements usually but not exclusively as part of an appraisal or performance management process. Typical headings for these requirements might be communication skills, team working, work quality and customer focus. Whilst this is a good starting point, the approach has the potential to be developed further:
Firstly, the requirement headings are generic and open to subjective interpretation of what is meant. My understanding of acceptable levels of "communication skills" could be very different from that of a colleague and so there is potential for confusion and inconsistency within the process.
Secondly, the specific requirements for the delivery of information, advice and guidance are very often not defined or described. For example, skills such as building rapport, questioning and listening and giving feedback.
So the first step may be to develop a framework in which competence has been defined and described. The next step is to "paint a picture" of the levels of competence needed for different roles in the organisation. For example, a senior manager will need a different level of planning skills to a frontline member of staff. Whatever the level of competence required, it is also important to be clear about what is acceptable performance for each competency at each level - this could be achieved by developing a series of statements which describe poor, acceptable and excellent performance in your organisation.
It may also be useful to build into the framework the behaviours and attitudes articulated in policies and procedures such as those around Equal Opportunities and Diversity. This will help to ensure that you obtain maximum value from developing the way you approach 6b: it will provide a means through which to monitor and manage the consistent application of policy and procedure and to ensure that policy, procedure and practice are aligned.
Although the Standard does not require staff to have or be working towards an NVQ Guidance qualification, organisations may wish to look at the competency framework of the NVQ to help them consider how to develop something that will work for them.
Having developed a suitable framework to define and describe competence, organisations need to consider how to use such a framework to monitor and develop staff competence to deliver information, advice and guidance. I have seen this done in many ways in different organisations, for example, through observation of client interactions either by a line manager or through peer review activities. Where it is felt that observation of clients is inappropriate some organisations have successfully used the framework as the basis for role play/team development activities.
I have always thought that any process or system should add as much value as possible to the way organisations and people perform. The framework used in an observation setting can do just this by not only including desired behaviours and attitudes but also key process checks such as explaining to clients’ how personal information is stored and used.
Where a framework is used as part of a self-assessment and review discussion, it is helpful to ask for examples to support assessment of competency in order to reduce as far as possible the subjective nature of the discussion. Examples of feedback from clients or other stakeholders (where appropriate) might also be considered as a way of demonstrating competence based on the widest possible evidence.
Remember all staff that provide information, advice and guidance need to be included in whatever the approach is developed. Developing a framework that can be adapted for frontline staff, those staff that meet and greet clients for example, as well as those providing in depth advice and guidance will ensure that the competence of all staff delivering the service is monitored and developed.
An important part of 6b is providing feedback to staff about their competence and ensuring that development activities are provided where competence needs to be maintained. This provides a link with 6f which requires organisations to demonstrate that performance is reviewed and training and development agreed linked to objectives. This is the what individuals are expected to achieve and so needs to include a discussion about what the individual has achieved in the period under review as well as agreeing what is to be achieved in the forthcoming period. This will be where targets or objectives are discussed and agreed, whether they are linked to performing a task, producing outputs or an outcome or undertaking a development activity. Training and development needed to support the achievement of objectives or targets ad to enable individuals to achieve or maintain the desired competency levels should be an integral part of the review discussion.
In my view, integrating a review against the desired competencies with the performance review discussion will provide a means through which achieve a cohesive and consistent approach to the way in which the outcomes of 6b and 6f can be achieved. In the context of the Standard, the focus of 6b and 6f is around the information, advice and guidance aspect of someone’s role but using the Standard as a framework for the management and development of staff as a whole will add value to the matrix Journey.