PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Transcription

1 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2 Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 7: , 2009 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: print/ online DOI: / A Qualitative Assessment of Culinary Science Competencies Defined by the Research Chefs Association WCSC Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, Vol. 7, No. 4, Jan 2010: pp. 0 0 RACHEL L. BISSETT, 1 MICHAEL S. H. CHENG, 2 and ROBERT G. BRANNAN 1 1 School of Human and Consumer Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 2 Department of Culinology, Southwest Minnesota State University, Marshall, Minnesota Qualitative R. L. Bissett Assessment et al. of RCA Competencies The Research Chefs Association (RCA), a professional association for Culinology (i.e., culinary science), has created core competencies for practicing Culinologists. This qualitative study was performed to gain insight into perceptions of RCA members about the Culinology core competencies. In focus groups conducted at the 2008 RCA Annual Conference, members expressed confusion about the self-selected membership process but agreed that there is a benefit to a competency assessment of the RCA membership. Participants were confident that results of a competency assessment may improve the knowledge, skills, and abilities of RCA members, to the benefit of members, employers, and the entire industry. KEYWORDS Focus group, Research Chefs Association, professional competency, Culinology INTRODUCTION The focus on developing and using core competencies has increased due to specialization within many disciplines and increased demand for accountability within organizations of all sizes (Barber, Sharpless, Klostermann, & McCarthy, 2007). Of particular interest is the investigation of competencies in response to trends in corporate downsizing, declining profit margins, and increased market unpredictability (Rothwell & Lindholm, 1999). Address correspondence to Robert G. Brannan, School of Human and Consumer Sciences, Ohio University, W324 Grover Center, Athens, OH brannan@ohio.edu 285

3 286 R. L. Bissett et al. The Research Chefs Association (RCA) has incorporated the use of competencies in formulating standards of ability for professionals within Culinology. Culinology is a synonym for culinary science and is an emerging profession that combines the skills of culinary arts and food science and technology to meet the demands for convenience food within the food industry. The RCA is composed of food industry professionals, especially chefs and food scientists, working on the manufacturing, consulting, marketing, sales, and distribution of food products. The organization has six membership categories (Affiliate, Associate, Chef, Culinology, Food Science and Technology, and Student members) to which members self-select in order to categorize the variety of people involved in the food industry. The RCA s first attempt at developing core competencies was undertaken in 2002 when competency statements were developed for a research-focused chef and a management-focused chef (Birdir & Pearson, 2000). In 2007, the RCA Certification Commission and RCA Education Committee took the competencies of the Birdir and Pearson study and redeveloped the core knowledge competencies for Culinology professionals. The new competency statements were created to improve the educational and training needs of these professionals. Focus group interviews are a relatively new qualitative research tool for social science and are recognized as an effective way to generate ideas and gather opinions (Dolan, 2003; Morgan & Spanish, 1984). The data provided by focus group interviews are often of qualitative phenomena that are not successfully gathered by other methods (Morgan & Spanish). Focus groups provide an opportunity for survey researchers to develop questions that correspond to the focus group participants opinions and approach to the topic at hand (Morgan & Spanish). With this in mind, the goal of this study and a companion paper (Bissett, Cheng, & Brannan, 2010) was to undertake qualitative and quantitative assessment of the 2007 RCA standards. The focus of this article is the qualitative assessment. METHODS Study approval was granted through the Ohio University s Institutional Review Board to assure the safety of human participants. Focus group sessions were conducted at the 2008 RCA Annual Conference and Culinology Expo. A mass was sent to the entire RCA 2007/2008 membership directory that invited members to participate in one of the three focus groups during their time at the conference. A reminder was sent to the RCA listserv. Conference attendees were also solicited onsite via word of mouth. The first of the three sessions was held in conjunction with preconference activities, which included the RCA Board of Directors meeting, and

4 Qualitative Assessment of RCA Competencies 287 attendees were primarily composed of current or former board members. At the request of the RCA, the other two sessions were held in the late afternoon to avoid competing with non-social conference events. No compensation was provided to participants. The investigators developed a tentative format for the focus group discussion in advance of the conference. Consent was obtained from each participant (N = 20) at the beginning of the focus group meeting. The group was allotted minutes to discuss issues facilitated by the moderators concerning the validity and appropriateness of the 43 newly released core competencies. The discussions were tape-recorded and transcribed upon return from the conference. The qualitative data were analyzed and dominant themes were identified from all three focus group data by the researchers. RESULTS The three major themes that were identified from the focus groups were membership, core competencies, and assessment. Subthemes were culled from the three major themes and are represented in Figure 1. Major Theme: Membership Discussions related to the theme of membership, centered on the fact that members can self-select themselves into one of the six RCA membership categories (Table 1), and focused on whether members select the most appropriate category. The RCA was founded by chefs, so they hold a place of particular importance within the organization. Recently, the Culinology membership category was developed because the RCA has defined Culinology as the blending of culinary arts and food technology. Participants in the focus groups from the Culinology category had previously placed themselves in the Food Science and Technology category, rather than the chef category. This may suggest that chef members are reluctant to give up the credential of chef. Participants of the focus group acknowledged that self-selection can be influenced by job title, identification with a particular membership category, or the desire to create an implied credential, in most instances chef. Participants had a hard time identifying the characteristics and/or the type of individual that would self-select him- or herself into the affiliate and associate membership categories because these categories seemed vaguely defined (Table 1). This revelation lead to the acknowledgement that the membership categories to which RCA members currently identify may not be the most appropriate.

5 288 R. L. Bissett et al. FIGURE 1 Focus group interview themes. Major Theme: Core Competencies The discussion associated with the theme of core competencies centered on identifying a general definition for the term and a specific discussion of the RCA s core competencies. Participants were unable to come up with a single, agreed-upon definition for the term core competency. When asked to define the term, responses ranged from not knowing what the word meant to identifying certain characteristics associated with job success. Identified characteristics included the ability to meet set credentials, the skills/abilities/knowledge essential to job success, benchmarks that an

6 Qualitative Assessment of RCA Competencies 289 TABLE 1 Research Chefs Association Membership Categories Membership category Definition Examples Affiliate Associate Chef Culinology Food science and technology Student Recognized professionally in a field affiliated with Culinology, culinary arts, or food science, and who otherwise do not qualify as a chef, food science in technology Recognized professionally as employed in supporting fields Recognized professionally as a chef employed in any sector of the food industry Recognized professionally as Culinologist in any sector of the food industry Recognized professionally as food scientists or food technologist in any sector of the food industry Recognized as a full-time student in a related field Writer, publisher, media/ communications professional, academician, administrator, or non-food science research Sales/marketing professional, supplier, co-packer, distributor, or recruiter Research/corporate/executive chef, research and development chef, concept/ product development chef, director/manager of culinary department, consultant, foodservice manager, or food establishment owner Culinologist, research chef, culinary scientist, culinary technician, research and development specialist, innovation director, certified research chef, certified culinary scientists, or Culinology degree graduate Food scientist, food technologist, flavorist, chemist, registered dietitian, nutritionist, lab technician, or food science research Culinology, culinary arts, food science, or food studies individual needs in identifying strengths and weaknesses, and the skills/ abilities/knowledge needed in creating and improving certification and education efforts. Several participants were very knowledgeable about the details related to the RCA s development of the core competencies for a practicing Culinologist. One participant, who was on the board of the RCA at the time the focus groups were undertaken, explained that the original list of competencies was created as a starting point to improve efforts in education, certification exam preparation, and textbook creation. This person suggested that the competencies were designed to be an umbrella of skills that covered all contingencies needed for success in the food product development industry, with an understanding that not every individual would have proficiency in every competency, but that some competencies would be shared by all

7 290 R. L. Bissett et al. RCA members. One member believed that the competencies were not originally developed for certification purposes but as a list of skills that an individual could use to evaluate his or her own level of strength or weakness. Another member felt that the competencies should not be viewed as a tool to pass a certification exam but as a tool to teach and have students recognize what skills are needed in the food industry. These results suggest that the purpose for the creation of the Culinology competencies is not clear to all members, with confusion centering on whether they are designed for certification and educational purposes or as a tool for individual evaluation. Participants had a variety of opinions about how the Culinology competencies were related to membership. Some participants believed that the competencies were written as a list of baseline skills important for every membership category. Other participants believed that all the competencies were important for success in the food industry, but that each membership category would exhibit strengths and weaknesses in particular competencies such that by assembling a team across membership categories, all skills would be present. The comments as to how competency is related to membership suggest that it is dependent on the opinion of the individual RCA member. Focus group participants agreed that there are benefits to assessing the Culinology core competencies. From the standpoint of educational efforts, many participants active in academia and certification exam training believe that there would be a strong benefit to competency analysis. Results could give an insight to competencies that need to be improved via training or education. Participants also suggested that results of a competency analysis could benefit employers and the food industry as a whole by providing information about competency areas in which their employees are strong and weak. Employers can better understand the skill set their employees have and thus develop improved hiring and training practices. The food industry has the potential to use these results to better predict the future and develop strategies to continue to remain competitive. There was a hope expressed that the food industry and its employers will discover value in the Culinology core competencies that creates a greater appreciation for those who are certified through the RCA Certified Research Chef and RCA Certified Culinary Scientist programs. Participants also suggested that an analysis of the competencies is extremely beneficial to the individual who can identify their own strengths and weakness and seek efforts to improve his or her skills. Participants also pointed out that time may be an indicator to why there is confusion surrounding the Culinology core competencies. The RCA is a young organization that is still working to establish a clear identity. Therefore, as the organization becomes more mature, clarification of what is important in terms of competency and skill level may, in the words of one participant, work itself out.

8 Qualitative Assessment of RCA Competencies 291 Major Theme: Assessment Conversations related to assessment included discussion about the pros and cons associated with a self-assessment method, the importance of a practical/ performance piece to assessment, the benefits of assessment, examples of how other organizations have assessed competence, and the importance of having a context associated with each skill. During the focus groups, participants were presented with a sample survey as a visual tool to prompt assessment conversations. The sample survey listed each of the 43 competency statements with a corresponding 5-point scale (1 = I have no knowledge in this area, 2 = I have little knowledge in this area, 3 = I have some knowledge in this area, 4 = I have a lot of knowledge in this area, and 5 = I am very knowledgeable in this area). Participants commented on problematic issues with the survey in terms of the scale and in presenting the competency statements. Comments concerning scale indicated whether or not the distinction between the numbers, in terms of measurement and description, was clear enough. Participants also commented that the competency statements were rather vague and needed to be anchored in the appropriate context. The option of conducting the competency assessment in the form of a self-assessment was also debated. Several participants felt the easiest way to reach the membership was to create a self-assessment survey, the benefit being that the individual would value the opportunity to rate his or her individual proficiency level for each of the competencies. Others pointed out the subjectivity issue of a self-assessment and whether members would be truthful in their responses. The question of whether the member would actually take the time to go through the entire survey without an incentive was another key issue. One participant suggested that if the survey was presented as a tool for the individual to identify what areas he or she needs to work on, it would be perceived as beneficial and encourage the member to evaluate his or her proficiency honestly and without incentive. Many participants felt that the only way to most accurately evaluate an individual s competence was through a practical performance test. There was general agreement among participants that to know whether a person is competent and at what level is to observe performance, especially with the culinary skills. A majority of the skills needed in the food industry would best be validated through a performance assessment; however, it was acknowledged that it would not be practical in reaching the RCA s population, which is spread across the United States. Focus group participants recognized that there are beneficial outcomes to assessing the core competencies. Participants made the point that it is a good thing to have a list of skills that the RCA feels is important, but without knowing what the membership knows and does not know, it is difficult to validate the list. Therefore, participants agreed that an assessment of the

9 292 R. L. Bissett et al. competencies is essential in improving the future of the organization, notably in efforts to better train and educate its members. Conversations on ways to conduct an assessment brought up examples of the way other organizations performed similar competency investigations. The American Dietetic Association (ADA) was brought up numerous times as an organization that has had success in competency assessment. One member described how the ADA developed a process that an individual must follow in order to prove his or her competence and acquire his or her registration, which includes required course hours, an internship, and a qualifying score on the registration exam. The ADA uses a process and a final test to assess whether or not its professionals are competent enough to practice. Another member described how the Women s Food Service Forum (WFSF) set up an online self-assessment exam that members could take in order to identify individual areas of strength and to provide information about conference seminar and training opportunities. These examples suggested possible ways to conduct the RCA s competency assessment. Participants stressed the importance of context when presenting the competency statements. It was addressed in the interviews that the competency statements may be misrepresented by those in different membership categories. For example, the competency knowledge of proteins could be interpreted as center of the plate for a chef or the chemistry of the macromolecule to a food scientist. Because the competencies were written in a way that is open to interpretation, it was suggested that each competency be written with context so that every participant interprets it similarly regardless of membership category. IMPLICATIONS The RCA represents a diverse membership that is not always clearly defined, as revealed by participants of the focus groups who acknowledged that the membership categories to which RCA members currently identify may not be the most appropriate. In spite of the fact that the purpose for the creation of the Culinology competencies is not clear to all members whether they are designed for certification and educational purposes or as a tool for individual evaluation participants agreed that an assessment of the competencies is essential to improving the future of the organization. They suggested that an assessment would give insight to competencies that need to be improved via training or education, and that a competency analysis could benefit employers and the food industry as a whole by providing information about competency areas in which their employees are strong and weak. From a practical point of view, the results of these qualitative data were taken in consideration when developing the competency assessment method reported in our companion paper (Bissett et al., 2010). Although

10 Qualitative Assessment of RCA Competencies 293 focus group participants agreed that assessing performance was critical to assessing competence, they agreed that a performance assessment of the RCA competencies was virtually impossible. As a result, the creation of an online tool was suggested so that all membership had access, regardless of location or other limiting factors. Participants also suggested the inclusion of context information for certain competency statements that could be misinterpreted. CONCLUSIONS The results of the qualitative portion of this study provide an insight to the ideas and opinions of the RCA membership regarding competencies of a practicing Culinologist. The information gathered from the focus group interviews may be essential to determine areas of misunderstanding by the membership and to create a baseline from which membership competency can be assessed. The results suggest that there is confusion within the membership surrounding the core competencies. It is not clear to the membership whether the purpose of the competencies is for certification, education and training, or both. The state of the RCA membership and the reason why a member is in a particular category is unclear among the membership. Lastly, the RCA membership agrees that there is a benefit in conducting an ongoing competency assessment of the new Culinology core competencies for practicing Culinologists. An opportunity to improve the competency, proficiency, and skill set of an RCA member would also benefit the employer and the food industry. REFERENCES Barber, J. P., Sharpless, B. A., Klostermann, S., & McCarthy, K. S. (2007). Assessing intervention competence and its relation to therapy outcome: A selected review derived from the outcome literature. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 38 (5), Birdir, K., & Pearson, T. E. (2000). Research chefs competencies: A delphi approach. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 12(3), Bissett, R. L., Cheng, M. S. H., & Brannan, R. G. (2010). A quantitative assessment of the research chefs association core competencies for the practicing Culinologist. Journal of Food Science Education, 9(1), Dolan, G. (2003). Assessing student nurse clinical competency: Will we ever get it right? Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12(1), 132. Morgan, D. L., & Spanish, M. T. (1984). Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 7(3), Rothwell, W. S., & Lindholm, J. E. (1999). Competency identification, modeling and assessment in the USA. International Journal of Training and Development, 3(2),