15
th
International Congress on Archives
Hoy
www.wien2004.ica.org
9
organisations, such competencies may be too generic.
For example, following the issue of AS ISO
15489-2002 Records Management, the IT 46/SC11 Committee on Records Management proposed that
a set of competencies be developed. This was rejected on the basis that it would be too broad to have
meaning and difficult to take account of different cultural or community perspectives.
3. What are some new factors in the pipeline with competencies and capabilities and archival
education in general?
One of the recommendations of the 2003 Australian Senate Committee on development of skills in the
Australian workforce articulated a new direction for competency standards or training packages that
seems to reflect a more humanist, developmental approach, and thus closer to the concept of
capabilities:
Training packages [should] address the full range of concerns about their design and
implementation, including: the need for greater focus on the development of underpinning
knowledge, critical thinking and generic skills.
In contrast to the highly structured, very comprehensive competency standards framework, with very
detailed descriptions and performance criteria, a number of public sector jurisdictions (Australia, New
Zealand, United Kingdom and Canada) are developing sets of capabilities that do not focus on defined
knowledge to perform a particular job that can be measured.
The key difference between capabilities
and competency standards is that capabilities are developmental, future orientated in nature and seek to
extend knowledge and thinking in a values-based environment, rather than seeking to reinforce current
knowledge and practice. Dearstyne's belief in the need for leadership in electronic archives and records
areas reflects this concept of capability:
While retaining a strong sense of their obligations to history and posterity, leaders of programs
in the electronic records and archives arenas need to exemplify the traits of the future-
orientated dynamic leaders in other fields.
Questions have been raised about the ability of archivists and records managers to achieve this
dynamism. A survey on the temperament of archivists in Australia sought to answer these questions.
The results showed that the temperament of archivists in Australia is not an impediment to operating in
a strategic environment, rather their traits show they can provide leadership and take their place in the
strategic decision making circles of their employers.
Globalisation and enabling technology offer more opportunities for archival institutions, professional
associations and educators to develop partnerships with each other and with other networks, to learn
from each other and tap into resources that can be shared.
It is critical that archives and records
professionals continually look outward:
47
Field p. 168.
48
J Caldwell, member of IT46/SC11, personal communication, May 2004.
49
Senate, Bridging the Skills Divide, p. 118.
50
Australian Public Service Commission (APSC), Public Service Leadership: Emerging Issues, Commonwealth of
Australia, Canberra, 2004, p. 5.
51
B Dearstyne, `Riding the lightning: strategies for electronic records and archives programs', in B Dearstyne (ed),
Effective Approaches for Managing Electronic Records and Archives, The Scarecrow Press, Maryland, 2002, p.
147.
52
A Pederson, `Understanding ourselves and others: Australian archivists and temperament', Archives at Risk:
Accountability, Vulnerability and Credibility, Proceedings of the Australian Society of Archivists Conference,
Brisbane, 2931 July 1999, p. 61.
53
Pederson, p. 73.
54
Anderson & Cuddihly, p. 6; Council of Federal, State and Territory Archives (COFSTA), `COFSTA Meeting
Report' email to AusArchivist Listserve, 28 April 2004. As well as discussing education issues, this email reported
that from 1 July 2004 this organisation would change its name to Council of Australasian Archives and Records
