Competence management in 
starts from the role rather than the course catalogue. Each role carries a defined set of requirements, and each person is measured against the requirements of the role they are filling.
Defining requirements at role level makes competence comparable across teams and sites. A position either has the competencies attached to it or it does not, and the same definition applies wherever that position exists.
It also makes gaps specific. Rather than a general statement that a team is under-trained, you get a named person, a named requirement and a date.
Competence is recorded as an assessed outcome with an assessor, a date and supporting evidence — not inferred from attendance at a session. Where an assessment carries an expiry or a reassessment interval, that date lives on the record and drives forward-looking reporting.
Evidence attached to the assessment means the record can answer a later question without anyone reconstructing it: what was assessed, against what standard, by whom, and when.
A competence system that only produces reports changes little. Here, a lapsed or missing competency changes a person's operational availability and therefore the readiness of the team relying on them, which is where the consequence is felt.
That link also protects planning. When a competency is about to expire, the planner sees the position it will affect, not just a row in a training matrix.
A completed course, a logged CPD hour and an assessed competency are three different records. keeps them separate so capability is never inferred from activity alone.
holds the requirements, assessments and evidence your organisation defines. It does not certify, accredit or validate any standard.
Bring your questions about people, assets and response capability. We will show how a connected view could work across your sites and teams.