Real questions: Digital Skills

The fabulous Prof. Lizzie Valentine recently spoke at a Govis event (you can watch the video here) on what’s new with SFIA 9 (now in BETA), there were so many audience questions we ran out of time to answer them all. Many, as you will see below, are about up skilling generally rather than SFIA specifically. It took me a while to really think these through - they are great questions. The first two are not SFIA specific.

For those who are new to SFIA - it’s the Skills Framework for the Information Age - internationally developed (with NZ representatives) and recognised. Here in Aotearoa NZ we have selected it as the skills framework to align with as we mature our industry. Getting started with SFIA can be found here.

Questions and Answers

Question: How would you manage acknowledging that senior leaders are some of the least digitally capable? Because I would say that's the truth. 

My answer: This is a really prudent observation - one I have observed myself. It is however hard to influence from a lower position in an organisation and to date I have not observed any willingness to lift the capabilities of senior leaders via a central process or policy mechanism (across all of government). So my answer is from the perspective of what you can do to influence the senior leaders in your own organisation no matter your position in the organisation: 

• Champion using SFIA to ensure there is a common language and consistent mechanism for personal development in place

• Communicate the risks associated with making strategic digital decisions without suitable advisory structures in place. Equally the risk of inaction, missing out on opportunities and the cost of living with technology and technical debt. 

• Facilitate hands-on experiences for senior leaders, exposing them to digital concepts and helping them become more tech-savvy

• Champion the role of a digital advisory group to assist with decision making and as support for senior leaders, this group should include external advisors and a private sector voice (someone who is neutral with no vested interests)

Question: Do you think the competency level in Boards is increasing, or are they still leaving it to IT to make decisions?

My Answer: This is an excellent question. While there's undoubtedly increased awareness of technology's strategic importance, a digital divide persists between boards and IT departments.

The complexity of IT has created a unique challenge. The rapid evolution of technology, coupled with the prevalence of technical jargon, can often leave board members feeling ill-equipped to make informed decisions. This dynamic can lead to a power imbalance, with IT departments potentially wielding undue influence.

To bridge this gap, boards must invest in digital literacy training. Simultaneously, IT leaders should strive for clear and concise communication, avoiding overly technical language. Collaborative workshops and open dialogue can foster mutual understanding and shared decision-making.

Ultimately, a digitally literate board is better equipped to oversee IT strategy, mitigate risks, and drive innovation.

Question: Do you deliberately choose competencies over skills as a label? or can they be used interchangeably?

My Answer: First up to differentiate between the two, I like this definition of skills vs competencies. 

• Skills are specific, measurable, and observable actions or abilities. They are the "what" of a job.

• Competencies are broader constructs that describe the application of knowledge, skills, and attitudes in a work setting. They represent the "how" and "why" of a job.

While "competencies" and "skills" can be used interchangeably in some contexts, in the context of SFIA, we tend to deliberately use the term 'skills' rather than 'competencies.' This is because SFIA specifically defines and categorises technical and professional skills at various levels of competency.

Hope that makes sense. For more info I suggest you check the SFIA website.

Question: Any tips for educating my manager or HR team about SFIA - so it can be the basis of my professional development?

My Answer: To the latter first - yes, SFIA can definitely be the basis of your professional development and is already used by some companies and government agencies for this reason. I love that SFIA gives us a basis for measuring progression and relativity with peers.

To your manager. Talking about how using a framework like SFIA can cut through role complexity, project fluctuations, organisational structure will often resonate with a manager in digital tech. Themes like the ones discuss above on using SFIA as a mechanism to measure your progression in the role or for performance management markers. SFIA can identify areas of growth for instance. 

HR is harder in my experience. HR often like to have a one size fits all for all roles in an organisation. Helping them understand the complexities and challenges of digital technology roles and team structures may help with the discussion. They are likely to respond well to SFIA as a tool to aid them in understanding and defining roles and position descriptions. You could always propose a pilot with HR, suggest that you could be the test case. 

Question: How will the trend of AI impact the SFIA framework, besides cyber security and data protection?

My Answer: Not sure whether you are asking about SFIA 9 improvements to encompass AI skills? Or if you are asking whether AI will impact the way the framework is delivered and developed? or what the impact of AI will be on SFIA skill levels? 

Assuming it’s AI and SFIA 9. What you will see is AI Specific skills emerging, the start of AI governance and ethics coming into the framework, and integration with existing skills within the framework evolving them to incorporate AI.

To the latter - the impact of AI on skill levels - with the automation we anticipate as an industry it is likely roles traditionally associated with lower levels of the SFIA framework (eg: data entry or basic analysis) may be augmented or automated by AI solutions. This will result in our industry as a whole moving towards roles at mid or high SFIA levels over time. 

Question: Research teams are often in the same part of the organisation as IT and data warehousing. Does SFIA still work for qualitative researchers and evaluators?

My Answer: In short yes - SFIA can be adapted to accommodate qualitative researchers and evaluators. While traditionally designed for IT roles, its core principles of defining skills and competencies can be applied to other knowledge-intensive fields. This might take a bit more work of course to map out. 

For instance you could look at skills like - Research (RSCH) skill, coupled with Data Science (DATS) skill and Stakeholder Relationship Management (RLMT). 

Question: How do you manage/advise an organisation that says they want a Lvl 6-7 but do not have the maturity to support someone at that level?

My Answer: If the level 6-7 person is being brought into develop a maturity roadmap and lead this body of work then I would embrace their addition. 

However if they are not there specifically for this purpose then agree it could lead to them churning out once they realise the reality of your current state or it impacts their ability to be successful in their role. Some suggested tactics you could employ: 

• Suggest hiring at a lower SFIA level - such as level 4-5 - who can help with maturing practices as they grow with the organisation as well. 

• Recommend a maturity project, development of a roadmap, gradual building of mature practices in the organisation. 

• Recommend establishing regular reviews to enable the new person to have a voice in fostering practice improvements and ensuring the organisation stays on track. 

Question: You talked about L8 for Board Directors? Aren't boards typically there to guide on business governance and not necessarily need to be technical experts?

My Answer: If you read the definition of Governance (GOVN) level 7 it says: 

• Directs the definition, implementation, and monitoring of the governance framework to meet the organisation’s obligations under regulation, law, or contracts.

• Provides leadership, direction, and oversight for an organisation’s governance activities.

• Secures resources required to execute activities to achieve the organisation’s governance goals with effective transparency.

• Provides assurance to stakeholders that the organisation can deliver its obligations with an agreed balance of benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks.

None of this is technical at all. Using SFIA as a mechanism to assess whether a governor is at level 6 or level 7 would be a great first step for boards beyond the current practices that focus more on the professions individuals work in. 

Question: How are hybrid roles SFIA Capabilities best managed in JDs? Can't see an example on Aussie govt versions.

My Answer: Hybrid roles, which encompass a mix of skills and responsibilities from different SFIA categories, can be effectively managed in job descriptions (JDs) by following a structured approach. Although the Australian Public Service (APS) SFIA position description mapping may not explicitly show hybrid roles, the principles can be applied to create comprehensive and clear JDs.

To approach developing a hybrid JD I suggest you identify core and secondary SFIA skills - make yourself a table for each role and find the common ones - you will need to understand the breakdown of responsibilities for the role and map these to the SFIA skills, don’t worry about developing different scenarios here - it will help to identify common areas like collaboration, communication etc first.