The digital transformation of the construction industry is in full swing with an endless stream of new technologies and standards. At the core of this transformation are the individual architects, engineers, constructors, facility operators, and many others who need to deploy these technologies and integrate them into existing and new processes. To succeed, each practitioner needs to be digitally competent and capable of embracing new ways of working within increasingly complex information-rich environments. But what is ‘digital competence’ and how can it be maintained and improved?
In this restart of BIM ThinkSpace episodes (last one was published on September 9, 2015!), I will expand on the topic of individual competence (Episode 17) by introducing a new competence model offering a deeper understanding of ‘human abilities’. This expansion is necessary to allow us to assess and improve these abilities as they get increasingly influenced—whether enhanced or diminished – by large language models, specialised robots, and autonomous agents.
What is competence?
Competence is a term used to describe the abilities of individuals and teams, not those of organisations, systems or AI agents [1]. A competent individual is a person (e.g. a chef at a restaurant) who has gained the abilities to complete a specific activity (e.g. prepare a vegetarian lasagna dish for a restaurant patron), deliver an output (e.g. a well-prepared and well-presented dish), and achieve a desired outcome (e.g. a satisfied patron who leaves a 5 star review on Google Maps!).
Competence satisfies a defined requirement. That is, the chef cannot be called a ‘competent chef’ if he sings beautifully, can dance while cooking but still delivers a tasteless, badly presented plate! Another important characteristic of competence is that it must be gained through effort and thus is learnable. The competence displayed by the chef can be replicated by the sous-chefs if they receive proper training, know the recipe, and follow the steps leading to – all other things being equal – the same desired outcome.
Understanding competence can be challenging for more complex activities and outcomes, and we need a methodology to analyse what an individual can do competently. One such methodology is to break down “competence” into smaller components similar to how we dismantle a complex product to understand the functions and connections between its parts.
The five components of competence
Competence is a combination of three overlapping abilities – Knowledge, Skill, and Experience – and two enablers for these abilities – intelligence and attitude. These abilities and enablers do not exist independently but can be evaluated separately within an Integrated Competence Model (ICM). Let’s try to understand each of these components first and then observe them in a couple of sample use cases.
|
K |
Knowledge is the ability derived from an individual’s understanding of underlying principles, concepts, and connections within a specific context (e.g. understanding the applicability of construction codes or the effects of supply and demand on product pricing). |
| S | Skill is the ability corresponding to an individual’s use of physical or digital tools (e.g. using a screwdriver or a web application). |
| E | Experience is the ability stemming from an individual’s learning by exposure to different situations or through task repetition within a specific context over time [2] (e.g. working as a receptionist in many hotels provides hospitality experience, or working in a particular country for many years provides local experience). |
| i | Intelligence is an enabler emanating from an individual’s potential to solve problems or to generate an output of value. Each one of us has a unique combination of ‘intelligences’ – spatial, logical, musical, linguistic, cultural or similar [3] – that we are born with and can be honed over time. For example, some of us can learn new languages faster, while others can play many musical instruments with astonishing mastery and ease. |
| a | Attitude is an enabler represented by an individual’s mindset towards a specific activity or expected outcome (e.g. being passionate about sharing knowledge with students or having the empathy to take care of patients). As opposed to other components which have absolute value (e.g. more Skill or Experience is always better to complete a specific task) an individual’s attitude only has relative value to the task. That is, a specific attitude may have a positive, neutral or negative impact on competence. For example, aggressiveness is not desirable in many contexts, but it is a welcome attribute for MMA fighters. When inspecting ‘attitude’, it is important not to confuse it with ‘behaviour’: while attitude is one driver of behaviour, behaviour also reflects situational Context, temporal Circumstances, surrounding Culture, and personal Values (CCCV). |
Sample use cases
Ok, let’s apply this 5-components model to analyse the competence of Waleed (a bus driver, the actor in this story) who is tasked with transporting students and teachers (the activity) from their school campus in the city centre, through the suburbs, on the state highway, and then safely drop them off at a ski camp up in the mountains (the desired outcome). We can analyse Waleed’s driving competence by establishing:
 Integrated Competence Model – Bus Driver |
| Waleed’s Knowledge of the vehicle, route, driving rules, etc. |
| Waleed’s Skill in driving the bus including the motor abilities to use the steering wheel, pedals, various buttons, etc. |
| Waleed’s Experience in driving a bus through busy city streets, on high-speed motorways, up snow-covered mountains, etc. |
| Waleed’s linguistic, interpersonal, and logical intelligence enabling him to communicate effectively and resolve unexpected issues (e.g. adding unscheduled stops, changing course to avoid traffic etc.) |
| Waleed’s attitude as a driver, his respect for the school’s schedule, adherence to road rules, and being a safety-minded operator of a vehicle filled with a busload of over-excited kids! |
Let’s also consider Zaha, a senior engineer within a large engineering firm (the actor) who leads her small team (activity) to improve the quality and richness [4] of their digital deliverables (desired outcome). Using the 5-components model, we can establish Zaha’s competence by assessing:
- Zaha’s knowledge of engineering principles, digital engineering practices, industry standards, and the latest protocols relevant to her projects.
- Zaha’s skill in utilising various digital tools essential for authoring, reviewing, and exchanging information-rich models.
- Zaha’s experience in leading complex projects and working in information-rich digital environments.
- Zaha’s spatial, interpersonal, and logical-mathematical intelligence necessary to visualise complex engineering solutions, collaborating effectively with project partners, and analysing the efficiency of competing technical options.
- Zaha’s attitude reflected in her supportive or commanding leadership style and her patience/impatience in nurturing and maintaining a collaborative team environment.
By evaluating these five components, in greater detail of course, we can establish whether Zaha is, or is not, a competent digital transformation agent within her organisation.
In summary
Digital transformation offers many opportunities to improve the productivity of the construction industry. However, for this to happen, we need competent individuals who can manage the increased complexities and challenges. Before we can devise a plan to improve competence, we first need to understand it, then accurately assess it, and lastly attempt to improve it. The Integrated Competence Model introduced in this post provides a basis for understanding competence through its components. In future posts or articles on LinkedIn, I will clarify how to connect this understanding of competence with robotics and artificial intelligence. I will also provide examples of how to use ICM to develop roles, training materials, and continuously improve our digital competence in an era of rapid and continuous change!
Important: the Integrated Competence Model (ICM) was developed by was developed by Dr. Bilal Succar of ChangeAgents AEC for the assessor.io platform and then shared for wider public benefit through the not-for-profit BIMe Initiative (BIMexcellence.org) under an Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license. Bilal Succar, PhD, is a digital performance specialist with extensive experience in competence assessments across many countries. His research and work through focus on developing frameworks and online tools that bridge theory and practice to improve the digital effectiveness of individuals and organisations across the construction industry. For any questions or clarifications, please contact https://www.linkedin.com/in/bsuccar/
A print-ready, citable version is available as: Succar, B. (2024). Redefining Competence: a five-component model for digital transformation, BIM ThinkSpace.com, Ep. 25. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14043675
[1] Competence is one part of a larger performance picture. Other terms and metrics that contribute to overall performance include Readiness, Capability, Compliance, Conformance, Compatibility, and Maturity. These apply to different actors at varied organisational scales. Refer to Organisational Hierarchy https://www.bimframework.info/2013/12/organisational-hierarchy.html
[2] Please refer to the Individual Competency Index – the “time and repetition divide” separating Level 3 (Advanced) from Level 4 (Expert) https://www.bimframework.info/2014/03/individual-competency-index.html
[3] Refer to Gardner, Howard (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Third Edition. Basic Books. Also refer to https://infed.org/mobi/howard-gardner-multiple-intelligences-and-education/
[4] Information richness refers to the overlaying of different uses in the same deliverable. For example, a 3D digital model that allows visualisation, quantity take-off and structural analysis is more information rich than a similar model that only allows visualisation. For more details, please download the Model Uses Table https://bimexcellence.org/resources/200series/211in/
Comments 4
Hello, professor Succar. Great work! Thank you for sharing it. I have a question: in both examples, what you would consider to be the competency(ies) of the actors? Are the competencies represented/defined as the list of KSEias to perform the activities intended (each one is a single competency)? Or are they defined as the activities themselves?
Hello, professor Succar. Great work! Thank you for sharing it. I have a question: in both examples, what you would consider to be the competency(ies) of the actors? Are the competencies represented/defined as the list of KSEias to perform the activities intended (each one is a single competency)? Or are they defined as the activities themselves?
Hello Caroline, thank you for your question!
It would be good to clarify that ‘competence’ refers to the abilities and underlying enablers of an individual, while ‘competencies or competency items’ refer to the modular language used to describe these abilities/enablers. For example, if someone is a competent carpenter and we want to describe their abilities, we need to generate tens of statements [ability to do X, ability to do Y, ability to do Z].
These statements can define either an “activity” (cut wood using a saw band), an “output” (a dinner table) or an “outcome” (deliver a custom dinner table on time according according to detailed designer drawings and to the client’ satisfaction). Typically you need a combination of these depending on whether you are defining a role, a learning outcome, a process, or similar. Makes sense?
Hello Caroline, thank you for your question!
It would be good to clarify that ‘competence’ refers to the abilities and underlying enablers of an individual, while ‘competencies or competency items’ refer to the modular language used to describe these abilities/enablers. For example, if someone is a competent carpenter and we want to describe their abilities, we need to generate tens of statements [ability to do X, ability to do Y, ability to do Z].
These statements can define either an “activity” (cut wood using a saw band), an “output” (a dinner table) or an “outcome” (deliver a custom dinner table on time according according to detailed designer drawings and to the client’ satisfaction). Typically you need a combination of these depending on whether you are defining a role, a learning outcome, a process, or similar. Makes sense?