DEAR READER,The previous Espresso Surveys haveanalyzed and focused on the newrequirements in the revised and newISO standards (quality, environmentand occupational health & safety). Inthis and coming editions, we will focuson other areas in the standards wherewe believe there are valuable lessonsto be shared and benefits createdfrom sharing experiences.The first topic in this new series that we willinvestigate is 7.2 Competence management.Although, the requirements are not significantlychanged compared to previous editions, it isa central element of any management systemstandard.THEVIEWPOINTESPRESSOThe overall performance and improvement of amanagement system ultimately depends uponthe involvement and execution of competentpersons. They must be properly trained andintegrated into the organization and its processes.The involvement and integration of the personswho will be operating within or using themanagement system every day is important forany organization to achieve outcomes that areconsistent and aligned with their objectives,strategies and values. Hence, to identify, developand evaluate knowledge, competences andbehavior – in a structured way- is key to ensureyou reach your intended outcomes from theimplemented management system.In this Espresso Survey, we therefore wantedto investigate a few elements relevant to 7.2’score requirements. Thank you to those whocontributed by responding, and we hope you findthis Espresso Survey report both interesting anduseful! The Viewpoint Espresso is our way of sharing with you what yourpeers think and how they are moving on hot topics. Our hopesare that what we share may trigger some curiosity, improvedunderstanding and possibly action on select topics. This is an extended initiative of ViewPoint, our customercommunity. While the main ViewPoint surveys provide in-depthanalyses, the ViewPoint Espresso are meant to be more agile,providing a concentrated injection of insight. Previous initiatives can be found ESPRESSO2

THE REQUIREMENT IN FOCUS: 7.2 — COMPETENCESClause 7.2 in ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001:2015 anddraft ISO 45001 requires the organization to determinethe necessary competence of person(s) doing workunder its control that affects the performance andeffectiveness of the management system and ensurethat these persons are competent on the basis ofappropriate education, training or experience. Whereapplicable, actions must be taken to acquire thenecessary competence, and evaluate the effectivenessof the actions taken and retain appropriatedocumented information as evidence of competence.We investigated how companies are dealing withrequirement 7.2 of the new ISO standards by askingquestions related to three areas:1.2.3.Extent of implementation of wider trainingprocessesWhich processes are most frequently applied asinput for determining training needsTo what extent is training executed as plannedRespondents are customers with a certified quality,environmental and/or occupational health and safetymanagement system.QUESTION 1TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE FOLLOWINGTRAINING PROCESSES EFFECTIVELYIMPLEMENTED IN YOUR ORGANIZATION?1 not applied2 somewhat applied3 structurally applied4 way of lifeOVERALL RESULTSISO 9001ISO 14001ISO 45001Determination of the necessary competence of persons affectingthe performance and effectiveness of management system(competence analysis)RESPONDENTS 996AVERAGE SCORE2. of individual competence to determine training needs2.62.9Effective planning and execution of education and training basedon identified training needs2. the effectiveness of delivered education/training2.52.6VIEWPOINT ESPRESSO3

DEEP DIVE ON MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DELIVERED EDUCATION/TRAININGISO 9001ISO 14001ISO 45001RESPONDENTS 974PERCENTAGES9.1%Not applied15.2%6.4%35.6%Somewhat applied31.5%44.0%39.1%Structurally applied39.4%33.9%14.9%Way of life13.3%15.6%54.0%Sum of Structurally applied & Way of life52.7%49.5%WHAT ARE THEY SAYING? The average scores are notably similar for thethree standards, all within the range 2.7 0.2,which means in between somewhat applied andstructurally applied. ISO 14001 shows a somewhat lower averagescore for each of the training processescompared with occupational health and safetyand quality. Deep dive on the last training process inquestion 1: When it comes to “Measuring theeffectiveness of delivered education/training”,the general scores are somewhat lower than forthe other training processes. Among the threestandards, the response for ISO 14001 standsout with 15.2% answering Not applied.VIEWPOINT ESPRESSO4

WHAT DO WE THINK?Respondents were asked to indicate to whatextent they have implemented different trainingprocesses in their organization on a scale from1 to 4: where 1 is not applied, 2 is somewhatapplied, 3 is structurally applied and 4 is way oflife. When commenting on the results, we haveinterpreted the answers structurally applied andway of life as having a structured approach.Quality together with occupational healthand safety generally score somewhat higherthan environment for every training process.A possible reason is that for most companies,quality and occupational health and safety willbe relevant for the majority of the personnel asthese disciplines are directly linked to their dailywork activities. Use of a structured approach istherefore considered to be needed.For environment, we see that training is quiteoften focused on general awareness ratherthan being tailored to individual work activities.This is typically seen for non-manufacturingcompanies where the environmental impactsare limited. In addition, achievement of reducedenvironmental impact may for some companiesbe seen as being more driven by bettertechnical solutions rather than being related topersonal behavior, e.g. more energy efficientequipment or use of a different material/components in their products. These factors mayexplain why some companies perceive less needfor a structured approach.When it comes to Measuring the effectivenessof delivered education/training, the scores arelower than for the other three processes. Thisconfirms what we often see, i.e. that companiesperceive this step to be more difficult toimplement and execute in a structured way.Questions raised include: How do we measureeffectiveness of provided training? How do wedo this in a good and effective way that providesvalue?When deep diving into Measuring theeffectiveness of delivered education/training, forISO 14001, the number answering Not applied(15.2%) was higher compared with ISO 9001 andOHSAS 18001. Moreover, for this process and ingeneral, the occupational health and safety scoresare on average in the higher range. Training withinoccupational health and safety is often influencedby regulatory requirements. In addition, therelative importance of securing workers’ healthand wellbeing are key drivers for a structuredapproach to training.In general, we could expect average scoresto be somewhat higher (closer to 3 or higher)since the survey respondents do have certifiedmanagement systems. However, these resultsmay also be influenced by factors such as the sizeof the organization and type of operations therespondents represent. Smaller-sized companiesand those where environmental aspects arelimited would probably tend to score loweras they would typically apply a less structuredapproach to assure competence acquisitionand people involvement. The company-sizedistribution has not been analyzed in this survey.PREVIOUS ESPRESSO SURVEYS TOPICS 4.1 Understanding the organisation and itscontext. 4.2 Understanding the needs andexpectations of interested parties andrequirement. 5.1 Leadership & Commitment. 6.1 Actions to address risks and opportunities. 7.4 CommunicationVIEWPOINT ESPRESSO5

QUESTION 2TO WHAT EXTENT DOES YOUR COMPANYUSE THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS ASBASIS FOR ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUALCOMPETENCE TO DETERMINE THETRAINING NEEDS?To determine training needs, the following elementscan be used as a basis for individual competenceassessment.1 not applied2 somewhat applied3 structurally applied4 way of lifeOVERALL RESULTSISO 9001ISO 14001ISO 45001Company strategic direction, policies and objectives (overall needof your company)Assessment of individual’s existing knowledge, skills andexperience (competence mapping)RESPONDENTS 973AVERAGE SCORE2. of the profile (expectations) for a given function/role2.52.72.8Individual performance assessment (employee appraisal) specific training objectives/requirements2.52.92.4Requirements for refresher training2.32.6VIEWPOINT ESPRESSO6

DEEP DIVE INTO REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRESHER TRAININGRESPONDENTS 973PERCENTAGESISO 9001ISO 14001ISO 4500114.6%Not applied17.6%6.5%31.9%Somewhat applied35.2%39.8%36.1%Structurally applied32.7%33.3%13.6%Way of life10.3%19.4%49.7%Sum of Structurally applied & Way of life43.0%52.7%WHAT ARE THEY SAYING? The environmental standard generally showssomewhat lower scores when comparingaverage score across all elements used todetermine training needs. The average scoreis 2.5 for environment, while similar score foroccupational health and safety is 2.8 and forquality 2.7. The occupational health and safety standardtops the rankings for all elements used todetermine training needs, except for one:Company strategic direction, policies andobjectives (overall need of your company). Individual performance assessment (employeeappraisal) stands out as the most used elementfor all three standards to determine the trainingneeds: occupational health and safety standards(average score 3.1), quality (average score 2.8)and environmental standards (average score2.7). Company strategic direction, policies andobjectives is among the top-ranking for quality(average score 2.8) and environmental (2.7)standards. Deep dive on the last element of Question 2:Requirements for refresher training is seeminglythe least used element to determine trainingneeds for the three standards: occupationalhealth and safety (average score 2.6), quality(average score of 2.4) and environmental(average score 2.3). When looking at theanswers behind the average figures:1.2.This is the element with the highestnumber of “Not applied” for all threestandards (17.6% for environment, 14.6%for quality and 6.5% for occupationalhealth and safety).If “structurally applied” and way of lifeanswers are combined as indicationof a structured approach, we see thatoccupational health and safety and qualitystandards show scores at about 50%(52.7% and 49.7% respectively) while theenvironmental standard rates somewhatlower at 43%. These results are lower thanfor the other elements, where respondentsindicating a structured approach are closerto 2/3.VIEWPOINT ESPRESSO7

WHAT DO WE THINK?Respondents were asked to indicate to whatdegree they have applied or not the differentelements for determining training needs on ascale from 1 to 4: where 1 is not applied, 2 issomewhat applied, 3 is structurally applied and4 is way of life. When commenting on the results,we have interpreted the answers structurallyapplied and way of life as having a structuredapproach.When it comes to the element “Requirementsfor refresher training” where the “Not applied”is the highest, we believe that this is an elementthat should not to be underestimated. Certaintypes of competence require reminders toassure the right level or even training in smallerchanges/amendments in a particular area.For companies with a certified occupationalhealth and safety management system, we seea tendency of slightly higher scores in applyingall elements and using a structured approach.Individual performance assessment (employeeappraisal) and Company specific trainingobjectives/requirements score particularly high.Many countries have labor legislation that setsrequirements for working conditions, worker’sparticipation and involvement. As a result,many companies have implemented periodicalemployee dialogues and evaluations throughappraisal systems where training needs areidentified, as well.The more we come down to legislation at theindividual level, the stronger we can expect thattraining is applied and hence mechanisms fordetermining training needs. In some countries,individual assessment is a step incorporatedinto the legislation. However, not everythingcan be attributed to legislation for occupationalhealth and safety. Companies also set their ownrequirements and standards to reduce risks forpersonnel where training is a crucial element.This could for example be mandatory trainingfor use of protective equipment, training asa prerequisite to enter production areas tounderstand risks, etc.It is interesting to see the relatively high scorefor Company strategic direction, policies andobjectives across the standards. This is clearly inline with the intentions of the standards, wheretraining and competence shall be a support forreaching the company’s intended outcomes.VIEWPOINT ESPRESSO8

1 Not at all2 Somewhat delivered3 Mostly delivered4 Fully deliveredQUESTION 3TO WHAT EXTENT HAVE THE IDENTIFIEDTRAINING NEEDS FOR 2016 BEENDELIVERED ACCORDING PLAN?OVERALL RESULTSRESPONDENTS 982PERCENTAGESISO 9001ISO 14001ISO 450011.8%Not at all1.2%1.8%27.6%Somewhat delivered32.3%21.151.1%Mostly delivered50.3%64.2%17.7%Fully delivered15.6%12.8%68.8%Sum of Mostly delivered & fully delivered65.9%77.0%WHAT ARE THEY SAYING? The combined scores of mostly delivered andfully delivered range from 65.9% to 77% acrossstandards (77% occupational health and safety,68.8% for quality and 65.9% for environment).The results show indications that trainingplanned in 2016 to a large extent has beendelivered as planned.WHAT DO WE THINK? Respondents were asked to indicate to what extentthe ide