Critical aspects for assessment and evidence required to demonstrate competency in this unit | Assessors should ensure that candidates can: work effectively with team members who may have diverse work styles, cultures and perspectives promote team cohesion and effectiveness measure and improve team and individual performance monitor team and individual performance.
|
Context of and specific resources for assessment | This unit of competency is to be assessed in the workplace or simulated workplace environment. Competency in this unit should be assessed over a sufficient period of time to enable the candidate to initiate and implement improvements. This unit of competency may be assessed with: MSL916003A Supervise laboratory operations in work/functional area. Resources may include: relevant OHS, equal opportunity, licensing, registration policies and procedures workplace procedures and standard operating procedures (SOPs) industrial awards and enterprise agreements.
|
Method of assessment | The following assessment methods are suggested: review of record systems and documentation of team outputs and performance feedback from team members about team processes feedback from managers about team performance feedback from customers serviced by the team observation of the candidate during team meetings and contact with individual team members interview questions with the candidate to assess underpinning knowledge of team dynamics, leadership and management. In all cases, practical assessment should be supported by questions to assess underpinning knowledge and those aspects of competency which are difficult to assess directly. Where applicable, reasonable adjustment must be made to work environments and training situations to accommodate ethnicity, age, gender, demographics and disability. Access must be provided to appropriate learning and/or assessment support when required. The language, literacy and numeracy demands of assessment should not be greater than those required to undertake the unit of competency in a work like environment.
|
This competency in practice | Industry representatives have provided the case studies below to illustrate the practical application of this unit of competency and to show its relevance in a workplace setting. Construction materials testing A materials testing laboratory introduced a mentoring system as part of its laboratory work team's program. Laboratory assistants and technicians were placed in work teams that included technical specialists. This strategy was designed to enable less experienced team members to develop advanced technical skills on the job. The team leader acted as the mentor, monitored the competency of the less experienced team members and organised work tasks to further develop their skills. For example, as part of a quality improvement project, the team was asked to propose a way of minimising waste disposal. After discussing a number of alternatives, the team narrowed down the choice to one feasible suggestion, and then investigated the cost and environmental implications with the guidance of the team leader. Biomedical Two technical officers working in the haematology section of a large hospital laboratory explained to their supervisor that they would like to gain experience of making blood films, having learned the basic skills during their initial training. The supervisor agreed, but first assessed their competency against enterprise standards and recognised that they could benefit from some on-the-job training. The supervisor arranged for them to be coached by a more experienced team member. Some time later, they were assessed as competent and able to regularly perform the task. Food processing The new laboratory supervisor of a food processing company was keen to develop the professionalism of the laboratory team. The supervisor wanted to enhance the team's level of cooperation, participation in the ongoing development of the quality management system and willingness to suggest refinements to the food analyses that they performed. Neither the supervisor nor the team of technicians believed they had the time to devote to in-house professional development exercises. In any event, the technicians were dubious about the effectiveness of these activities. Instead, the supervisor offered to meet the costs of the technicians joining a professional society of their choice, provided that it was closely related to the work performed in the laboratory. Most of the staff accepted this offer. Over the next few months, a significant improvement in the enthusiasm of the staff and the quality of their work occurred. The supervisor attributed this to an increased sense of esteem for their profession, the forging of links with the laboratory staff of other companies and the opportunity to discuss their work within a wider circle of peers. Some technicians made the time to visit other laboratories, where they were able to assess new work practices and the merits of instrumentation not used in their own workplace. Overall, the supervisor found that the benefits to the operation of the laboratory team greatly outweighed the modest financial cost involved.
|