ijcrb.webs.

com MAY 2012

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

THE COMPETENCE CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK

A CLASSIFICATION MODEL FOR EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT

Saquib Yusaf Janjua, Corresponding Author:

PhD, Assitant Professor,
Department of Management Sciences, CIIT
Park Road, Chak Shahzad, Islamabad 42000, Pakistan

Malik Asghar Naeem,

PhD, Assistant Professor
Department of Management Sciences, CIIT
Park Road, Chak Shahzad, Islamabad 42000, Pakistan

Farrukh Nawaz Kayani,

PhD, Assistant Professor
Department of Management Sciences, CIIT
Park Road, Chak Shahzad, Islamabad 42000, Pakistan

Corresponding Author: Janjua, Saquib Yusaf is PhD in Business Administration from Vienna University of Economics and
Business Administration. He has served as Assistant Director (Admn & HR) in public sector organization in Pakistan. He
has also been part of adjunct faculty at different universities in Pakistan and full time Assistant Professor in the Department
of Management Sciences, CIIT.

Abstract
Competence management is a diversified field of research and central theme to both Strategic Management and
HRM literature. Despite the popularity of competence management, the assessment of competencies remains a
real challenge for researchers and practitioners. Without any classification framework it is even more difficult to
conceptualize and operationalize the managerial jobs. Hence difficult to design and develop effective
management development strategy catering the need of future workforce. This research paper intends to present
the theoretically derived classification model for identification of skills, abilities, and personal characteristics of
managers required to fulfill the managerial tasks and responsibilities. The five classes were developed called
cognitive, functional, social, generic management, and personal competence class. The competencies in these
classes represent traits and skills ranging from personal, social and functional sphere. This study has practical
implications for practitioners in a way to design effective management development strategy. This classification
framework can be also adopted by educationist to rethink and redesign their business education curriculum
towards developing and preparing business students to take future managerial responsibilities.

Key Words: Competence Classes, Management Competencies, Classification Framework, Employees

Development.
1 Introduction
The value of competent human resources for organizational performance is well established in organizational
behavior literature (Ozcelik & Ferman, 2005). In this perspective competence based approach to manage and
develop employees has gained enormous importance (Soderquist et al., 2010). Amid overwhelming support for
competence based management, the question arises regarding assessment and applicability of competencies in
organizational practice. The assessment of competency remains a great challenge for researchers (Boyatzis,
2006). Indeed 'multidimensional' and 'multicultural' construct of competency create problems in establishing the
precise definition of competence (Erondu & Sharland, 2002). Therefore, it is difficult to define what exactly
constitutes the competence of a person and what is meant by competency. The absence of a common definition
leads to second problem related to training and developing employees through competency-based training
programs.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 396

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

These methodological shortcomings make it difficult to identify knowledge skills, and characteristics necessary
to accomplish job related responsibilities and tasks. Resultantly, it limits the practical implications and
applicability of competence approach in management development efforts. This debate over conceptual
ambiguity and complexity involved in assessment of competencies underline the need of sound classification
framework. Once it is developed, it can provide sound theoretical framework and background for assessment
and development of employees. In this context, the current paper presents conceptual classification framework
of management competencies aimed at advancing the competence-based philosophy in both academic and
practical context. The rest of the paper is organized in three main sections. Firstly, it provides critical review of
the literature in reference to classification of individual management competencies. The second section presents
the classification model and elaborates its features. Third section discusses the practical implication of
classification model of competencies in development of employees. Finally, the paper concludes with some
thoughts on the topic.
2 Literature Review
The organization of closely related competencies into group based on some underlying theory or logic is called
classification, or categorization of competencies (Boyatzis, Golman, & Rhee, 2000; Draganidis, Chamopoulou,
& Mentzas, 2008). This classification enhances theoretical and practical understanding and significance
(Boyatzis et al., 2000; Marelli, Tondora, & Hoge, 2005; Viitala, 2005; Woodruffe, 1993). According to Boyatzis
et al. (2000) there are different ways to classify competencies. The two main options are organizing
competencies based on prior theory or classifying competencies based on empirical evidences. Boyatzis et al.
(2000) further mention several relationships that may exist among competencies namely complimentary,
compensatory, antagonism, and alternate manifestation depending on nature of their influence and interaction
with each other. Boyatzis et al. (2000) assert that like relationship amongst several competencies there may also
exist certain type of relationship between competences classes. In literature both classifications i.e. theoretical
classification and empirical classification are in practice. Apart from debate on advantages and disadvantages of
each of the methods, theoretical classification is relatively easier and more stable framework to start with.
Therefore, it seems to be more prudent strategy to begin the management development program with some basic
predefined theoretical classification scheme for subsequent empirical analysis and implications.
2.1 Classification Schemes of Competency
Researchers often classify competencies based on their logic, theory and purpose of the study (Chyung, Stepich,
& Cox 2006; Mühlbacher, Nettekoven, & Putnova, 2009). In literature, several ways of classification of
competencies are found. The most common classification forms are described briefly in the following section.
2.1.1 Soft and Hard Competencies
This classification was introduced by Jacobs (1989). According to the author the analytical and organization
competencies are considered as hard competencies whereas creativity, interpersonal, and behavioral skills are
soft competencies. The soft and hard competencies both are indeed essential for effective work performance.
Soft competencies, in fact, control and determine dispositions of observable behavior and performance (Hodges
& Burchell, 2003; Rainsbury, Hodges, & Burchell, 2002). However, this concept of classification is often
criticized on the grounds that differentiation between hard and soft competencies is always difficult to
understand and establish conceptual and practical significance (Woodruffe, 1993). Despite aforementioned
criticisms, the scheme of classification of competencies into soft and hard skills is still popular and in practice
(see Rainsbury et al., 2002).
2.1.2 Threshold and Performance Competencies

It was Boyatzis (1982) who made differentiation between threshold and performance. According to the author,
„threshold competencies‟ are basic minimum requirement while „performance competencies‟ are skills and
competencies that actually differentiate between average and excellent performers. This distinction of
competency as a threshold and performance was criticized by Woodruffe (2003, 1993) stating that it is matter of
degree rather than category it may tilt from one extreme to other.
2.1.3 Hierarchical Wise Classification
The most popular pattern of classification is based on categorization of competencies needed by managers
across three hierarchical levels of management. In addition to hierarchical distribution there is also interest of
researchers and practitioners to establish generic list of management competencies (Stuart & Lindsay, 1997;
Thompson, Stuart, & Lindsay, 1997; Viitla, 2005). In this regard, Dulewicz (1989) earlier listed generic middle
management competencies which he called as „supra competencies‟. The concept of classification competencies
according to specific need of managers along the line of management hierarchy is supported by assertion that at
each level manager has to perform different functions and to fulfill varied responsibilities. Hence they need
different set of management competencies to perform their duties in more effective and efficient way.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 397

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

2.1.4 Prior and Empirical Classification

In general, there are two ways of classification whether to start with some predefined theoretical derived
competencies or arrange competencies based on empirical analysis. However, the later is more popular and is
widely used. Boyatzis et al. (2000) note that empirical classification presents somehow varied competencies
need from theoretical derived competence classification. Apart from debate on advantages and disadvantages of
theoretical and empirical classification schemes, it is, perhaps, more practical approach to start with some
predefined classification for subsequent empirical analysis to elicit competencies resulting into excellent work
performance.

3. Theoretically Derived Competence Classes

The existing literatute portrays that competencies are categorized into two classes (Cizel, Anafarta, & Sarvan,
2007; May, 1999; Rainsbury et al., 2002), three skill levels (Bernthal et al., 2004; Mumford et al., 2000), four
domains (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003; Kaufeld, 2006) five competencies classes (Mühlbacher, 2007; Rifkin,
Fineman, & Ruhnke., 1999), and six skills level (Rothwell & Lindholm., 1999; Viitala, 2005; Mahmood, 2002).
Nevertheless, strong criticism on classification of competencies is raised on the assertion that the competencies
in different domains are overlapping and interdependent on each other. It is difficult to conceptualize and
understand relevant importance of each competency if read in isolation. Without agreement or classification
framework it is even more problematic to understand what constitutes mangers capabilities and having
minimum applicability for practitioners (Viitala, 2005). Therefore, it is wiser approach to categorize the
competencies into classes to support the research theory in subsequent empirical analysis.
In order to avoid the criticism and disadvantages of the above discussed scheme of categorization, in literature
there is also strong support for categorization of competencies into knowledge, skills, capabilities, traits, and
abilities (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1997; Le Deist & Wintrerton, 2005; Hoge, Tondora, & Marrelli, 2005; Ley &
Albert, 2003; Mühlbacher et al., 2009; Mühlbacher, 2007; Winterton, Le-Deist, & Stringfellow, 2005). Le Deist
and Winterton (2005) argued that this widely adopted categorization of competencies into knowledge, skills,
and abilities is more holistic and comprehensive in nature answering to the need of developing professional
competence in more structured and rational way. Building on the concept of theoretical classification of
competencies into knowledge, skills, abilities, and attributes advanced by Mühlbacher et al. (2009), the current
paper presents five competence classes in sequence and hierarchical form. These five competence classes
represent wide range of skills, knowledge, and attributes from personal to social aspects appeared in HR
literature. The features of each of competence class are described in Table 1.
Table 1: Features of Five Competence Classes
3.1 Functional Competencies
These are the set of professional skills, abilities, and technical knowledge which specifically deals with the
technical aspects of the job essential to carry out specific functional or task related activities. These
competencies can also be referred as technical or functional related competencies. In this class first aspect
focuses on acquiring proficiency in handling tools and machine. In this sense it includes vocational & technical
skills which are essential for the accomplishment and task related objectives of the job. These technical skills
are often basis for the formal education, vocational, and apprenticeship (on the job training) programs. The
second aspect relates to the functional & subject specific knowledge of the job which are essential for the
accomplishment of the functional related objectives of the job. This can be understood as theoretical
knowledge and skills that is mainly target for training programs in educational institute (Hogan & Warrenfeltz,
2003). In short these technical skills comprise of „methodological knowledge, know-how of processes, and
techniques designed to conduct specialized activity in addition to ability to use tools, machines to accomplish
these tasks‟ (Nordhaug, 1998, p. 10).
In essence, performance in this cluster or executing of functional competencies involve repertoire of skills from
functional, tasks or context knowledge sphere. In this category different subject specialized knowledge relating
to the professional skills and experiences are also included for example, TQM/supply chain management,
change management, accounting and management control, strategic management, etc. However, application and
scope of the competencies varies as per nature of task specificity which Nordhaug (1998) defined as “a degree
to which competencies are related to execution of narrow or broader range of tasks having variation from high
to low task specificity”. For example: for individual working on managerial position in finance department need
primarily proficiency in accounting and management controlling thus making it core competence, whereas other
competencies like planning and project management are secondary or supplementary for his job.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 398

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

3.2 Generic Management Competencies

The second class is “generic management competencies” includes competencies which are more common to
management related jobs and require in all managerial jobs irrespective of the nature of business, industry,
hierarchy, and function of the job (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003; May, 1999; Viitala, 2005). This can be
understood as „non firm specific‟ and „non industry specific‟ competencies that include knowledge and skills
essentials for the all managers irrespective of their nature of job, industry or firm in which they are working
(Nordhaug, 1998). This competence domain forms the core requirement of management related jobs covering
repertoire of skills, knowledge, behavior, and intervention strategies that makes managers more effective in
dealing with routine managerial activities. The competencies in generic management class are different from
functional class in respect that it is least concerned with the ability of the managers in handing tools & machine,
process, and technical aspects of the job. Whereas different from personal competence class in respect that it
does not represent the core personality attributes rather demonstrated behavior and skills required in
management related tasks. These competencies and business management knowledge is often main target for
learning and development in business degree programs like MBA and Executive Education Programs. The
competencies in this class can be learned through training and development programs or ability to perform
better in this domain increases with the experience and progress in the career.
3.3 Social Skills
The social or interpersonal competence category covers the wide range of skills and behaviors making the
managers competent to work effectively with the people in team. Indeed social competencies make managers
more productive in establishing and maintaining healthy business relationships within organization and internal
and external stakeholders (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003; Mühlbacher, 2007). This cluster mainly focus more on
people to people contact at individual and group level based on cooperation and reciprocal business relationship.
The competencies in this class include understanding people expectations and reactions (Viitala, 2005) and
social judgment skills (Mumford et al., 2000). Individual more oriented towards social competencies are good
communicator, effective team player, able to get work done through networking, capable of lobbying to get
advantage for organization, and maintaining fruitful relationship with different business stakeholders.

3.4 Cognitive Skills

The competencies in this domain comprise of cognitive ability of managers to handles business issues and
problems. The competencies in this domain include employees thinking ability to identify and solve the work
related problem or find innovative solutions to tackle challenges based on cognitive skills. In this category
cognitive thinking skills like analytical thinking, systematic thinking, visionary thinking and creative thinking
are included.

According to Nordhaug (1998) the problem solving skills revolve around the ability of an individual to solve
work related problems more efficiently includes creativity, analytical capacity, systematic thinking, and ability
for which wide range of cognitive thinking skills are essentials. Skarzauskiene (2008) define thinking process as
“a systematic manipulation of information, formation of concepts, and way of problem solving, searching for
reasons” (p. 105), therefore, these cognitive thinking skills set foreground to solve work related problems. These
meta-competencies are more dependent on one‟s personality characteristics in the sense that these cognitive
skills are mainly determined by inherited family characteristics and brought up.
3.5 Personal Characteristics
The last competence class can be understood as an underlying personality traits and attributes of the managers
which are subject matter of psychology (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003). It can be differentiated from other classes
in the sense that these are the core values, traits, self image, motives, and intents of the managers. These
personal attributes define one‟s personality. The personality characteristics as underlying motives of the
individuals also define how individual react or behave in given situation. Therefore, it is one of the significant
variables in determining human behavior (Buss, 1989). These attributes are indeed difficult to measure
objectively (Bird, 2003), hence, difficult to develop (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003).
These motivational personal characteristics for example include achievement orientation, willingness to learn,
self confidence, ambition, integrity & honesty along with patience and assertiveness. These personal attributes
explain how the manager behave or act in a certain way in given situations? how he views and approaches
certain problems?. Therefore, these personality variables have important implications on manager's behavior
consequently job performance. In short, these are the stable part of one‟s personality and essential competencies
needed for effective job performance and derive or influence the behavior or capabilities of manager in other
classes as well. The competencies in this domain represent stable part of one‟s personality that cannot be easily
changed or developed through formal learning and development programs. Therefore, significant attention

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 399

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

should be given in assessment of these traits while making recruitment, promotion and work placement
decisions (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003; Rifkin et al., 1999).
4 Discussion and Practical Implication:
There are several ways to classify competencies such as based on importance over different period of time
(Robison et al., 2007; Shackleton, 1992; Woodrufe, 1993, 2000), managerial hierarchical level (Erondu &
Sharland, 2002; Dulweciz, 1989), level of use and importance (Kochanski & Ruse, 1996), and based on personal
characteristics, skills, knowledge, and behavior (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1997; Mühlbacher, 2007; Rifkin, et al.,
1999; Kaufeld, 2006). The theoretical competence classes explained earlier are put into hierarchy in iceberg
model in figure 1. The competencies in hierarchy represent in continuum from task oriented to people oriented
and from people oriented to personal oriented competencies needed to deal with the work related to people
related issues respectively. It covers different personality aspects ranging from work related to interpersonal and
intrapersonal activities.
Figure 1: Hierarchical Model of Managerial Competence Classes
The hierarchical model elaborates the cause and effect relationship among competencies in competence model
(Rifkin et al., 1999). The workplace learning and performance can be improved by assessing and developing
employees based on competence classification framework. The training and development agenda therefore,
should focus on re-strengthening and balance of competencies at each level so that performance standards could
be achieved. In this manner the management development programs and other HR processes can be redesigned
to meet the organization‟s strategic requirement by focusing on competence classes which result in effective
strategic HR planning. For instance, competencies at lower level are more specific to individual personal values,
societal brought up, and beliefs representing personality of individual. These characteristics cannot be easily
developed, therefore, should be given due value in recruitment, placement and career development decisions
(Garavan & McGuire, 2001; Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003). The skills at top level are related to solving the job
specific problems mainly dealing with the technical and functional aspects. These functional level skills are in
general basis of formal education and training & development programs (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003).
The possession of competence from one class strengthens or enhances the disposition of behavioral competence
in other classes. For example: possessions of „self confidence‟ and „achievement orientation‟ at personal
competence class have positive and influential effect on disposition of competencies in leadership cluster.
Similarly, competencies in social cluster have positive & developmental relationship with competencies at
leadership cluster. The „interpersonal‟ and „communication‟ competencies have strong association with
leadership cluster and having these competencies significantly affect the performance and disposition of
leadership competencies and make one‟s more effective at leadership role. Same as, possessing competency
„conflict management‟ and „negotiation skill‟ that are components of social competence class enhance the
ability of manager to be effective in some generic management level competencies. There is vice-versa
developmental relationship amongst competence classes as well. As competencies from social class compliment
performance at generic management cluster, having requisite competencies at generic management class on the
other hand influence the performance at team and group level and help to maintain the effective social
interaction with stockholders that is the feature of social competence class. In nutshell, management education
and development should focus on developing managerial competencies around competence classification
framework illustrated in figure 2. In this way HR professional can take benefit of competence management for
increasing managerial performance at workplace. The classification model provides direction in designing
effective management training programs. This competence classification form also provides guidelines in
recruitment, placement, and promotion decisions. The personal characteristics are relatively difficult to change
hence importance should be given to these motivational characteristics while making recruitment decision.
Functional skills can be developed easily through effective management training programs. In jobs which
require behaviors from employees to build strong business relationship ask for finding individual who is more
extroverted and easy going personality. Training program can be developed to impart social competencies. In
actual, training need assessment should aim to identify gap between what is expected from individual and what
is his/her level of competencies. Evaluating these training need gaps from competence class perspectives assist
in developing effective management development programs.
5 Conclusion
To some extent, the literature on competence management is controversial and debatable. As the implication and
practicability of competence approach is void and unclear so necessitate the need for identifying competence-
based training programs with objectivity. This objective assessment requires strong understanding of
competence classification scheme. In given context this paper moves forward to advance the competence
classification theory. The different formats of competence classification appeared in HR literature are reviewed
and readjusted to present the competence model having implication for management education and
development. The five theoretically derived competence classes cover wide range of competencies that are

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 400

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

indeed essential to perform management jobs more effectively. The classification framework represents wide
range of skills, behaviors, and personal characteristics that are essential to increase managerial performance but
in more structured and meaningful way. The training programs structured around this competence classification
model may provide clear direction and objectivity in strategic HR planning particularly in designing of
management development programs. However, practicability and utility of the classification model is yet to be
established. To achieve this aim, in future. The research needs to be conducted to analyze the performance of
managers that have undergone training need assessment and development programs structured around proposed
competence classification model.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 401

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

References
 Bartlett, C. A. & Ghoshal, S. (1997). The Myth of the Generic Manager: New Personal Competencies for
New Management. California Management Review, 40(1), 92-116.
 Bernthal, P. R., Coltyryahn, K., Davis, R., Naughton, J., Rothwell, W. J. & Wellins, R. (2004). ASTD 2004,
Competency Study, Mapping the Future, New Workplace Learning and Performance Competencies, ASTD
Press, Alexandria, USA.
 Boyatzis, R. E. (2006). Using Tipping Points of Emotional Intelligence and Cognitive Competencies to
Predict Financial Performance of Leaders. Psicothema, 18(1), 124-131.
 Boyatzis, R. E., Goleman, D. & Rhee, K. (2000). Clustering Competence in Emotional Intelligence Insights
for the Emotional Competence Inventory, Chapter in Handbook of Emotional Intelligence. San Francisco.
Jossey-Bass.
 Cizel, B., Anafarta, N. & Sarvan, F. (2007). An Analysis of Managerial Competence Need in the Tourism
Sector: The Case of Turkey. Tourism Review, 62(2), 14-22.
 Erondu, E. & Sharland, A. (2002). Managerial Competence in Nigerian Firms: An Empirical and
Comparative Analysis. Multinational Business Review, 10(2), 129-137.
 Draganidis, F., Chamopoulou, P. & Mentzas, G. (2008). A Semantic Web Architecture for Integrating
Competence Management and Learning Paths. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(6), 121-136.
 Dulewicz, V. (1989) Assessment Centers as the Route to Competence. Personnel Management, 21(11), 56-
59.
 Garavan, T. & McGuire, D. (2001). Competence and Workplace Learning Some Reflection on Rhetoric and
Reality. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(4), 144-163.
 Hodges, D. & Burchell, N. (2003). Business Graduate Competencies: Employers‟ Views on Importance and
Performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 4(2), 16-22
 Hogan, R. & Warrenfeltz, R. (2003). Educating the Modern Managers. Academy of Management Learning
and Education, 2(1), 74-84.
 Hoge, M., Tondora, J. & Marrelli, A. (2005). The Fundamentals of Workforce Competency: Implications for
Behavioral Health. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 32(5-6), 509-531.
 Jacobs, R. (1989). Getting the Measure of Managerial Competence. Personnel Management, 21(6), 32-37.
 Kaufeld, S. (2006). Self Directed Workgroups & Team Competence. Journal Of Occupational Psychology,
79(1), 1-21.
 Kochanski, J. & Ruse, D. (1996). Designing a Competency Based HR Organization. Human Resource
Management, 35(1), 19-33.
 Le Deist, F. & Winterton, J. (2005). What Is Competency? Human Resource Development International,
8(1), 27-46.
 Ley, T. & Albert, D. (2003). Identifying Employee Competencies in Dynamic Work Domains:
Methodological Considerations and a Case Study. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 9(12), 1500-
1518.
 Mahmood, K. (2002). Competencies Needed for Future Academic Librarians in Pakistan. Education for
Information, 20(1), 27-43.
 Marelli, A., Tondora, J. & Hoge, M. (2005). Strategies for Developing Competency Model. Administration
and Policy in Mental Health, 32(5/6), 533-561.
 Matthews, G., Deary, I. J. & Whiteman, M. C. (2003). Personality Traits, 2nd edition. Cambridge
University, Cambridge, UK:

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 402

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

 May, A. (1999). Developing Management Competencies for Fast Changing Organization. Career
Development International, 4(6), 336-339.
 Mühlbacher, J (2007). Kompetenzmanagement Als Grundlage Strategischer Wettbewerbsvorteile. Fachbuch
Wirtschaft, Linde, Wien
 Mühlbacher, J., Nettekoven, M. & Putnova. A. (2009). Competence Development In The Czech Republic.
Journal Of Global Business And Technology, 5(2), 1-13.
 Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, M. S. & Marks, M. A. (2000). Leadership Skills Conclusions and
Future Directions. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 155-170.
 Nordhaug, O. (1998). Competence Specificities in Organizations: A Classificatory Framework. International
Studies of Management & Organization, 28(1), 8-29.
 Özcelik, G., & Ferman, M. (2006). Competency Approach To Human Resource Management Outcomes and
Contribution in a Turkish Cultural Context. Human Resource Development Review, 5(1), 72-91.
 Rainsbury, E., Hodges, D., Burchell, N. & Lay, M. (2002). Ranking Workplace Competencies: Student and
Graduate Perceptions. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 3(2), 8-18
 Rifkin, K., Fineman, M. & Ruhnke, C. (1999). Developing Technical Managers: First You Need A
Competency Model. Research Technology Management, 42(2), 53-57.
 Rothwell, W. & Lindholm, J. (1999). Competency Identification Modeling and Assessment in USA.
International Journal of Training and Development, 3(2), 90-105.
 Shackleton, V. (1992). Using A Competency Approach In A Business Change Setting, In Boam and
Sparrow, P (Eds), Designing And Achieving Competency: A Competency Based Approach To Developing
People And Organizations, McGraw Hill Book Company London, 157-172.
 Skarzauskiene, A. (2008). Theoretical Insights to Leadership Based On System Thinking Principles.
Organizacijo Vodyba Sisteminiai Tyrimai, 48(1), 105-120.
 Soderquist, K. E., Papalexandris, A., Ioannou, G. & Prastacos, G. (2010). From Task Based to Competence
Based: A typology and Process Supporting a Critical HRM Transition. Personnel Review, 39(3), 325-346.
 Stuart, R. & Lindsay, P. (1997). Beyond The Frame of Management Competencies: Towards a Contextually
Embedded Framework of Managerial Competence in Organizations. Journal of European Industrial
Training, 21(1), 26-33.
 Thompson, J., Stuart, R. & Lindsay, P. (1997). The Competence of Top Team Members a Framework for
Successful Performance, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11(3), 48-66.
 Viitala, R. (2005). Perceived Developmental Needs of Managers Compared to an Integrated Management
Competency Model. Journal of Workplace Learning, 17(7), 436-451.
 Winterton. J., Le Deist, F. D. & Stringfellow. (2005). Technology of Knowledge, Skills and Competencies:
Clarification of the concept of Prototype. Research Report Elaborated on Behalf of Cadefop/Thessaloniki,
Center for European Research on Employment and Human Resources Group ESC Toulouse
 Woodruffe, C. (1993). What Is Meant By Competency? Leadership and Organizational Development
Journal, 14(1), 29-36.
 Woodruffe, C. (2003). Development and Assessment Centers: Identifying and Assessing Competencies, 3rd
edition. 2nd Reprint, Charter Institute of Personnel and Development, CIPD. London.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 403

 ijcrb.webs.com MAY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 4, NO 1

Annexure
Table 1
Competence Class Feature
Functional Competencies The subject and function specific knowledge and skills necessary to
deal with the technical and functional aspects of the job. It also
includes vocational skills needed to perform task specific activities in
certain professions.
Generic Management Competencies Abilities and skills common for all managerial jobs required for
performing routine managerial activities regardless of their position in
management tier and functional duties.
Social Skills Skills and abilities that focus on developing and maintaining active
social interaction and relationships.
Cognitive Skills Thinking abilities and intuitive skills needed to solve job specific
problem.
Personal Characteristics Deep personality traits that represent core part of the personality often
differentiate one individual from other. It is subject matter of of
personal psychology.

Figure 1
low
high
Functional
Knowledge Task
oriented

Generic Management
Priority in
T &D Competencies
Recruitment
Option
People and Selection
Social Skills
oriented

Personal Cognitive Skills

oriented
Personal Characteristics

low high
Note: The figure shows competence classes in hierarchy and relative value of competence classes with respect
to Recruitment and T&D significance.

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 404