Competence Development has been an issue since the 1970s. The study presented here builds on earlier research in over 800 organisations (Mulder, 2002). A pilot-study was conducted to gather the first data from selected EU-member states (Mulder & Bruin-Mosch, 2005). The present study is based on data from nearly 900 organisations in 13 member states. There are three main research questions in this study1. what competence instruments are being used by private, public and educational organisations within selected EU members states?2. what are the perceived effects of the use of these competence instruments in organisations? 3. what are the relationships between the perceived effects of the use of competence instruments and various factors, such as organizational size, economic sector, the orientation towards training and development, and experience organizations have with implementing the concept? The theoretical framework is based around literature on the learning organisation (Senge, 1990; Nyhan, 1998; Drejer, 2000), core competence (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990), competence development (Mulder, 2000; 2001; 2004; Mulder & Bruin-Mosch, 2005), professional development (Eraut, 1994), the competence concept (Norris, 1991; Ellström, 1997; Mansfield, 2004; Achtenhagen, 2005; Delamare le Deist & Winterton (2005) and competence-based vocational education (Mulder, er al, 2003; Biemans, et al, 2004; Weigel, Mulder & Collins, 2007; Mulder, Weigel & Collins, 2007).The survey method was selected as the basic strategy to accomplish this study. This study is based on the survey "Competence Development in Organisations" launched on the European Training Village (ETV) website of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) in 2005 and again in 2006. It is the follow-up to a study conducted by Mulder (2002a) in the Netherlands for the Foundation of Management Studies, The Hague. That study concentrated on large organisations in the public and private sector as they are the most advanced in this regard (Mulder 2002a). Therefore a similar technique was employed for this study with the questionnaire designed around the previous findings and experience.The total response group of over 1300 respondents was cleaned to include only those who used and understood the competence concept and competence instruments and were of the higher or middle management level in their organisations (n=421).It must be mentioned that the very nature of the response group does not provide for any reliable generalisations to be made. Participation was voluntary and based on the contact list from the ETV, primarily composed of public and educational organisations. Therefore there was little control over respondents or their experience with competence. As such, the validity of comparison is restricted because of the inability to standardise the response group. However, as a preliminary exploratory study, the survey population can still provide valuable information regarding the state of competence development within the organisations studied. Research Strategy The survey method was selected as the basic strategy to accomplish this study. This study is based on the survey "Competence Development in Organisations" launched on the European Training Village (ETV) website of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) in 2005 and again in 2006. It is the follow-up to a study conducted by Mulder (2001) in the Netherlands for the Foundation of Management Studies, The Hague. That study concentrated on large organisations in the public and private sector as they are the most advanced in this regard (Mulder 2001). Therefore a similar technique was employed for this study with the questionnaire designed around the previous findings and experience.Data Sources The survey was circulated online to all ETV contacts, specifically geared towards respondents in organisations with the aim of obtaining an overview of the current status regarding competence development within organisations in the EU. In total the questionnaire consisted of 28 questions with 103 items covering the following areaso Background organisational information (Question 1-6) o Extent of competence development within each organisation (Question 7-23 and 28) o Perceived effects of competence development on organisational (Question 24), HRM (Question 25), and training and learning functions (Question 26) o General views of the competence concept (Question 27) Responses to the questions on perceived effects of competence development were given using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1=no, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=considerable, 5=strong). Responses to the questions on general views were also given using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1=strongly disagree, 2=agree, 3=neither agree nor disagree, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree). The survey was distributed in four language versions: English, French, Dutch, and German; all translated by professional translators. The first survey from 2005 yielded 643 responses and the second round, in 2006, yielded 704 (total n=1347). After data cleaning and selection the final data set comprised 421 respondents across 13 countries. These 421 respondents were both higher or middle managers in their organisations and who used instruments for competence development. The initial data cleansing process firstly looked at the geographical distribution of respondents. Since the study was aimed at the European Union, the response group was quite varied and the number of respondents per country varied between one and sixty; it was decided to select those EU member states of which there were 20 respondents or more. Subsequently all those remaining respondents who answered either "no"or "do not know" to the question "does your organisation work with instruments for competence development?" were excluded from the analysis. Finally from the remaining 1,022 respondents only the higher and middle managers were included for the final analysis resulting in a final response group of 421 people.It must be mentioned that the very nature of the response group does not provide for any reliable generalisations to be made. Participation was voluntary and based on the contact list from the ETV, primarily composed of public and educational organisations. Therefore there was little control over respondents or their experience with competence. As such, the validity of comparison is restricted because of the inability to standardise the response group. However, as a preliminary exploratory study, the survey population can still provide valuable information regarding the state of competence development within the organisations studied. Data Analysis Both descriptive, correlation, and parametric and non-parametric significance tests were used to analyse the data. Descriptive techniques were used to analyse the data first. Next, the reliability of the items in the clusters of questions was tested with Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient. Finally Chi-square Tests, Kendall's Tau, and Mann- Whitney Tests were performed to explore the relationships between the different variables. The use of competence instruments varies considerably. On average, organisations reported positive experiences with using competence instruments and the added value of that. There are significant but low correlations between the use of competence instruments and the experience organisations have with implementing these instruments. Further data point at the strong relationship between training investment in general and the use of competence instruments.In general, the results suggest that there are two approaches regarding the use of competence instruments: 1. for organizational development (testing, selection and placement), and 2. employee development (formative assessment, personal development plans, competence development activities, portfolios for career development). These approaches will be elaborated in the paper. Educational/Scientific Purpose of Study It must be stated that the meaning of the concept is not agreed upon, there are many definitions. The costs of competence development can be high and it requires an open culture and cooperation. There is the danger that competency profiles are not always reliable and valid and can lead to bureaucracy. However at the same time experiences are showing the benefits of a competence mindset and that generally positive effects are perceived as a result of working with competence instruments.Since there is so much interest in the use of competence instruments, it is good to further evaluate their implementation, and to look into their real results. The first research question seeks to establish the types of organisations adopting the competence concept and, in particular, the instruments used.To investigate instrument use respondents were asked which of the 14 listed competence instruments they used. The three most used instruments were: 1. defining the core competence of the organisation; 2. arranging facilities for learning; 3. use of personal development plans. The lowest used instrument was using competence assessment in remuneration. It is interesting to note at this stage that the most popular competence instruments are primarily associated with employee development and the Human Resource function which must facilitate co-ordinate and support rather than simply supply training and development (Sambrook & Stewart, 1999; Poell, Pluijmen & Van der Krogt, 2003).Across all sectors defining the core competency of the organisation, arranging facilities for learning, and developing competence profiles of job families were popular instruments. Again these are the instruments leaning more towards an employee development approach rather than an organisational development approach. For public and education sectors the two most used instruments were "define the core competency of the organisation" and "arrange facilities for learning" respectively. The third most used instruments differed for all three sectors; for the pubic sector it was distinguish competence centres; for the education sector it was use of personal development plans; for the other/private sector it was use of personal development plans. A new collective instrument variable was formulated which indicates that respondents, on average, use competence instruments to a moderate or considerable extent although there is a great deal of variation in this (M= 19.29, sd= 3.28). Then, the differences between various factors of interest (organisational size, economic sector, orientation towards training and development, and experience with the competence concept) and this new key variable were assessed. Significant differences were found between competence instruments and: stage of implementation (MW = 1.0; Z= -1.73; Sig. = 0.80) and level of promotion of employee training and development (X2 = 46.72; df. = 14; Sig. = 0.00). Therefore the use of instruments for competence development tends to be greatest at a later stage of implementation and where there is a greater level of promotion of employee training and development. The second question addresses the potential added value that respondents perceive in using competence instruments. To investigate the organisational effects respondents were asked to rate the extent to which working with competence instruments has had an effect on eleven organisational factors, fourteen HRM factors, and twelve training and development factors on a five point scale (1=no; 2=weak; 3=moderate; 4=considerable; 5=strong).The top three organisational effects with a mean of 3.5 or more are: improvement of quality management, improvement of customer orientation, and performance improvement of the organisation. The top HRM effects with a mean of 3.5 or more are: improving performance of employees, improving motivation of employees, and offering better development opportunities. The top three training and development factors with a mean of 3.5 or more are: improved added value of training and development, stimulating learning and development, and better basis for selection of training activities. Collective organisation, HRM, and Training and development variables were formulated. The differences between various factors of interest (organisational size, economic sector, orientation towards training and development, and experience with the competence concept) and these three new key variable were assessed The results showed significant differences between level of training and development and perceived organisational effects (X2 = 85.01; df. = 39; Sig. = 0.00); perceived HRM effects (X2 = 70.81; df. = 51; Sig. = 0.035); and perceived training and development effects (X2 = 93.88; df. = 44; Sig. = 0.00). No significant differences were found between the three effects variables and organisational size, business sector, and stage of implementation of competence development. References Achtenhagen, F. (2005). Competence and their development: cognition, motivation, meta-cognition, in: W.J. Nijhof & L. F. M. Nieuwenhuis (Eds.) The Learning Potential of the Workplace (Twente, University of Twente). Ambrosini, V. & C. Bowman (2005) Reducing Causal Ambiguity to Facilitate Strategic Learning, Management Learning, 36, 4: 493-512. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Qualifikations-Entwicklungs-Management (QUEM) (2000). Kompetenzen entwicklen - Veränderungen gestalten. Münster/New York: Waxmann. Arguelles, A & A. Gonczi (Eds) (2000). Competency Based Education and Training: a world perspective. Mexico: Conalep. Barney, J.(1991) Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management, 17: 99-12. Barney, J. (2001) Resource Based Theories of Competitive Advantage: A Ten-Year Retrospective on the Resource-Based View, Journal of Management, 27: 643-650. Bernthal, P.R., K. Colteryahn, P. Davis, J. Naughton, W.J. Rothwell & R. Wellins (2004). ASTD 2004 Competency Study, Mapping the Future. New Workplace Learning and Performance Competencies. Alexandria: ASTD Press. Biemans, H., L. Nieuwenhuis, R. Poell, M. Mulder & R. Wesselink (2004). Competence-based VET in The Netherlands: backgrounds and pitfalls. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 56, 4, 523-538. Briscoe, J.P. & D.T. Hall (1999) Grooming and Picking Leaders Using Competency Frameworks: Do They Work? An Alternative Approach and New Guidelines for Practice, Organisational Dynamics, 26, 2, Autumn: 37-51. Buyers, D., K. Wouters & K. Dewettinck (2001) Future Challenges for Human Resource Development Professionals in European Learning-Oriented Organisations, Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, 9: 442-453. Cappelli, P. & A. Crocker-Hefter (1996) Distinctive Human Resources are Firms' Core Competencies, Organisational Dynamics, 24, 3, Winter: 7-21. Merx-Chermin, M. & W.J. Nijhof (2004) Factors Influencing Knowledge Creation and Innovation in an Organisation, Journal of European Industrial Training, 29, 2: 135-147. Chiesa, V., E. Giglioli & R. Manzini (1999). R&D Corporate Planning: Selecting the Core Technological Competencies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11, 2, 255-279. Clarke, N. (2004) HRD and the Challenges of Assessing Learning in the Workplace, International Journal of Training and Development, 8, 2: 140-156. Darlington, R.B. (2006) Factor Analysis, Cornell University [online].Available from: http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu.Dalington/factor.htm [28-03-2006]. Debenham, M.G.S. (2004) The Value of Organisational Culture and the Role of Competencies [online]. Available from: http://www.qmconf.com/Docs/178.pdf [12-12-2006]. Delamare le Deist, F. & Winterton, J (2005) What is Competence? Human Resource Development International, 8, 1: 27-46. Drejer, A. (2000). Organisational Learning and Competence Development, The Learning Organisation, 7, 4, 206-220. Edwards, R. & K. Nicoll (2006) Expertise, Competence and Reflection in the Rhetoric of Professional Development, British Educational Research Journal, 32, 1, February: 115-131. Ellström, P.E. (1997.) The many meanings of occupational competence and qualification, Journal of European Industrial Training, 21, 6/7, 266-273. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London/Washington, D.C.: The Falmer Press. Garavan, T., M. Morley, P. Gunnigle & D. McGuire (2002) Human Resource Development and Workplace Learning: Emerging Theoretical Perspectives and Organisational Practices, Journal of European Industrial Training, 26, 2, 3, 4: 60-71. Gibbert, M. (2006a) Generalizing About Uniqueness: An Essay on an Apparent Paradox in the Resource-Based View, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 2, June: 124-134. Gibbert, M. (2006b) Munchausen, Black Swans, and the RBV: Response to Levitas and Ndofor, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 2, June: 145-151. Ginkel van, K., M. Mulder & W.J. Nijhof (1997) Role Profiles of HRD Practitioners in the Netherlands, International Journal of Training and Development, 1, 1: 22-33. Grant, G., P. Elbow, T. Ewens, Z. Gamson, W. Kohli, W. Neumann, V. Olesen & D. Riesman (1979). On Competence. A Critical Analysis of Competence-Based Reforms in Higher Education. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass. Gauld, D & P. Miller (2004) The Qualifications and Competencies held by Effective Workplace Trainers, Journal of European Industrial Training, 28, 1: 8-22. Hassan, A., J. Hashim & A.Z.H. Ismail (2006) Human Resource Development Practices as Determinant of HRD Climate and Quaity Orientation, Journal of European Industrial Training, 30, 1: 4-18. Heffernan, M.M. & P.C. Flood (2000) An Exploration of the Relationships between the Adoption of Managerial Competencies, Organisational Characteristics, Human Resource Sophistication and Performance in Irish Organisations, Journal of European Industrial Training, 24, 2, 3, 4: 128-136. Hoffmann, T. (1999) The Meanings of Competency, Journal of European Industrial Training, 23, 6: 275-285. Lans, T., R. Wesselink, H.J.A. Biemans & M. Mulder (2004). Work-related lifelong learning for entrepreneurs in the agri-food sector. International Journal of Training and Development, 8, 1, 73 - 89. Lewis, M.A. (2003) Analysing Organisational Competence: Implications for the Management of Operations, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23, 7: 731-756. Lynskey, M.J. (1999). The Transfer of Resources and competencies for Developing Technological Capabilities - The Case of Fujitsu-ICL. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11, 2, 317-336. Mackay, P (1997) Competencies and Competence: What are they and what part do they play? [online]. Wellington, Management Development Centre. Available from: http://www.mdcentre.govt.nz/faqs/faq003.htm [12-12-2006]. Matlay, H & M. Addis (2002) Competence-Based Training, Vocational Qualifications and Learning Targets: Some Lessons for the Learning and Skills Council, Education and Training, 44, 6: 250-260. Mansfield, B. (2004). Competence in Transition, Journal of European Industrial Training, 28, 2/3/4, 296-309. Markowitsch, J., I. Kollinger, J. Warmerdam, H. Moerel, J. Konrad, C. Burell & D. Guile (2001) Competence and Human Resource Development in Multinational Companies in Three European Union Member States: A Comparative Analysis between Austria, the Netherlands and the U.K. [online]. Thessaloniki, CEDEFOP. Available from: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/0d/ef/e0.pdf [09-10-2006]. Mulder, M. (2000). Creating Competence: Perspectives and Practices in Organizations. Paper presented at AERA, New Orleans. Enschede: University of Twente. Faculty of Eductional Science and Technology. Mulder, M. (2001). Competence Development - Some Background Thoughts. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 7, 4, 147-159. ISSN 1389-224X. Mulder, M. (2002). Competentieontwikkeling in organisaties. Perspectieven en praktijk. 's-Gravenhage: Elsevier Bedrijfs Informatie. Mulder, M. (2004). Education, competence and performance. On training and development in the agri-foodcomplex. Inaugural address. Wageningen: Wageningen Universiteit. www.ecs.wur.nl. Mulder, M., R. Wesselink, H. Biemans, L. Nieuwenhuis & R. Poell (Red.) (2003). Competentiegericht beroepsonderwijs. Gediplomeerd, maar ook bekwaam? Houten: Wolters-Noordhoff. Mulder, M. & C. Bruin-Mosch (2005). Competence development in organizations in EU member states, ECS Bulletin, 3, 1, 6-10 (www.ecs.wur.nl)Mulder, M., T. Weigel, & K. Colllins (2007). A critical analysis of the use of the competence concept in the development of vocational education and training in selected countries. Journal of Vocational Education and Training (JVET) (In Press). Murray, P. (2003) Organisational Learning, Competencies, and Firm Performance: Empirical Observations, The Learning Organisation, 10, 5: 305-316. Murray, P. & K. Donegan (2003) Empirical Linkages Between Firm Competencies and Organisational Learning, The Learning Organisation, 10, 1: 51-62. Nijhof, W.J. & de Rijk, R.N. (1997) Roles, Competences and Outputs of HRD Practitioners - A Comparative Study in Four European Countries, Journal of European Industrial Training, 21, 6/7: 247-255. Norris, N. (1991). The trouble with competence, Cambridge Journal of Education, 21, 3, 331- 341. Nybø, G. (2004). Personnel development for dissolving jobs. Towards a competency-based approach? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 3, 549-564. Nyhan, B (1998). Competence Development as a Key Organisational Strategy-experiences of European companies, Industrial and Commercial Training, 30, 7: 267-73. Nyhan, B., M. Tomassini, M. Kelleher & R. Poell (2004) European Perspectives on the Learning Organisation, Journal of European Industrial Training, 28, 1: 67-92. O'Brien, G. & J.E. Thompson (1999) The Development of Irish HRD Professionals in Comparison with European Professionals: Roles, Outputs and Competencies, International Journal of Training and Development, 3, 4: 250-268. Onyeiwu, S. (2003). Some Determinants of Core Competencies: Evidence from a Binary-Logit Analysis. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15, 1, 43-63. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L. & Hakkarainen, K. (2004) Models of Innovative Knowledge Communities and Three Metaphors of Learning, Review of Educational Research, Winter, 74, 4: 557-576. Pate, J., G. Martin & M. Robertson (2003) Accrediting Competencies: A Case of Scottish Vocational Qualifications, Journal of European Industrial Training, 27, 2, 3, 4: 169-176. Poell, R., R. Pluijmen & F.J. van der Krogt (2003) Strategies of HRD Professionals in Organising Learning Programmes: A Qualitative Study Among 20 Dutch HRD Professionals, Journal of European Industrial Training, 27, 2, 3, 4: 125-136. Prahalad, C.K. & G. Hamel (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 79-91. Resnick, L.B. (1987) The 1987 Presidential Address Learning In School and Out, Educational Researcher, 16, 9, December: 13-20. Rychen, D.S. & L.H. Salganik (Eds) (2001). Defining and Selecting Key Competencies. Seattle/Toronto/Bern/Göttingen: Hogrefe & Huber. Rychen, D.S. & L.H. Salganik (Eds) (2003). Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society. Cambridge/Göttingen: Hogrefe & Huber. Sambrook, S. & J. Stewart (1999) "Influencing Factors on Lifelong Learning and HRD Practices: Comparison of Seven European Countries", In European Conference on Educational Research, 22-25 September 1999, Lahti, Finland: pp.305-313. Senge, P.M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday. Smith, A., J. Whittaker, J.L. Clark & G. Boocock (1999) Competence Based Management Development Provision to SMEs and the Provider's Perspective, The Journal of Management Development, 18, 6: 557-572. Sundberg, L. (2001) A Holistic Approach to Competence Development, Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 18: 103-114. Tjepkema, S., J. Stewart, S. Sambrook, M. Mulder, H. ter Horst & J. Scheerens (Eds.) (2002). HRD and Learning Organisations in Europe. London: Routledge. Twente University (2005) Competence Instrument for the Dutch Universities Manual [online]. Available from: http://w3.tue.nl/fileadmin/dpo/TU_e_arbeidsvoorwaarden/engelstalig/handleiding_Eng.pdf [12-12-2006]. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2002). Defining and Assessing Learning: Exploring Competency-Based Initiatives. NCES 2002-159, prepared by E.A. Jones & R.A. Voorhees, with Karen Paulson, for the Council of the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative Working Group on Competency-Based Initiatives. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Weigel, T., M. Mulder & K. Collins (2007). A review of use of the competence concept in the development of vocational education and training in selected countries. Journal of Vocational Education and Training (JVET) (In Press). Wesselink, R., E. van den Elsen, H.J.A. Biemans & M. Mulder (2005). Conceptual framework for competence-based education. Paper presented at the ECER 2005 conference, Dublin, Ireland. Wesselink, R., M. Mulder, E. R. van den Elsen & H.J.A. Biemans (2006). Developing competence-based VET in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AERA, 2006, San Francisco, USA. Zaugg, R.J. & N. Thom (2003). Excellence through implicit competencies: Human resource management - organisational development - knowledge creation. Journal of Change Management, 3, 3, 199-211. Zook Jr., A.M.(2006) Military Competency-Based Human Capital Management: A Step Toward the Future [online]. Pennsylvania, U.S. Army War College. Available from: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil553.pdf [12-12-2006].European and International management or organisational journals