Forgot your password?
Break-Out Groups
Report back from break-out groups
Group 1
Question: Is it possible to define standardized competencies (functional) knowledge and skills?
Is the establishment of more uniform standards for SCM realistic? What could be lost in the short term?
Feedback: The answer was yes, it's possible to define standardized (functional) knowledge and skills. Details might be tricky. People could be lost in the short term. People might start feeling undervalued. There is a definite risk.
Uniform standards for SCM will not work with the UN agencies (e.g. you need to have a B.A. degree to be promoted or hired in certain positions). It's unlikely that UN structure would change even if we address these issues.
Group 2
Question: How could HLA play a role? How do we best leverage our varied experience to establish cross-sector competencies and build stronger SCM professionals?
Feedback: There are several issues with HLA playing a role in the Competencies project. HLA represents individuals and can't influence organizations. Even though HLA made progress with Fritz Institute's support and raised its profile, the main issue is still if managers in organizations are supporting the project. HLA should be promoting fast track approach to Certification so the programme staff can go through the training.
Another issue is that with taking on the Certification programme, HLA is already over-committed. The group supports the competencies project as simple and easy to do. In terms of leveraging varied experiences, the competencies project should be comparable to other elements in the supply chain.
Group 3
Question: How should the transition to the establishment of cross-sector competencies standards be managed?
Feedback: Group 3 also approved the competencies model. In order to manage the transition and the establishment of cross-sector competencies, there needs to be recognition that organizations should be looking for competencies as part of their SC evaluation process.
