The Difference Between Activity and Competence

Learning activity is relatively easy to measure. Most organisations can readily demonstrate training attendance, course completion, webinar participation, CPD hours and learning records. These measures provide useful information, but they primarily demonstrate what people have done rather than what they are capable of doing.

Competence, however, is different. Competence concerns the ability to apply knowledge, skills and professional judgement effectively in practice. This distinction sits at the centre of many current discussions around continuing competence. The question is shifting from “What learning has taken place?” to “What evidence exists that competence is being maintained and developed?”

Why attendance is not enough

Attendance at learning activities is crucial – professional development requires investment in learning and ongoing improvement. The difficulty arises when attendance becomes the primary measure of competence. Participation alone cannot demonstrate effective application of learning, improved performance, professional judgement, behavioural change, nor capability development.

Consider the following scenario: a solicitor may complete a programme on client communication and the learning record confirms attendance. However, what it does not automatically demonstrate is whether client communication has improved in practice. This therefore is where competence evidence becomes important.

Understanding competence evidence

Competence evidence is information that provides reasonable assurance that an individual is maintaining and developing professional capability. Unlike formal training records, competence evidence is often generated through normal professional activities.

Examples may include:

• supervision discussions
• reflective practice records
• development plans
• observed performance
• quality reviews
• file audits
• client feedback
• work outputs
• mentoring discussions

Collectively, these create a reliable record of competence.

A practical competence evidence framework

Firms often benefit from considering competence evidence across four areas.

1. Learning evidence

Evidence that development activities have taken place.

Examples include:

• Training attendance
• Course completion
• Professional reading

2. Reflective evidence

Evidence that learning and experience have been considered critically.

Examples include:

• Reflective records
• Learning reviews
• Competence discussions

3. Performance evidence

Evidence that capability is being applied effectively.

Examples include:

• Supervision feedback
• File reviews
• Observed practice

4. Development evidence

Evidence that competence needs are being addressed over time.

Examples include:

• Development plans
• Coaching activities
• Progress reviews

Together, these provide a more rounded picture of competence than learning records alone.

Building reasonable assurance

Competence can never be measured with complete certainty. Reasonable assurance exists when firms can demonstrate that:

• competence expectations are clear

• development needs are identified

• support mechanisms are available

• competence is reviewed regularly

• evidence is collected appropriately

This approach is both practical and proportionate.

What Firms Should Be Asking

As competence governance develops, useful questions include:

• What evidence exists beyond training records?
• How is professional performance evaluated?
• How are competence discussions documented?
• What role does supervision play in competence assurance?
• Could the organisation demonstrate how competence is maintained?

The answers often reveal whether competence is being evidenced or merely assumed.

Conclusion

The future of continuing competence is likely to depend less on recording learning activity and more on demonstrating competence itself. This does not diminish the importance of training. Rather, it places training within a broader framework that includes reflection, performance, supervision and development. For firms, the opportunity is to move beyond measuring participation and begin building a more complete picture of professional capability. In doing so, competence becomes something that can be evidenced, supported and governed rather than simply assumed.

Next Steps

If your firm is reviewing competence arrangements, consider what evidence currently exists beyond learning records. You may already possess much of the information needed to demonstrate competence more effectively than you realise.