Inclusión educativa:

In the present study, the term meta-, trans-, and super-competencies will be used interchangeably to refer to meta-competencies. Pedler, Burgoyne and Boydell (1994:26-34)

research indicated that there were three levels of competencies and qualities an effective manager should possess, namely:

• Basic knowledge and information which include command of basic facts, relevant professional understanding.

• Skills and attribute sensitivity to events, judgement making, social skills, emotional intelligence, pro-activity.

• Meta-Competencies creativity, mental agility, balanced learning, self-knowledge.

The components of the three levels of competencies (highlighted in bold) form the basis of the theoretical framework of this study. Meta-competencies are therefore ‘overarching’ competencies that are applicable to a wide range of work settings and which smooth the progress of adaptation and flexibility on the part of the organisation (Cheng, Dainty & Moore, 2005:381). Learning, adapting, anticipating, and creating change are usually classified as meta-competencies (Grzeda, 2005:532). Boak and Coolican (2001:212-220) focussed on “meta-competencies” which they stated ‘’refer to abilities that underpin or allow for the development of competencies, as well as characteristics that individuals will need in addition to competencies such as motivation and key cognitive abilities”.

Brown and McCartney (1995:43-53) defined meta-competencies as the “advanced level skills and abilities upon which competencies are based and which are associated with being able to learn, adapt, anticipate, and create rather than being able to demonstrate that one has the ability to do”. Abilities to develop a proposal, gather data, make a logical argument, apply knowledge, and communicate ideas are also associated with meta-competencies (Brown & McCartney, 1995:43-53). Boyatzis (2007:6) stated that meta-competencies are “those abilities, skills, and capacities which exist above and beyond any competency which an individual may develop, guiding and sustaining them, and from which they originate”. Toolsema (2003:47) stated that meta-competencies make the gaining of new competencies possible and make present competencies more adaptive and efficient. Cheetham and Chivers (1996:28) described meta-competencies as an ability to manage ability.

Meta-competencies therefore represent cognitive processes of a higher order, such as creativity and analysis (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:28-30). Professional practitioners and graduates therefore must develop meta-competencies that as Martin and Pope (2008; 82) suggests “will help them develop the just-in-time competencies they will need in order to adapt to ongoing, short-term challenges and the personal competencies that will help them

endure and lead through multiple waves of change”. Personal capabilities that seem like sound judgment, instinctive thinking, and expertise have a mutual relationship that exceeds the concept of competency; these baseline managerial qualities are meta-competencies (Martin & Pope, 2008:83). That is to say, the capacity to use different competencies in the context of certain behaviours can be described as a meta-competency (Ruth, 2006:211). In simpler terms, competencies may be seen as learning to learn, flexible transfer and application of knowledge and skills across contexts or thinking outside the box (Fleming, Martin, Hughes & Zinn, 2008:190). Meta-competencies are placed higher than the other competencies; in other words a meta-competency can only be developed when the other competencies are existing (Boyatzis, 2007:6). Cheetham and Chivers (1998: 28-30) grouped meta-competencies with concepts of communication, vision, innovation, problem-solving strategies, learning styles, and mental agility together.

Meyer and Semark (1996:96-103) proposed four meta-competency clusters namely, managing cognitive complexity; ability to facilitate multiple levels of communication; abilities to generate new ideas; and openness to diversity. The first cluster consists of

managing cognitive complexity in the same vein Boulding (1956:197-208) described in

general systems theory. Cognitive complexity runs along a range that runs from static structures, through open system self-maintaining structures, to the level of overarching transcendental systems. The second cluster involves facilitating multiple levels of

communication such as team member relationships (intra-team), inter-team exchanges across

functional lines, and relations with stakeholders in the external environment. The third meta- competency cluster involves abilities to generate new ideas and propose new strategies before the need is widely visible. The final cluster concerns openness to diversity which includes “new knowledge, concepts, values, and behavioural norms, both at a cognitive and affective level”.

Meta-competencies embody the cognitive power of experts and skilled practitioners needs to manoeuvre beyond existing competencies - to analyse, modify, and create competencies’ hence they occupy a higher level (Boyatzis, 2007:11). For the purposes of this study, the key components of meta-competencies by Cheetham and Chivers (1996:20-30) as illustrated in Figure 2.3 will be used to provide an overview of the concept meta-competencies. According to Cheetham and Chivers (1996:20-30), the core components of meta-competencies are knowledge/cognitive competence; functional competence; personal or behavioural

Figure 2.3: The key components of Meta-competency

(Source: Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:24) Tacit/practical (knowing-in-

action) i.e. linked to specific functional or personal competencies

Technical/theoretical (linked to underlying knowledge base) includes synthesis and transfer of knowledge Procedural how, what, who, when, etc.

Contextual, e.g. sector industry, organisation, profession, etc.

Occupation-specific (many profession-specific tasks) Organisation process e.g. planning, monitoring, implementing, delegating, evaluating, etc.

Cerebral, e.g. literacy, numeracy, diagnosis, IT numeracy, evaluating Psychomotor, e.g. manual dexterity, keyboard etc.

Personal e.g. adherence to law, social/moral sensitivity, religious adherence to persona moral code Professional, e.g. adherence to professional code(s), self-regulation, environmental sensitivity, ethics

Social/vocational (e.g. self- confidence, thinking on feet, calmness, control of emotions, interpersonal listening, stamina presentation etc.

Intraprofessional e.g. college- ality, sensitivity towards perers, conformity to professional norms

Professional competence outcomes – (macro / micro / partial) observed / perceived:

By self By others

Meta- Competencies

Communication, Self-development, Creativity, Analysis, Problem-solving

Knowledge/ cognitive competence Functional competence Personal or behavioural competence Values / ethical competence Reflection

Knowledge/Cognitive competencies, in Figure 2.3, include the acquisition of relevant work- related knowledge and the ability to convert this knowledge and utilise it effectively. Functional competencies are the ability to execute a wide array of job specific tasks successfully to produce particular results (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30). Functional competence strategies focus on tasks or functions that are executed within the job responsibility, instead of the personal characteristics of the person who has the job (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30; Le-Deist & Winterton, 2005:27-46). Individual or behavioural competencies comprise the ability to implement suitable discernible behaviours in work- related situations (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30). Personal (or behavioural) competence models in comparison to functional approaches focus on the personal attributes and behavioural skills that a person is obligated to bring when offered employment (Le-Deist & Winterton, 2005:27-46). These will incorporate characteristics such as ‘self-confidence, stamina - the capability of sustaining prolonged stressful effort (like endurance), attention to detail, output orientation and thinking on one’s feet, control of emotions, emotional intelligence, interpersonal listening, task centeredness, presentation, collegiality’’ (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30; Le-Deist & Winterton, 2005:27-46). An important aspect of personal or behaviour competence, namely emotional intelligence, will be discussed in the next section. Values/ethical competencies is the acquisition of personal and expert values, and the ability to formulate and make decisions in the work environment based on these competencies (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30).

As illustrated in Figure 2.3 a number of ‘meta-competencies’ overarch these four core components (knowledge/cognitive, functional, personal/behavioural, and values/ethical competence). These meta-competencies include communication, self-development, creativity, analysis and problem solving (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30). According to Boyatzis (2007:7-9), ‘meta-competencies either assist in developing other competencies (e.g. self- development) or are capable of enhancing or mediating competence in any or all of the component categories (e.g. creativity)’’. The same meta-competencies are generic and relevant to most occupations and transferable between different work situations, tasks and responsibilities.

Reflection as stated by Cheetham and Chivers (1996:20-30) is the ‘ability to learn through and within practice and occurs during an action or afterwards and is the basis of continuous improvement’’. Therefore self-perception of competence leads to (or should lead to)

perception of outcomes. Reflection may be done by skilled practitioners when they reflect on their performance against any of the core competencies (or probably against any of their constituent competencies), or against any of the meta-competencies, or certainly about his or her overall professional competence. Reflection may be based either on macro- or micro- outcomes (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30).

Reflection may also take place in the middle of an activity (i.e. “reflection-in-action”) (Cheetham & Chivers, 1996:20-30). This is incorporated in the model through the concept of partial outcomes, referred to before (i.e. reflection against partial outcomes equates to reflection-in-action). The main purpose of reflection is (or ought to be) to improve and develop professional competence. Therefore, as illustrated in Figure 2.3, the results of reflection are shown as having the potential to feed back into any of the core components and their various constituents, or into any of the meta-competencies, thus completing the cycle of continuous improvement.

The development of meta-competencies in preparing graduates for managerial positions provides a challenge for HEIs, as teaching graduates how to acquire higher order competencies, highlighted in Figure 2.3 is particularly challenging. In order to develop graduates to be able to be effective and successful managers HEIs should develop both competencies and meta-competencies. This can be done by focusing the syllabi on the outstanding features of meta-competencies, such as learning, knowledge and wisdom, ability to adapt, cognitive ability, emotional intelligence, anticipating events and being innovative as shown in Table 2.6.