2012 Q6 Competence Management System

[PJW]

I have attempted the same question, see attached for my 'under exam conditions 31 min' attempt.

I'd appreciate any feedback.

Adrian

To me your answer was rather too focused on just summarising the operation of the IRSE Licensing scheme.
I agree that the question did indeed ask for a description of how a system should work, but although I can't place a finger precisely on why, I don't feel that this was quite what the examiners were after.  
I suppose it may be that 

• I don't think the IRSE licence scheme is itself a Competency Management System, but only one element of one,
  
• the exam is not about being able just regurgitating recalled facts, so presumably they wanted something more.
  

I think I'd have given a bit less detail about the steps in the process of obtaining a licence and a little more about the implementation within the management of a company or project- how the competence to do a task is defined, how an individual is developed to have that competence, how work is assigned to people who can demonstrate their competence.  It is never a bad idea in IRSE exam to hint at WHY things are they way they are, so perhaps you could have stuck broadly with your description but woven such things into it, trying to relate back to the first part of the question re the function of a CMS to show how the steps in getting the licence fulfill.

There were a few things in your description which grated slightly; for example 

• the CACs are Criteria, not CheckLists; 
  
• the purpose of the CA is to review the adequacy of the WPA which has been carried out (rather than fill the gaps identified by the WPA; it is actually more to fill gaps that were NOT identified by the WPA and arguably more of a scrutiny of them than the actual candidate!);
  
• the WPA and CA must be carried out by those having the assessment skills and adequate demonstratable knowledge of the domain area, but need not actually hold a relevant current licence themselves.
  

Part b:
Question explicitly asked for examples; you hardly seemed to do so.  Rather vague statement about evidence being "signed off by manager and/or assessor"; there could be witness statements, mentor reports etc. verified by any appropriate (generally licensed) individual and the line manager typically examines logbook etc. and signs to say that the candidate is ready for assessment and then the WPA makes a judgement whether that piece of evidence is valid and demonstrates the CAC which it is claimed to do so.

Part c:
Again there was too much focus on the mechanics of the IRSE licensing scheme, rather than the person and how to increase their level of competence and restrict what they can do and how they can do it in the interim.  Indeed a person can make an error in all sorts of ways for which a complaint on their licence would neither be fair nor supportable- the complaint has to be based on the failure to perform in accordance with a defined CAC.  
My opinion (and I am afraid that I have had o do far too much thinking about such things recently!)  is that 

• when there has been a deliberate violation then registering a complaint may well be appropriate, but 
  
• should the error be an honest oversight or mistake then it would be very hard to make such a charge stick and it would very likely not be upheld upon appeal.  Until it is, then it does not get recorded in the IRSE logbook- this does not mean that there is not a lesson for the person / organisation to learn
  

---

I don't think this was one of your better answers.  It was a very decent length and well presented (apart from your tendency to overflow regularly into the right hand margin), but your really spent too much time talking about the IRSE licensing scheme and actually you weren't actually as familiar with that in all respects as you should have been given that you chose to very much focus your answer on to it.
It seemed to get progressively weaker as the question progressed.  Sensible amounts were written and there was not anything very wrong, even though it wasn't all completely right; however didn't feel you really "hit the nail squarely on the head".  I think that it would have passed, but not much more.
I wouldn't be very happy about answering this particular question well myself, but I think that your presentation of the material from the earlier attempt would have been a step in the right direction.