competency based learning

by Tom Byerley, Director, University of Tennessee's Reliability and Maintainability Center

In the reliability and maintenance world (and elsewhere I suppose), there continues to be significant confusion concerning the meaning and proper use of the three words, certificate, diploma and degree. 

Originally presented at Reliability 2.0

Ken Bass, CMRP, Director, Content and Quality, Management Resources Group

Most organizations have recognized for many years that when we change the way any job is done, we most likely change the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed at that job. For minor changes in the work, some on the job training is sufficient. When the changes involve dramatic differences in the knowledge and skills base, formal training is required. But one question remains. That is, is “how to” training enough since it is very specific to the knowledge and skills for a discrete set of tasks?

Originally presented at Reliability 2.0

Written by Casey Wagner, Training Manager Industrial Maintenance, Shaw Industries Group, Inc. and Eric Rodgers, SVP Manufacturing Group, General Physics Corporation

Background  

Shaw has a rich history in carpeting and flooring and from its early beginnings in 1946 Shaw has remained an industry leader. Maintaining a leadership position requires constant diligence and focus on your products, quality, manufacturing processes and your people. Early in 2005, Shaw Industries understood that a proactive workforce development initiative would be required to sustain current and future business operations. Specifically, building the skilled workforce was a growing concern with labor resources being very hard to find and many that were found were highly under skilled. Shaw was facing a considerable workforce issue – how to address both aging workforce departures and the lack of qualified and skilled replacement workers.

The dominate trend in corporate America over the past ten years is to cut cost through headcount reduction, reducing maintenance activities and a variety of other arbitrary means. Many view headcount reduction as the only means of achieving a competitive position that would permit our industries to survive in the ever-increasing competitiveness of the world market. Unfortunately, companies cannot cost cut their way to prosperity. If cutting cost is not the answer, to only real option is to increase the productivity of our critical assets. This is certainly true of our workforce.

Decline in Technical Education a Serious Threat to U.S. Manufacturing Capabilities

By Robert M. Williamson, president of Strategic Work Systems