Competency

The competence schemes are designed to test the ability of personnel, although some may argue, perhaps cynically, that they are used to keep personnel in current grades and to help keep the wage bill down.

The only way to progress is to search out the answers for yourself and not rely on others to fill in the gaps for you. It is so easy to copy the standard answers as they are available on all sclub vessels – if ever the training dept start to pay more attention than just lip service to clients they will realise the vast majority of answers are word perfect copies.
This is a very small industry and if you can complete the competency scheme as honestly as possible you will go far, copy and basically scam the system and obtain promotion under false pretenses it will be only a matter of time when you will be in a situation you will be ill equiped to deal with.

Good supervisors will be able to point you in the right direction but at the end of the day the completed competencies are (or should be) a fair reflection of your own abilities.

Best of luck.

You would have to write it up specifying the proven system. Something simple like a light circuit for example the obvious place to look is the console. Are lights enabled, is it switched on then the bulb has that blown that kind of thing.

The new system is the same sort of thing depending on what it is you could use the example of a new piece of tooling. Is it hosed up correctly is the oil supply set up correctly that kind of thing.

Most of the competence schemes have a few slightly ambiguous questions you just have to think a little laterally to work them out.

[Good supervisors will be able to point you in the right direction but at the end of the day the completed competencies are (or should be) a fair reflection of your own abilities.

I could not agree more which concerns me that guys are having to come onto this kind of site for advice. I wonder if the supervisors have been trained up on the competence scheme within there own company. ❓

your last comments & sentiment ROVPILOT….right-on.

Your thinking is correct.
Allow me to add in regards to proven systems – last work(s) completed incorrectly (tech error).
Component installation was with a part not identical to previous or required. Though unusual and rare, system never should have operated as was previously experienced due to erroneuously installed or set-up component (example: xsformers tappings).
While performing repairs inadvertantly something was altered that was not intended or even perhaps recognized.
Failure(s) of the crew(s) to pass on the idiosyncracies learned over time in regards to operation, set-up & maintenance of parts & systems.

new system ; operational set-up parameters #1 & initial start-up.

just a few ideas in-line with your thinking…good luck 😉

Obviously the competency you are working through is a little different to the one I went through.

When I completed the Subserv competencies everything was broken down into catogories so you did not really take it to the whole system as Lucas and yourself obviously have done.

The only thing I gained from my competence was a certificate nobody has ever asked to see, a huge bill for the assessment and a £20 postage bill for the file with all the various signature sheets and evidence to support the assessment.

Having seen a couple of the companies trainee assessments it seems a lot easier than that. Seems like you get signatures from supervisors and I could not see a demand for evidence proving you were competent.

Therefore if you were buddies with your supervisor you could get a lot signed off as most people see the schemes as a waist of space.

On the same note if you have a supervisor who you do not get on with it could hold up your entire career if he will not sign the competencies off.