Comparison of Interpersonal skill competency for Australian Graduate and Experienced engineer frameworks

Abstract

CONTEXT Engineers require excellent interpersonal skills and self-awareness (Crosthwaite et al., 2018; J. E. King, 2007; NAE 2004). Successful team-based practice and collaboration necessitate enhanced interpersonal skill competency, attributes, and attitudes (R. King, 2008; NAE 2004). Experience and formal education play a key role in development of these skills. Since the shift in the 1990s to outcomes-based attributes, Engineers Australia's (EA) accreditation frameworks have continued to drive standards of engineering programs and professional engineers in Australia (EA 2017a, 2018; Lloyd, 1991; Male et al., 2011). The Stage 1 (Graduate) and Stage 2 (Experienced Professional) frameworks establish enabling and practice competencies (EA 2003). How and where engineers are expected to develop the competencies required to progress from Stage 1 to Stage 2 is not clear. Understanding these expectations of interpersonal skills can assist engineers to better develop these skills. PURPOSE OR GOAL The research investigates expectations of interpersonal skill development in Australian engineers. It addresses two questions: What interpersonal skills, behaviours and attitudes are Australian engineers expected to develop according to EA Stage 1 and Stage 2 competency frameworks? What are the key differences and gaps between Stage 1 and Stage 2 Indicators of Attainment (IAs) in interpersonal skills and behaviours? APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODS We systematically compare EA Graduate and Experienced Professional Standards for the interpersonal competencies of communication, team membership and leadership, relationships, self-management, management and collaboration. Gaps and differences between the two frameworks will be identified and interpreted to understand the expected growth between the two career stages. ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES Significant focus has been placed on ensuring undergraduate students are work-ready, but these interpersonal attitudes, attributes and behaviours are largely expected to be developed in an industry setting. While some interpersonal skills and behaviour between the two Standards align, areas such as community engagement and providing feedback present a large learning gap. We conclude by offering recommendations about how and where engineers might develop the competencies required to progress from Stage 1 to 2. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARY Identifying areas of expected interpersonal skill growth informs approaches to engineering practitioners professional development and education at university and beyond. As the market for micro-credentials and short-courses expands, there is potential to target attitude, behaviour and skill competencies required of experienced engineers with Stage 1 and 2 competencies in mind.