I have yet to look at MUSKET closely, though I do hope to do so soon.

I’m not so sure about that. See MUSKET Project http://www.xcri.co.uk/current-projects-using-xcri.html. MUSKET has a very interesting semantic comparison tool.

My name is Kyle, pardon the keyword laden moniker.

Yes, I agree to some extent that it would be impossible to resolve all cases of that kind through any singular means. In reality, it would almost be simpler to just have the property lawyer try his hand at the real estate licensing exam and see if he passes than to have some sort of base case study comprising a portfolio blog that records an example lawyer cum real estate agent’s thoughts on the required skills for the field that he or she felt lacking in competence about once transferring between the two disciplines.

I just felt a discussion of competency across different industries AND structures would be interesting. Though, your implication is likely correct that it would probably not be possible nor worth the time to develop a cross-structure/cross-industry competency transference system as it would be very unlikely for those making the transfer to have the same level of competency to warrant the transference of accreditation in one way or another.

The issue you point to is hard to resolve for any particular case, and I believe impossible to resolve in general.

What does seem to be very widely held is that there is a set of “core”, “key”, “employability” or “transferable” skills, and though different formulations all seem to differ, it is clear that they are all talking about much the same range of abilities.

Beyond that, we may all wonder how much of one set of skills and competencies may transfer from one context to another, but in the end it is more or less educated guesswork. We have to study or ask people who have themselves transferred between the two contexts, and ideally several people not just one or a few. Because that would take so much time and effort, we probably should rely for the time being on the most educated guesswork we can get hold of.

Or you could see it as a matter of assessment. Get a competent X, and assess them for the competence needed to be a Y. To me, the most convincing long-term answer would be this, plus people volunteering to keep up a portfolio blog in which they record details of which of the required skills they did not feel competent about.

Simon

I think it would be much more interesting to evaluate competencies across two entirely different disciplines between entirely different structures. For example, do the competencies required to be a lawyer that specializes in zoning and property law overlap with the competencies required to become a licensed real estate agent enough that passing the bar in a given U.S. state would, with the proper career evidence in terms of law specialty, allow the individual to be granted a real estate license from that state. Kind of a stretch as an example. But that was the first thing that came to mind.