Perhaps the most important trend in the people management field right now is the definition of job competencies. When defined properly, job competency information can relate together many discrete human resource activities--training course design, performance consulting, career development, performance measurement, assessment, employee selection/promotion, and even compensation practices. We will be discussing just a few of these activities in this article.

 First it must be mentioned that there are many models of job competencies. We track activity in this area at more than 300 organizations, including 253 of the Fortune 500. The majority of the organizations we track have some sort of competency data. Yet less than 20% of the organizations use a model and process that enables them to link together many HR activities. The others have a list of competencies on a sheet of paper but are not doing anything exciting with them.

 The competency definition and model presented here reflects a consensus of what the leading companies and consultants in the field are talking about when they use the term "competency." Be aware that others may define the term differently. We cannot emphasize enough the importance of properly defining job competencies. The failure to do this may cause performance consulting, career development, and other activities to fall considerably short of what could be done.

 Historically, the human resources function has conducted unrelated activity to generate lists of job dimensions. An example is the narrative job description, usually done by compensation. Most job descriptions are rarely used for anything but to justify a job as being correctly slotted into a certain salary grade. Training people typically feel these job descriptions are useless for training activity. The typical job description does not contain a list of job competencies, though some might contain a list of basic skills, knowledges, or job activities.

We cannot emphasize enough the importance of properly defining job competencies.

 Similarly, the training function at an organization may have carried out a needs assessment. In many cases, these are nothing more than holding conversations with managers to find out what sort of training they want for their employees. No job analysis is ever done. No competencies are defined. The employment or compensation functions of the company have little interest or use in such needs assessments.

 The employment function may have developed lists of job dimensions that they deemed useful for selection or promotion purposes. In most cases these are job "specs" such as the type of experience or education needed for the job and a list of the key responsibilities. In a few cases basic skills or traits are flushed out for use in conducting interviews or assessment centers. Compensation and training professionals rarely use the data.

 The above situation is very common in corporate America today. The training staff and other HR functions have gone their separate ways in analyzing jobs and determining what is important. And line operating departments may run off on their own and try to define job competencies. The net result of all of these separate, independent efforts? The human resources/training group is not seen as having its act together, and the line organization is thoroughly confused by all of the different dimensions that the HR area creates and how to relate them together. Employees are appraised on one set of dimensions, trained on another, selected on another, and evaluated on still another as part of 360 degree reviews.

 There is a better way. At the leading companies job competencies are a single database of information used by all HR disciplines and all line managers. There is only one job analysis being done. Its results are used by all and there exists a single set of competencies that serve as a common language throughout the organization. Whether managers are