COMPETENCIES REQUIRED BY PORT PERSONNEL IN THE NEW ERA: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND CASE STUDY
Vinh V. Thai
Division of Infrastructure Systems & Maritime Studies School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Nanyang Technological University N1-01c-81, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798 Tel: +65 6790 5331 Fax: +65 6791 0676 Email:
[email protected] Abstract Nowadays, ports have transformed from a purely ship-shore interface into logistical platforms where logistics-related activities occur, and are also important clusters of economic activities. The role of seaports is therefore essential since these transport nodes are important and indispensable for the effective and efficient management of flows of products and information in the supply chain. With this new role, it is critical that port personnel possess necessary competencies to contribute to port efficiency and turn the port into an effective supply chain partner. This research issue is explored through a conceptual model of competencies constructed based on thorough literature review and in-depth interviews and validated by a survey with port personnel both in Singapore and Vietnam. As a result, important managerial insights are drawn to the design and implementation of human resource development policy for ports. Keywords: competency requirements, port, human resource development
1.
Introduction
Ports have undergone several generations of development, from purely a technical interface between ship and shore to a logistical platform providing value-added services to various partners in the supply chain. In this context, ports play the role as nodes for both maritime and multimodal transport leg in both inbound and outbound logistics processes, as logistical platforms where logistics-related activities occur, and are also important clusters of economic activities. Ports are not only where cargo e.g. raw materials, semi-finished or finished products are loaded/discharged onto/from vessels but also used as warehouses or distribution centres where value-added services such as labeling, packaging, cross-docking etc. are provided (World Bank, 2007). Ports as such integrate further to the value chains by adding 1
more value to shipments while in the port area, providing the so-called port-centric logistics (Mangan and Lalwani, 2008). The role of ports is therefore essential since these transport nodes are important and indispensable for the effective and efficient management of flows of products and information in the supply chain. As competition today is no longer between firms but rather between supply chains, port efficiency and competitiveness will have a great impact on those of the supply chain of which it is an integrated partner.
Given its importance in the supply chain context, ports must constantly focus on improving their performance to respond to challenges in the new era. In this connection, port human resource development (HRD) plays a critical role, since personnel efficiency and effectiveness is one of the essential intangible resources contributing to port performance. Port personnel, in turn, need to possess necessary skills, knowledge, and abilities to be efficient and effective in their work and fully competent to take on challenges that ports in the new era have to face. Research on this aspect is, however, quite scant, and this paper reports a recent effort to explore further on which competencies that are critical to port personnel. The paper is organized in four sections. First, discussion on the research background will be provided highlighting new challenges affecting ports and competency requirements for port personnel. This is followed by the section on methodology in which sampling, data collection methods and conceptual model building will be explained. Findings and discussion will be presented next, while the last section of the paper will sum up with some managerial implications and recommendation for future research.
2.
Research background
2.1
New challenges affecting ports and their personnel
2
The port industry has undergone markedly changes in recent years (Meersman et al., 2005). In the last decade, there are several trends greatly affecting ports and contributing to alter their patterns of development as well as their people’s profile. Among these, deregulation and the increased competition, both intra-ports, inter-ports and between ports and other transport modes, have greatly had important effects on the port industry (Notteboom and Winkelmans, 2001; Huybrechts et al., 2002). As many ports are being deregulated, traditional state-owned ports are facing stiff competition from those privatized ones in terms of operational and management efficiency, including labor’s productivity. This can be seen in several studies. For instance, in a recent study by Thai and Grewal (2005, p. 25) who examined the efficiency and effectiveness of Vietnamese ports, port throughput per person of one of the first jointventure ports in the country was significantly higher than that of the other two major stateowned ports. This not only calls for rationalization of operational and management efficiency of these state-owned ports, but also implies a change to betterment their workforce. Besides, huge capital investment in terminals and equipment especially to serve container trades has added up to the pressure for changes that ports have been facing. Many ports have invested intensively on specialized container handling equipment and transformed themselves from multi-purpose or general cargo ports to dedicated container terminals. This has had tremendous implications on port workers, supervisors and managers in terms of changing job profile, skills, and knowledge to response effectively to the change in cargo demography. In addition, the trend in logistics and supply chain management moving towards a more integrated approach has also placed ports in a position that changes have to go beyond the port area, since ports have become an integrated component of the supply chain. As such, port personnel need competencies not only on operations within the port area but also on those in the interactions between the port and other partners in the supply chain.
3
Increasingly in the literature there has been the trend to re-evaluate the roles of ports in the context of international logistics and supply chain management. Many authors have embarked on the discussion in this direction. Earlier in the literature the role that port authorities will play in the future was contemplated by Heaver, Meersman, Moglia and van de Voorde (2000) who raised questions of whether port authorities will become fully fledged partners in the logistics chain, or their involvement will be restricted to a supporting role, or they might disappear from the scene entirely. In response to these, Notteboom and Winkelmans (2001) argued that a successful port (authority) must be prepared to constantly adopt new roles in order to cope with the changing market environment. The authors also emphasised the importance of port networking by proposing that port networking constitutes probably the most important role for port authorities in the next millennium. As the role of ports expands to cover a wider service scope and relationships with their customers and stakeholders, port management needs to increasingly focus on building skill and knowledge profile for their personnel much more than those constrained in the technical operations and management within the port physical boundary
The concept of port networking puts ports in the context of international logistics and supply chain management. In this context, it is argued that the competition today is not between individual firms, but increasingly between supply chains (Simchi-Levi et al., 2008), and therefore a firm’s capability to integrate its business processes and management philosophy with its upstream and downstream partners will play an important role to achieve its business objectives, including creating and delivering values to the final customers. What this means for ports is that their scope of service, operations and management processes will no longer be treated in isolation but rather part of the overall supply chain picture. This would obviously require the constant communication and consultation with the port’s stakeholders. This is in
4
line with Almotairi and Lumsden (2009) who argued that the port is a functional element within the supply chains, and Robinson (2002) who observed that a number of chains will be focused on the port in a competitive environment. Thus, the port will compete not simply on the basis of operational efficiency or location but on the basis that they are embedded in chains that offer shipper greater value. On this basis, Robinson (2002) concluded that shippers will choose between chains based on competitive advantage and value gained in which port is an embedded element, rather than the port itself. This conclusion was also reiterated by Magala and Sammons (2008) in their work on a new approach to port choice modeling. In acknowledgement that ports are in the process of progressive integration in supply chains, the authors reasoned that shippers are no longer choosing a port in isolation but rather a supply chain in which a port is just an element in the system. A real-life example was also cited by these authors about the import of construction steel into Australian ports NC and SY in New South Wales, in that the shipper’s choice of port would never be understood by either port management or ocean carriers unless the complete supply chain is reviewed. Rodrigue and Notteboom (2008) meanwhile also argued that seaports and inland terminals are taking up a more active role in supply chains in that terminals can be used as extended distribution centres. All these studies support the argument that ports increasingly integrate into the supply chains as the indispensable nodes in the systems. Again, with this change in the role of port, its personnel need to possess a much wider competency profile inclusive those related to developing the port into a logistics centre in the supply chains.
As such, the success of ports in the new era of changing cargo demography, increasing competition with emphasis on human efficiency and effectiveness, new methods of operations and management corresponding to new types of cargo and vessels, as well as increasing role of ports as logistical centres in the whole supply chains depends very much on how the port
5
personnel adapt and acquire new competencies critical to their job. It is evidenced from the above that the role of ports has changed dramatically, and thus there should also be a shift towards more focus on developing port human resource to assure that they stay relevant to new requirements. Indeed, while focus of the port industry in the past few years has mainly on technological advances that make port productivity less dependent on human effort, knowledge and skills, there has been a shift in the perception of the port industry that appropriate attention must also turn to performance improvement through people. As such, modern ports are increasingly shifting from purely a hardware-based interface towards knowledge-intensive platform. In this context, the role of human resource development to equip port personnel with essential skills, knowledge and ability is critical.
2.2
Competency requirements for port personnel
Across the literature, the importance of human competence in improving organizational performance has been widely acknowledged (McClelland, 1973; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; McLagan, 197). The concept of competency has been defined by a number of authors. According to Lucia and Lespinger (1999, P. 5), competency is “a descriptive tool that identifies the skills, knowledge, personal characteristics, and behaviors needed to effectively perform a role in the organization and help the business meet its strategic objectives”. Competencies are also defined as skills, knowledge, abilities, and other attributes such as values and attitudes necessary for the effective performance of activities (Pinto and Walker, 1978; Hayes, 1980). Recent authors such as McGee et al. (2005), Johnson et al. (2009), Ireland et al. (2009) and Jones and Hill (2010) concur that a competence is the product of organizational learning and experience and represents real proficiency in performing an internal activity in the organization, while a distinctive competence is a competitively valuable activity a company performs better than its rivals.
6
It is common across the above mentioned literature that a competency is a mixture between the skill, knowledge, ability and other sets of characteristics that an employee possesses which enable them to perform their activities more efficiently and effectively. It has also long been argued that there is a strong linkage between employees’ competency level and the firm’s performance (Campbell, 1990; Swanson, 1990). In addition, it is also ascertained that a distinctive competence is a competitive resource because it gives a company a competitively valuable capability unmatched by rivals, can underpin and add real punch to a company, and is a basis for sustainable competitive advantage, especially in the knowledge-based economy and industry (Hafeez et al., 2002; Johnson et al., 2009).
In the context of logistics and supply chain management, Closs (2000) suggested that ‘one of the major challenges to management in the next decade is the scarcity of trained supply chain managers’, and that ‘substantial change in logistics and supply chain education is necessary’ to meet these challenges. Until recently, this perception has been reinforced by Carter and Carter (2007) who argued that supply management organisations would take on a higher value role in the coming decade, and thus success would hinge on whether they can attract, develop, and retain individuals with the right skills and capabilities to excel in the future. This view is further elaborated by Green (2010) of the Accenture Supply Chain Academy in that leading companies in recent years have recognised the vital role that people play in driving innovation in their supply chain and improving their ability to produce results, rather than investing only on technology and processes.
Managing the supply chain has become increasingly more complex as logisticians attempt to adapt to turbulent and competitive market environments. Adding to the complexity is
7
managing the paradox of achieving cost efficiencies whilst improving customer service and improving customer and supplier relationships within the supply chain (Christopher, 1998). Whereas logistics professionals may have focused on managing traditional logistics functions such as logistics information systems, transportation and warehousing, their contemporaries no longer operate in isolation from the organisation’s value chain and instead must constantly interact with other functional areas within an organisation such as marketing and production, as well as integrate with those of their suppliers and customers. The issue that arises is what knowledge and skills are necessary for logistics professionals to be able to meet the broader challenges of their role in a globalised market. Logistics professionals must be multi-talented across a range of management skills as well as having the depth of logistics knowledge and abilities, which means they must have both generalist and specialist knowledge and skills (Gammelgaard and Larson, 2001; Razzaque and Sirat, 2001; Murphy and Poist, 2006).
In the port industry, recent trends and challenges have brought about transformations such as the reduced extent of government’s involvement. Methods of transport have changed significantly and container transport has now become even more popular. More container terminals have been replacing conventional cargo ones, and thus the job profile of the former dockworker has gradually been replaced by a set of competencies required by port workers employed by terminals using innovative technologies (IPTC, 2003). Substituting capital for labor, containerization and related developments have also resulted in substantial reduction in port employment, accompanied by increasing requirements on enhanced labor productivity. In addition, job profiles have also changed radically as a result of structural adjustments calling for new management techniques and working skills, in that multitask workers and multiskilled operators are becoming more common in ports. Workers now have ‘more individual responsibility and work according to instructions received through radio communications,
8
computer printouts or information displayed on a computer screen’ (International Labor Organization, 1996). It is apparent that these developments have increased the need for better educated and trained port personnel. As a result, port personnel would need much more sophisticated skills and knowledge than they used to be required in the past.
As ports are important and integrated component of the supply chain, there might also be workforce mobility from other sectors of the transport and logistics industry into the port industry. As such, port personnel are also required to possess necessary competency requirements in order to cope with the increasingly challenging role that their ports play in supply chains, since port work has gradually become a vocation resembling other vocations common in the transport and logistics industry. Despite the importance of this research issue, there has been scant research on which necessary competencies port personnel need to possess in order to be successful in the new port era. This research will thus contribute to fill this gap in the contemporary literature and draft out some managerial insights for port managers.
3.
Methodology
3.1
Research question
This study aims to examine the questions of which competency requirements are necessary for port personnel to be successful in their job in the new era. In this study, competency is defined as the mixture of knowledge, skills, ability and personal characteristic traits that are essential for port personnel to have high performance at their workplace. For the purpose of examination, we will classify port personnel into two main categories: port workers which include stevedores, checkers, tallymen and clerical staff, and port executives including supervisors and above. In this research, the latter group will be the unit of analysis, following the recommendation that ‘supervisors, foremen and equipment operators are the groups most
9
in need of training, followed by checkers, tallymen and clerical staff’ (International Labor Organization, 1996).
3.2
Sampling and data collection methods
Triangulation is utilized in this study. Triangulation is strongly suggested in transportation and logistics research literature as an effective and useful technique to achieve the width and depth of research issues (Cunningham et al. 2000). The type of triangulation technique employed in this paper is the methodological triangulation, in which the author used and combined qualitative and quantitative methods to obtain a comprehensive understanding and a wide and deep picture of the research question. The methods of data collection and interpretation used in this study are exploratory in-depth interviews to provide more inputs for the follow-up survey method (by using mail questionnaires).
The exploratory phase of this research involves three in-depth interviews with senior port executives from two ports in Singapore and a dedicated, joint-venture container port in Vietnam. Due to the elite nature of the interview population which is required to be those in senior designations of the port industry, interviewee sample for this research was selected on convenient basis, i.e. from the author’ contact database. Given the target population being port executives, the sampling frame for the questionnaire survey is constructed from the member directory of Vietnam Seaports Association (VPA) with the total sampling approach taken. A list of 53 port members of VPA is thus used as the mailing list. By the cut-off date, 32 questionnaires were returned, representing a 60% overall response rate. Among these, 41% of respondents hold the designation of operations manager, followed by commercial manager (19%), human resource manager (16%), and director and deputy director (12% each). In terms
10
of the types of port business they are in, 72% of respondents are from general purpose ports while the remaining 28% work in dedicated container ports.
3.3
Conceptual framework development
The conceptual framework for this study is built on four cornerstones: existing literature on competency requirements for port personnel, in-depth interviews with senior port executives, analysis of job description and training programs of port personnel, and analysis of skill and knowledge requirements for transport and logistics professionals in the existing literature. The critical reasoning method is applied to scan and identify relevant competency requirements for port personnel, and they are cross-checked across the four resources to derive the most common set of competencies. First of all, there has been very few existing research on competencies requirements of port personnel, perhaps partly because there used to be a great involvement of the governments in many ports around the world and ports used to be considered as cash-cows in terms of employment. However, together with the shift in perception and acknowledgement of the role of ports in supply chains, it is argued that ports are moving from a largely labor- to a more knowledge-intensive supply chain player, and thus information and communication technology (ICT) tools are required to integrate processes both inside and outside the port area. In this context, it is understood that port personnel are desired to possess some additional fundamental ICT-specific knowledge and skills apart from SCM/logistics awareness and understanding and SCM/logistics specific skills (Sweeney and Evangelista, 2005). This appreciation of the importance of ICT skills was also reflected in a recent study (Ahn and McLean, 2008) in which port and logistics IT understanding and using ability was proposed as a competency for port personnel. Other noteworthy proposed competencies in this study are planning and management ability, port and logistics hinterland development ability, cargo work following procedures system ability, customs procedures
11
system ability, quality management ability for port and logistics system and service quality improvement ability.
Another cornerstone on which the conceptual framework in this study is built is through the analysis of job descriptions and training programs of port personnel. Various ports around the world publish job descriptions for specific designations in their port. For instance, the Port of St. Petersburg (City of St. Petersburg, 1996) advertised for the position of port supervisor with desirable knowledge, skills and abilities. Some of them include commercial port operations; port security; knowledge of various types of vessels and methods of docking and mooring requirements; knowledge of standard office practices; skill in computer operations; ability to enforce rules and regulations; ability to direct and assist; ability to make minor repairs to equipment if needed; ability to plan, organize and supervise; ability to establish and maintain effective working relationship with stakeholders. Some of these skills and knowledge are concurred in the training programs of other ports in the world. For example, in a recent project in port training in the European Union for the Port of Dublin (SKEMA, 2009), some top training themes were identified as team working and interpersonal skills (concurred with ability to establish and maintain effective working relationship with stakeholders), supervisory management (which includes ability to direct and assist; ability to plan, organize and supervise above), customer service skills and IT (in line with skill in computer operations) apart from skills in interviewing, selection and performance appraisal (also a management skills) and some port affairs-related skills and knowledge on hazardous chemical and cargo handling. Meanwhile, according to the interview with the senior port executive of Jurong Port in Singapore, the job description for the manager of general cargo operations requires the candidate to have experience in port, shipping or logistics as well as possessing
12
strong leadership, good analytical and communications skills. These concur with the fundamental competencies required by others mentioned above.
Some major and established ports around the globe set up their own training institute to provide training for their personnel and those of other ports, and the analysis of their training program would also provide insights on competency requirements for port personnel. In this respect, perhaps the two most frequently mentioned institutes are PSA Institute (PSA Institute, 2010) and Hamburg Port Training Institute (HPTI, 2010). A closer look at their existing training programs reveals some common training themes, including equipment operator training, port operations (to cover all four basic operation sub-systems in ports, namely, ship handling operations, quay transfer operations, yard and warehouse operations, and gate operations), management and safety related issues including port security. In addition, some non-traditional courses are also provided at HPTI such as port economics, and port marketing. These training themes and courses aims to provide knowledge and training skills in the three main areas, namely, management-, business- and port affairs-related competency groups. Detailed knowledge, skills and abilities in these groups are summarized in Table 1. It is interesting to note that those business-related skills and knowledge are quite neglected in this list compared to those of port affairs- and management-related ones. This might perhaps be explained with the same reasons for the scant amount of literature in this research area. Insert Table 1 about here
It has been argued in some recent international port training conferences that many functions in terminal operations and in the world of transport and logistics have various competencies in common, and thus port work is no longer a unique vocation but one progressively needing new competencies similar to many others now required in the transport and logistics industry 13
(IPTC, 2001, 2003, 2005). It is thus strongly argued that port personnel, especially at the supervisory level and above, should possess cross-functional and competency-based rather than unilateral-functional skills, knowledge and abilities to achieve high performance in their workplace. It is thus also essential that port personnel acquire some necessary skills and knowledge in other transport and logistics industry rather than relying only on the boundary of port affairs-related competencies, mainly in the areas of port operations and management. Literature on competency requirements for transport and logistics professionals was thus reviewed to identify and determine what skills, knowledge and abilities would most be appropriate to port personnel in performing their job successfully. In this connection, a number of authors have published their research in the quest to identify and validate essential competency requirements for transport and logistics professionals, for example Gibson, Gibson and Rutner (1998), Murphy and Poist (1991a), Pilnick and Gabel (1998), Young (1998), Le May et al. (1999). Among these, the BLM framework of 33 business, 18 logistics and 32 management skills developed by Murphy and Poist (1991a) and subsequently validated in their later studies (Murphy and Poist, 1991b; Murphy and Poist, 1993; Murphy and Poist, 1998; and Murphy and Poist, 2006) has since become a backbone model of research on skills and competencies of logistics professionals. The most recent literature published in this area is by Thai et al. (2010) in which a conceptual model of competencies for logistics professionals including 25 business, 23 logistics and 20 management skills was built based on the BLM framework with modification and adjustment. This study is perceived to include all important findings from the earlier studies while also presented some new insights and findings in this research area. The framework presented and validated in this study was thus selected as a base to conduct a critical review and analysis to determine which skills, knowledge and abilities in this framework would be most appropriate for port personnel. The results are summarized in Table 2.
14
Insert Table 2 about here
The competency requirements for port personnel can also be identified through in-depth interviews with port senior executives. This is based on the competency identification methods developed by Briscoe and Hall (1999) consisting of research-based, values-based and strategy-based methods, in which the strategy-based method focuses on competencies needed in the near future. This method is adopted in this study as competencies can be identified rapidly through expert interviews, especially those at the senior level in the industry. As mentioned earlier, three in-depth interviews were conducted in this research with senior port executives both in Singapore and Vietnam. All three interviews were conducted face-to-face and lasted for about one hour each. During the interviews, interviewees were asked to indicate their perception and knowledge of competency requirements that they think port personnel at the supervisory level and above should possess to be successful in ports of the new era, i.e. ports integrated into supply chains, increasing competition, climate change impact, etc. Some common perceptions of these senior port executives are that port personnel at the supervisory level and above should possess technical skills in their respective functional areas, ICT skills, management skills and abilities, general understanding of logistics, negotiation skills, knowledge and skills in port safety, security and emergency management. First, it is evident through these interviews that port personnel must be proficient in the work area of their expertise, and in the port context, those related to cargo handling, equipment operations and commercial activities. This forms a core competency group that port personnel must possess to be effective in their job. An interviewee put it as follows:
… Of course, no port can operate without proficient workforce, and thus their people must first be competent in the port’s day-to-day operations… Increasingly we see more and more that customers choose the port for their logistics activities, and thus port staff must have not only 15
good understanding of this business but also necessary skills and knowledge to do the job for them…
Another common thread in the interviews is the strong emphasis on those skills, knowledge and abilities beyond port operations and logistics. All interviewees shared the same perception that the role of ports has changed tremendously to become a full and integrated element of the global business arena, and thus port personnel need to be knowledgeable and competent in the areas of, for instance, international trade, economics, quality management, etc. beyond those related to the port itself such as pricing and marketing. Furthermore, as expected, interviewees also stressed on the importance of management competencies along the argument that no port can survive without qualified managers possessing critical management skills such as planning, organizing, controlling and leading, as well as some other interpersonal skills. This is reflected in an interviewee’s comment as follows:
… You need people with good understanding of some basic principles of doing business. Ports are just an economic entity like any other and their staff is required to be competent as those of others in various fields, such as general economic principles, administration, accounting, etc. What’s more, as we are talking about personnel at the supervisor level and above, they must have necessary skills to be good managers …
Besides, interviews also agreed that some general skills and knowledge of business area are currently missing in the competency profile of port personnel, and thus this would need to be fixed by education and training, both at the vocational and higher education levels. It was also argued through the interviews that the importance of soft skills for port personnel would be enhanced when they move up their career ladder at the port, and thus formal qualifications in this respect would be desired. Meanwhile, interviewees also reinforced the perception that 16
port personnel at the supervisory level and above would increasingly need competencies similar to those in the transport and logistics industry, and thus those who are purely reliant too much on their technical skills would find less room to move up their ladder career, both within the port and across the transport and logistics industry.
Table 3 provides a summary of key findings from the analysis of four sources of competencies which could be relevant to construct the profile of skills, knowledge and abilities critical to port personnel in the new era. Insert Table 3 about here
The above analysis and discussion on the four cornerstones of competency for port personnel provide the basis on which competencies are identified. It can be seen from Table 3 that port personnel need an array of skills, knowledge and abilities across several areas, mainly classified in three groups. Firstly, those related to port operations, engineering and increasingly port logistics are considered the core specialist competencies for those working in ports, since they constitute the core competence of port personnel. As people working in the port environment must comprehend how to run the port’s activities, these competencies are critical in building their capability. Secondly, business-related competencies, including general business and port-related one, are also essential. Indeed, as deregulation and privatization are more and more popular, competition is increasingly tense in the port business, and ports are integrated further into global supply chains, it is critical that port personnel possess not only a general understanding of the business environment in which ports are an integrated player, but also some specific skills, knowledge and abilities relating to the port business itself. To complete the profile, port personnel must also acquire management competencies as they move up their career ladder. The port cannot be successful without
17
qualified employees and capable managers, thus management competencies, both in general and port-related, must be desired by port personnel. Overall, the ideal competency profile of port personnel should consist of skills, knowledge and abilities in the areas of business, port and logistics affairs and management, both of generalist and specialist nature. This conceptual framework of competencies for port personnel is depicted in Figure 1. Insert Figure 1 about here
From the above discussion, it is evident that port personnel must be multi-talented across a range of business and management skills as well as having the depth of port and logistics knowledge and abilities, which means they must have both generalist and specialist knowledge, skills and abilities to cope with increasing job demand. By critical reasoning, checking for scope and semantic similarity and combining across the four cornerstone resources, a framework containing 65 essential competencies for port personnel is then proposed. This is presented in Table 4. Insert Table 4 about here
3.4
Design and administration of survey questionnaire
Both fixed-alternative and open-ended response questions were utilized in the questionnaire, preceded by a cover letter. There are two main sections in the questionnaire. The first section aims to explore competencies required by port personnel by asking respondents to rank the perceived importance of the proposed 65 skills, knowledge and abilities on the scale with 1 indicating ‘not at all important’ and 5 denoting ‘great important’. The last section of the questionnaire aimed to collect some data to draw out respondents’ profile. The survey questionnaire was pre-tested with a deputy CEO of a port in Vietnam. Once this was completed and all feedback was incorporated in a revised questionnaire, the finalized version
18
was mailed, together with a cover letter and a self-addressed envelope, to all 53 members of VPA, addressing to the CEO as the receiver.
4.
Data analysis and discussion
4.1
Measurement scale reliability analysis
In this study, the accepted value level of reliability (Chronbach’s alpha value) is above 0.60 for the scale. Table 5 shows the item-total correlation analysis and Chronbach’s alpha value of the scale measuring perceptions of 65 competencies. It is decided that no variable is dropped from the scale, as each is considered a reliable competency necessary for port executives. Even when the variable with the lowest item-total correlation is dropped from the scale, the scale’s alpha is still very high (0.911). The overall alpha value for the questionnaire is 0.915, which indicates that the survey instrument is very reliable. Insert Table 5 about here
4.2
Perception of the proposed framework of competency requirements
Table 6 presents the descriptive statistical results of the proposed 65 competencies which deem essential for port personnel at the supervisory and higher level. Mean and standard deviation were computed to derive the descriptive profile of variables. Based on the mean scores, conclusion could be drawn on respondents’ perception of the perceived importance of each skill, knowledge and ability. Ranking of these competencies in terms of importance could also be established based on their mean scores and standard deviation. Specifically, as the midpoint of the scale is 3 (moderate important), those variables having a mean score greater than 3 would indicate that their importance is supported by the survey respondents, while those with mean score less than 2 (little important) should be eliminated from the
19
original model. In addition, the test of significant at 95% confidence level using z test (Zikmund, 2003) was also conducted to examine the generalisability of all variables involved. Insert Table 6 about here
It can be seen from Table 6 that no competency in the proposed framework has the mean score of response less than 2, which means all of them are accepted as essential skills, knowledge and abilities that port personnel should possess to be successful in ports of the new era. As no proposed competency is dropped from the conceptual framework, it is evident that port personnel at the supervisory and above level would need skills, knowledge and abilities of both business, port and logistics and management areas to be competent and successful at their workplace in the new era. Looking at the results more specifically, it can be seen that the five competencies that were perceived as least important by respondents are all in the group of logistics affairs-related skills and knowledge, including materials handling (POCOM45), reverse logistics (POCOM51), salvage and scrap disposal (POCOM50), transportation management (POCOM46) and contract management (POCOM43). Nevertheless, even the least perceived important competency has the mean score of 2.38, towards moderate importance on the scale. The result that most competencies with the lowest mean scores are logistics affairs-related is quite expected, given the context that transport and logistics-related skills to be incorporated into the competency profile of port personnel is quite a new perception, and the survey was conducted in Vietnam where most ports have not yet developed to be real logistical platforms. Even so, the finding that all those logistics-related competencies were perceived as more than having ‘little importance’ signifies that port personnel in the future cannot neglect them in their desired competency profile.
20
Among the most perceived important competencies are container ship and yard operations (POCOM32), personal enthusiasm and integrity (POCOM60), dangerous cargo operations (POCOM36), berth planning (POCOM33), port strategic planning, master planning and operations planning (POCOM63), and Management Information System including terminal planning system (POCOM64), with all mean score of response greater than 4 (important) and towards 5 (most important). It is worth noticing that all these skills, knowledge and abilities fall in the groups of port and logistics affairs- and management-related; specifically in the sub-groups of port operations-related and generalist- and port-related of management. In this connection, the finding that personal enthusiasm and integrity was seen as the second most important competency concurs with findings in the earlier studies, most recently in Thai et al. (2010), in which this personal trait was also seen as one of the top important competencies that logistics professional need to possess. Port-related management skills and abilities, specifically in the area of port strategic planning, master planning and operations planning and time in port and port productivity management were also seen as critical to port personnel at the supervisory level and above. The importance of ICT in port operations and management was also acknowledged with Management Information System including terminal planning system rated among the most important competencies. This is in line with earlier literature in which ports are increasingly seen as knowledge-intensive rather than labor-focused hubs. Another worth noticing result is that customs procedures (POCOM17) was also seen as an essential knowledge that port personnel need to acquire. This again illustrates the argument that ports nowadays are integrated more into supply chains, and thus it is important for port personnel to possess cross-functional skills and knowledge. Overall, respondents appreciated the importance of not only technical skills in port operations and management, but also portrelated business and management skills, knowledge and abilities.
21
In order to understand more specifically respondents’ perception of the importance of competency sub-groups, t tests were conducted for business- and management-related groups while ANOVA tests was performed for port and logistics affairs-related group, all at 95% significant level. The results are summarized in Tables 7 and 8. It is evident from Table 7 that there is a significant difference in respondents’ perception towards the importance of generalist and port-related competencies in the business-related competency group, in that the latter was rated significantly more important than was the former. The same finding can be observed for management-related competency group. Meanwhile, within the port and logistics affairs-related competency group, there is no significant difference in respondents’ perception towards port operations- and port engineering-related sub-groups, but there is so between these two sub-groups and logistics affairs-related sub-group (Table 8). It can be interpreted from these findings that while port personnel should embrace new competencies in other areas of general business, logistics and management, it is still critical for them to acquire and sustain essential competencies in the port-related areas. ANOVA test was also conducted to examine whether there is significant difference between competency groups (Table 9). At this level, while there is no significant difference between business- and port and logistics affairsrelated groups, respondents rated management-related competency group significantly more important than did the other two groups. This finding is in line with other related earlier literature in that logistics professionals need to be managers first, not logistians (Thai et al., 2010; Murphy and Poist, 2006, 1998, 1993, 1991a, 1991b). Similarly, it can be inferred that port personnel at the supervisory level and above should be proficient in management-related competencies, especially port-related ones, while also need to continuously acquire skills and knowledge in the business- and logistics-related areas. Insert Tables 7, 8 and 9 here
22
Respondents’ perception of the proposed competency framework by their work designation and the types of port they are working in was also explored using t tests at 95% significant level. While respondents’ designation was classified into two groups namely senior management (directors and deputy directors) and middle management including the remaining positions, their workplace was grouped into dedicated container and general purpose ports. The test results show that, while respondents were indifferent in terms of their perception of the framework by their designation, there is a significant difference between them when classified by their workplace. In this connection, respondents working in dedicated container ports rated competencies of pricing of port services, port marketing information systems, and time in port and port productivity measurement significantly more important than did those working in general purpose ports. Meanwhile, materials handling, packaging, effective supervision of staff and problem-solving ability were rated significantly more important by respondents working in general purpose than those in dedicated container ports. It can be inferred from this finding that port personnel at the supervisory and above in general purpose ports are more concerned with necessary skills, knowledge and abilities in the logistics- and management-related areas, whereas those in dedicated container ports focused more on competencies relating to port operations and management. These above results are summaried in Table 10. Insert Table 10 here
5.
Conclusion and recommendation
It has long been argued that there should be some minimum competency requirements for port personnel worldwide similar to seafarers working onboard ships governed by the STCW convention (IPTC, 2001). Indeed, while this has not yet been realized, port personnel has been under constant pressure to acquire and possess new skills, knowledge and abilities from cross-
23
functional areas, given the changing role of ports to be integrated further into supply chains, increasing competition, and shifting from a labor-based to knowledge-intensive platform. In an effort to address this research issue, this study has found that port personnel at the supervisory level and above should possess a widespread scope of competencies in three main areas of business, port and logistics affairs, and management, in which port-related management skills, knowledge and abilities are deemed the most essential. Being perhaps the first research attempt in the field, this research is constrained by a small sample size and localized group of samples, and thus further generalization must be conducted with caution. The reliability and rigor of this research can be strengthened by conducting similar studies in other port contexts, as well as addressing a wider target population groups.
Nevertheless, this research presents some important contribution in terms of both academic and management aspects. First, although challenges affecting on ports in the new era have long been realized, research on the essential competency requirements for port personnel to be successful in the workplace has been scant. This research has therefore contributed to enrich the literature on what skills, knowledge and abilities port personnel should possess to excel in the ports in the new era. Findings from this research also highlight that, in order to successfully address new challenges, essential competency requirements for port personnel should go beyond those in the port operations, engineering and management only and cover as well necessary skills, knowledge and abilities in the general business, logistics and management fields. This is important for port management in designing, implementing and sustaining their human resource development programs. As such, maritime training and education, including port institutes, can use findings from this research and factor them in their curriculum so as to prepare port supervisors and managers for the future.
24
REFERENCES Ahn, Y-S. and McLean, G. N. (2008), ‘Competencies for Port and Logistics Personnel: An Application of Regional Human Resource Development’, Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 542-551. Almotairi, B. and Lumsden, K. (2009), ‘Port Logistics Platform Integration in Supply Chain Management’, International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 194-210. Boyatzis, R. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, New York: Wiley & Sons. Briscoe, J. P. and Hall, D. T. (1999), ‘An Alternative Approach and New Guidelines for Practice’, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 37-52. Campbell, J. P. (1990), ‘Modeling the Performance Prediction Problem in Industrial and Organizational Psychology’, in M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Consulting Psychologists, Palo Alto, CA. Carter, Phillip R. and Carter J. Joseph (2007), ‘The Future of Supply Chain Management – Part 3: Organisation + Talent’, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 11, No. 8, pp. 37 – 43. Christopher, Martin (1998), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Financial Times, London. City of St. Petersburg (1996), ‘Port Supervisor’, www.Stpete.org/hr/jobs/Port%20Supervisor.pdf. Closs, David J. (2000), ‘Preface’, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 21, No. 1, p. i. Cunningham, L., Young, C. & Lee, M. (2000), ‘Methodological Triangulation in Measuring Public Transportation Service Quality’, Transportation Journal, Fall, pp. 35–47. Gammelgaard, Britta and Larson D. Paul (2001), ‘Logistics Skills and Competencies for Supply Chain Management’, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 27-49. Gibson, B., Gibson, M. and Rutner, S. (1998), Careers in Logistics, Council of Logistics Management, Oak Brook, Illinois. Green, Andy (2010), ‘Building the Skills to Support a High-Performance Supply Chain’, Supply Chain E-Magazine, July/August 2010, www.scemagazine.com. Hafeez, K., Zhang, Y. and Malak, N. (2002), ‘Core Competence for Sustainable Competitive Advantage: A Structured Methodology for Identifying Core Competence’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 28-35. Hamburg Port Training Institute – HPTI (2010), ‘Courses and Workshops’, www.hpti.de Hayes, J. L. (1980), ‘How Competent Manager work with People’, Management Review, Vol. 69, No. 12, pp. 2-3. Heaver, T., Meersman, H., Moglia, F. and Van de Voorde, E. (2000), “Do mergers and alliances influence European shipping and seaport competition?”, Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 363-373. Huybrechts, M., Meersman, H., Van de Voode, E., Van Hooydonk, E., Verbeke, A. and Winkelmans, W. (2002), Port Competitiveness: An Economic and Legal Analysis of the Factors Determining the Competitiveness of Seaports, Editions De Boeck Ltd. International Labor organization (1996), ‘ILO Meeting Focuses on Social Labour Problems in Ports’, available in http://www.ilo.org/global/About_the_ILO/Media_and_public_information/Press_releas es/lang--en/WCMS_008054/index.htm. IPTC (2001), ‘Normalizing Training Curricula in the World Port Industry Overdue, futuristic or pointless’, http://www.iptc-online.net/pdfs/conclu20010528bdbcbk.pdf.
25
IPTC (2003), ‘Modularization and Certification in Port, transport and Logistics’, 17th International Port Training Conference, http://www.iptconline.net/pdfs/17thIPTC%20conclusions.pdf. IPTC (2005), ‘The implications of current developments in ports for port training’, http://www.iptc-online.net/pdfs/18thpapers.pdf. Ireland, R.D., Hoskisson, R.E. and hit, M.A. (2009), The Management of Strategy: Concepts and Cases, 9th edition, Cengage Learning, Australia. Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2009), Fundamentals of Strategy, Prentice Hall, Essex, UK. Jones, G.R. and Hill, C.W.L. (2010), Theory of Strategic Management with Cases, 9th edition, Cengage Learning, Australia. Le May, S. A., Jon, C. C., Jeffery, A. P. and Roger D. M. (1999), The Growth and Development of Logistics Personnel, Council of Logistics Management, Oak Brook, IL. Magala, M. and Sammons, A. (2008), “A new approach to seaport choice modelling”, Maritime Economics and Logistics Vol. 10, No. 1-2, pp. 9-34. Mangan, J. And Lalwani, C. (2008), “Port-centric Logistics”, The International Journal of Logistics Management Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 29-41. McClelland, D. C. (1973), ‘Testing for Competence rather than for Intelligence’, American Psychologist, Vol. 1, pp. 1-14. McGee, J., Thomas, H. and Wilson, D. (2005), Strategy: Analysis & practice, McGraw-Hill, Berkshire, UK. McLagan, P. A. (1997), ‘Competencies: The Next Generation’, Training and Development, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 40-48. Meersman H., Van de Voors, E. and Vanelslander, T. (2005), ‘Ports as hubs in the Logistics Chain’, in Leggate, H., McConville, J. and Morvillo, A. (eds), International maritime transport: Perspectives, Routledge Ltd, London, UK, pp. 137-144. Murphy, P. R. and Poist, R. F. (1991), ‘Skill Requirements of Senior-level Logistics Executive: An Empirical Assessment’, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 73-94. Murphy, P. R. and Poist, R. F. (1991), ‘A Comparison of Headhunter and Practitioner Views regarding Skill Requirements of Senior-level Logistics Professionals’, Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 277-294. Murphy, P. R. and Poist, R. F. (1993), ‘Career Preparation of Senior-level Transportation and Logistics Executives: Educator Perspectives’, Transportation Practitioners Journal, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 161-173. Murphy, P. R. and Poist, R. F. (1998), ‘Skill Requirements of Senior-level Logisticians: Practitioner Perspectives’, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 284-293. Murphy, Paul R. and Poist, Richard F. (2006), ‘Skill Requirements of Contemporary Seniorand Entry-level Logistics Managers: A Comparative Analysis’, Transportation Journal, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 46-60. Notteboom, T. E. and Winkelmans, W. (2001), ‘Structural Changes in Logistics: How will Port Authorities face the Challenge?’, Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 71-89. Pilnick, S. and Jo E. G. (1998), A Case of Mission Impossible, Human Systems International, Boca Raton, FL. Pinto, P. R. and Walker, J. W. (1978), A Study of Professionals Training and Development Roles and Competencies, American Society for Training and Development, Washington, DC. PSA Institute (2010), ‘Course Listings’, http://psa-institute.com/course-listing.aspx. 26
Razzaque, Mohammed A. and Sirat, Mas S. Bin. (2001), ‘Skill Requirements: Perceptions of the Senior Asian Logisticians’, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 374-395. Robinson, R. (2002), “Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: the new paradigm”, Maritime Policy and Management Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 241-255. Rodrigue, J-P. and Notteboom, T. (2008), “The terminalisation of supply chains”, In Proceedings of the IAME 2008 Conference, Dalian, China. Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P. & Simchi-Levi, E. (2008), Designing and Managing the Supply Chain. 3rd edn., McGraw-Hill, USA. SKEMA (2009), ‘SE2.2.3 “Port Related Training”’, www.myprojectspace.eu/AppDocuments/tblDocuments/62/D2.2.3.2%20POrt%20Relat ed%20Training_NECL_18Mar09.pdf. Spencer, L. M. Jr., and Spencer, S. M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, Wiley, New York. Swanson, R. A. (1990), ‘Improving Work Performance’, Educational Technology, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp. 16-20. Sweeney, E. and Evangelista, P. (2005), ‘Port Community Learning Needs: Analsis and Design’, Pomorski zbornik, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 27-43. Thai, V. V. and Grewal, D. (2005), ‘An Analysis of the Efficiency and Competitiveness of Vietnamese Port System’, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 3-31. Thai, V. V., Cahoon, S. and Tran, T. H. (2010), ‘Skills and Knowledge Requirements for Logistics Professionals in Australia’, in Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Australia New Zealand Academy of Management, Adelaide, December 8-10th. World Bank (2007), World Bank Seaport Toolkit, 2nd edn, World Bank, Washington, USA. Zikmund, W. (2003), Business Research Methods, 7th edition, Thomson Learning, SouthWestern Publishers, USA. Young, L. 1998, ‘Human Element’, Materials Management and Distribution, December, P. 27.
27
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Training themes/courses Equipment operator training
Port operations
Management
Safety-related issues
Port economics
Specific knowledge, skills and abilities • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Equipment safety measures Equipment operating procedures Solving technical problems Introduction to equipment maintenance & repair Cargo handling operating procedures Roles and functions of ports Navigation and traffic control Planning and operations for conventional cargo terminals (including dry bulk, liquid bulk & general cargo handling) Transit shed and warehouse operations Freight station operations Container ship and yard operations Ship stowage planning Quay transfer operations Dangerous cargo operations Port productivity measurement Management Information System, including terminal planning systems Human resource development Team building and communication Quality management application in ports Principles of fire fighting Dangerous cargo regulations Occupational health & safety Port security, including ISPS Code, 24-hour rule, CSI Port revenue, costs and charges Port tariff 28
• Pricing of port services • Port marketing mix • Port market segmentation • Port marketing information systems • Port marketing communication tools Table 1: Analysis of Port Training Themes and Courses Source: The Author, compiled from training programs of PSA Institute (2010) and HPTI (2010)
Port marketing
Competency group
Skills, knowledge and abilities
Business-related
• Accounting & financial management • Analysis statistical data • Managing client relationships • General business administration • Human resource management • Quality management • International business • Risk management • Impact of globalization & climate change • Strategic planning & management • Economic principles • Information system management • Industrial relations • Occupational health & safety • Corporate social responsibility Logistics-related • Customer service • Contract management • Purchasing • Materials handling • Transportation management • Packaging • Inventory management • Warehousing • Salvage and scrap disposal • Reverse logistics Management-related • Ability to plan, organize, lead & control • Effective oral & written communication • Effective supervision of staff • Ability to delegate, train & motivate staff • Ability to negotiate • Problem-solving ability • Effective time management • Ability to adapt to organizational change • Personal enthusiasm & integrity • Knowing two or more languages Table 2: Competencies in Transport and Logistics most Suitable to Port Personnel Source: The Author, compiled from Thai et al. (2010) Building blocks
Areas of competency
Examples of key competencies
29
Typical
references Existing literature on port competencies
• ICT tools • SCM/Logistics understanding and skills • Management capability • Quality management
Job analysis and training programs
• Port operations & management • ICT skills • Interpersonal skills • Management skills
• Port & logistics IT using ability • Planning & management ability • Customs procedure system ability • Quality management ability for port & logistics systems • Service quality improvement ability • Commercial port operations, including dangerous cargo • Computer operations skill • Ability to plan, organize & supervise • Communication skill • Leadership skill • Customer relationship management skill Detailed competencies are listed in Table 1
• Equipment operating skills • Port operations & management • Port safety & security • Port economics • Port marketing Detailed competencies are listed Competencies of • Business-related competencies in Table 2 transport & logistics • Logistics-related professionals competencies • Management-related competencies Competencies • Technical functional • Commercial port operations skills • Use of terminal operations identified • ICT skills system • Management skills & • Use of port’s KPIs abilities • Understanding of port • General understanding logistics activities of logistics • Understanding & application • Negotiation skills of ISPS Code • Knowledge & skills in port safety, security & emergency management Table 3: Summary of Competencies relevant to Port Personnel Source: The Author GENERALIST COMPETENCIES
30
SPECIALIST COMPETENCIES
Sweeney and Evangelista (2005); Ahn and McLean (2008)
City of St. Petersburg (1996); SKEMA (2009)
PSA Institute (2010); Hamburg Port Training Institute ( 2010)
Murphy and Poist (1991a, 1991b, 1993, 1998, 2006); Thai et al. (2010) Analysis from the interviews
General management
General business
Port management Port business
CORE SPECIALIST COMPETENCIES Port operations Port engineering Port logistics PORT COMPETENCIES Figure 1: Conceptual framework of port competency profile Source: The Author Competency group
Competency subgroups
Generalist
Business-related
Port-related
Skills, knowledge and abilities • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Accounting & financial management (POCOM1) Analysis statistical data (POCOM2) Managing client relationships (POCOM3) General business administration (POCOM4) Human resource management (POCOM5) Quality and customer service management (POCOM6) International business (POCOM7) Risk management, including emergency management (POCOM8) Impact of globalization & climate change (POCOM9) Strategic planning & management (POCOM10) Economic principles (POCOM11) Information system management (POCOM12) Industrial relations (POCOM13) Occupational health & safety (POCOM14) Corporate social responsibility (POCOM15) Roles and functions of ports (POCOM16) Customs procedures (POCOM17) Port revenue, costs and charges (POCOM18) Port tariff (POCOM19) Pricing of port services (POCOM20) Port marketing mix (POCOM21) Port market segmentation (POCOM22) Port marketing information systems (POCOM23) Port marketing communication tools (POCOM24) Principles of fire fighting (POCOM25) Dangerous cargo regulations (POCOM26) 31
Port and logistics affairs-related
Management-related
• Port safety & security, including ISPS Code, 24-hour rule, CSI (POCOM27) • Navigation and traffic control (POCOM28) • Planning and operations for conventional cargo terminals (including dry bulk, liquid bulk & general cargo handling) (POCOM29) • Transit shed and warehouse operations (POCOM30) • Freight station operations (POCOM31) Port operations• Container ship and yard operations (POCOM32) related • Berth planning (POCOM33) • Ship stowage planning (POCOM34) • Quay transfer operations (POCOM35) • Dangerous cargo operations (POCOM36) • Reefer cargo operations (POCOM37) • Project cargo operations (POCOM38) • Equipment safety measures (POCOM39) Port engineering• Equipment operating procedures (POCOM40) • Solving technical problems (POCOM41) related • Introduction to equipment maintenance & repair (POCOM42) • Contract management (POCOM43) • Purchasing (POCOM44) • Materials handling (POCOM45) Logistics affairs• Transportation management (POCOM46) • Packaging (POCOM47) related • Inventory management (POCOM48) • Warehousing (POCOM49) • Salvage and scrap disposal (POCOM50) • Reverse logistics (POCOM51) • Ability to plan, organize, lead & control (POCOM52) • Effective oral & written communication (POCOM53) • Effective supervision of staff (POCOM54) • Ability to delegate, train & motivate staff (POCOM55) • Ability to negotiate (POCOM56) Generalist • Problem-solving ability (POCOM57) • Effective time management (POCOM58) • Ability to adapt to organizational change (POCOM59) • Personal enthusiasm & integrity (POCOM60) • Knowing two or more languages (POCOM61) • Team building and communication (POCOM62) • Port strategic planning, master planning and operations planning (POCOM63) Port-related • Management Information System, including terminal planning systems (POCOM64) • Time in port and port productivity management, including KPI measurement (POCOM65) Table 4: Competency requirements for port personnel Source: The Author
32
POCOM1 POCOM2 POCOM3 POCOM4 POCOM5 POCOM6 POCOM7 POCOM8 POCOM9 POCOM10 POCOM11 POCOM12 POCOM13 POCOM14 POCOM15 POCOM16 POCOM17 POCOM18 POCOM19 POCOM20 POCOM21 POCOM22 POCOM23 POCOM24 POCOM25 POCOM26 POCOM27 POCOM28 POCOM29 POCOM30 POCOM31 POCOM32 POCOM33 POCOM34 POCOM35 POCOM36 POCOM37 POCOM38 POCOM39 POCOM40 POCOM41 POCOM42 POCOM43 POCOM44 POCOM45 POCOM46 POCOM47 POCOM48
Scale Mean if Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted Item Deleted Total Correlation 236.5313 377.354 .680 236.5313 385.612 .308 236.4375 382.835 .459 236.3125 379.835 .461 236.4063 383.088 .343 236.2813 388.467 .259 236.4375 381.351 .507 236.4688 390.773 .156 236.3125 377.448 .490 236.3750 390.371 .137 236.3438 386.620 .322 236.5313 379.483 .477 236.3438 390.943 .180 236.6875 389.512 .242 236.5625 384.060 .411 235.9063 389.636 .288 235.2813 381.241 .502 235.4688 388.580 .417 235.2813 384.854 .503 235.7188 380.854 .506 235.7813 384.305 .486 235.4063 381.991 .619 235.2813 387.112 .382 235.7500 389.419 .304 235.4375 387.157 .465 235.3750 380.177 .676 235.4688 389.289 .347 235.3750 393.145 .237 235.3125 387.448 .499 235.4688 388.515 .322 235.9375 391.609 .185 235.0938 386.088 .519 235.1875 384.480 .501 235.3750 379.403 .616 235.4375 384.319 .372 235.1875 392.028 .255 235.3125 387.383 .377 235.7500 381.484 .532 235.5625 399.867 -.080 235.8125 383.641 .469 235.3750 389.210 .321 235.2813 387.176 .354 236.9375 401.351 -.131 236.8438 378.717 .517 237.2188 400.434 -.115 237.0000 395.484 .054 236.8438 394.265 .097 236.7188 394.596 .067 33
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .911 .914 .913 .913 .914 .914 .912 .916 .912 .917 .914 .913 .915 .915 .913 .914 .912 .913 .913 .912 .913 .912 .913 .914 .913 .911 .914 .914 .913 .914 .915 .913 .913 .912 .914 .914 .913 .912 .917 .913 .914 .914 .917 .912 .917 .916 .916 .916
POCOM49 236.7813 395.660 .043 .916 POCOM50 237.0625 399.867 -.081 .917 POCOM51 237.0625 398.835 -.050 .916 POCOM52 235.4063 385.152 .491 .913 POCOM53 235.9063 373.120 .667 .911 POCOM54 235.8750 381.145 .485 .913 POCOM55 235.4375 375.931 .684 .911 POCOM56 235.4375 379.415 .641 .911 POCOM57 235.9688 379.838 .513 .912 POCOM58 235.5000 381.677 .490 .912 POCOM59 235.9688 387.128 .348 .914 POCOM60 235.1563 384.975 .394 .913 POCOM61 235.5625 380.319 .559 .912 POCOM62 235.4375 384.964 .513 .913 POCOM63 235.2188 380.370 .621 .912 POCOM64 235.2188 385.273 .388 .913 POCOM65 235.2500 386.258 .481 .913 Table 5: Reliability analysis of scale measuring necessary competencies for port personnel Competency POCOM32
M 4.50
STD 0.57
Zstat 1.96
zobs 14.94
Rank 1
Competency POCOM21
M 3.81
STD 0.69
Zstat 1.96
zobs 6.64
Rank 34
POCOM60
4.44
0.80
1.96
10.16
2
POCOM40
3.78
0.75
1.96
5.89
35
POCOM36
4.41
0.56
1.96
14.21
3
POCOM54
3.72
0.85
1.96
4.78
36
POCOM33
4.41
0.67
1.96
11.96
4
POCOM16
3.69
0.69
1.96
5.61
37
POCOM63
4.38
0.71
1.96
11.00
5
POCOM53
3.69
0.93
1.96
4.18
38
POCOM64
4.38
0.79
1.96
9.81
6
POCOM31
3.66
0.79
1.96
4.71
39
POCOM65
4.34
0.60
1.96
12.64
7
POCOM59
3.63
0.75
1.96
4.71
40
POCOM19
4.31
0.64
1.96
11.52
8
POCOM57
3.63
0.87
1.96
4.06
41
POCOM17
4.31
0.82
1.96
9.05
9
POCOM6
3.31
0.86
1.96
2.06
42
POCOM42
4.31
0.74
1.96
10.06
10
POCOM4
3.28
0.96
1.96
1.66
43
POCOM23
4.31
0.69
1.96
10.72
11
POCOM9
3.28
1.02
1.96
1.55
44
POCOM37
4.28
0.68
1.96
10.61
12
POCOM11
3.25
0.84
1.96
1.68
45
POCOM29
4.28
0.52
1.96
13.87
13
POCOM13
3.25
0.88
1.96
1.61
46
POCOM28
4.22
0.49
1.96
14.05
14
POCOM10
3.22
1.16
1.96
1.07
47
POCOM26
4.22
0.66
1.96
10.46
15
POCOM5
3.19
1.03
1.96
1.03
48
POCOM34
4.22
0.75
1.96
9.18
16
POCOM7
3.16
0.81
1.96
1.09
49
POCOM41
4.22
0.66
1.96
10.46
17
POCOM3
3.16
0.81
1.96
1.09
50
POCOM52
4.19
0.64
1.96
10.42
18
POCOM8
3.13
1.01
1.96
0.70
51
POCOM22
4.19
0.64
1.96
10.42
19
POCOM2
3.06
0.95
1.96
0.37
52
POCOM35
4.16
0.88
1.96
7.40
20
POCOM1
3.06
0.76
1.96
0.47
53
POCOM25
4.16
0.57
1.96
11.39
21
POCOM12
3.06
0.95
1.96
0.37
54
POCOM56
4.16
0.72
1.96
9.04
22
POCOM15
3.03
0.82
1.96
0.21
55
POCOM55
4.16
0.81
1.96
8.10
23
POCOM14
2.91
0.82
1.96
-0.65
56
34
POCOM62
4.16
0.63
1.96
10.42
24
POCOM48
2.88
0.94
1.96
-0.75
57
POCOM30
4.13
0.71
1.96
9.00
25
POCOM49
2.81
0.90
1.96
-1.18
58
POCOM27
4.13
0.61
1.96
10.45
26
POCOM47
2.75
0.80
1.96
-1.76
59
POCOM18
4.13
0.55
1.96
11.50
27
POCOM44
2.75
0.92
1.96
-1.54
60
POCOM58
4.09
0.82
1.96
7.57
28
POCOM43
2.66
0.75
1.96
-2.61
61
POCOM39
4.03
0.78
1.96
7.46
29
POCOM46
2.59
0.84
1.96
-2.75
62
POCOM61
4.03
0.78
1.96
7.46
30
POCOM50
2.53
0.76
1.96
-3.48
63
POCOM20
3.88
0.83
1.96
5.94
31
POCOM51
2.53
0.62
1.96
-4.27
64
POCOM38
3.84
0.77
1.96
6.23
32
POCOM45
2.38
0.61
1.96
-5.80
65
POCOM24
3.84 0.68 1.96 7.05 33 Table 6: Descriptive analysis of the proposed conceptual framework
Business-related competency group
Management-related competency group
Generalist
Port-related
M
STD
M
STD
3.16
0.44
4.08
0.39
Generalist M
p value 0.00
Port-related STD
M
p value
STD
0.00 3.99 0.58 4.37 0.55 Table 7: Respondents’ perception of the importance of business- and management-related sub-groups of competencies Port operations-related
Port & Logistics Affairsrelated competency group
Port engineering-related
M
STD
M
STD
4.19
0.38
4.09
0.42
Port engineering-related STD
M
STD
4.09
0.42
2.65
0.35
Port operations-related M
0.15
Logistics affairs-related
M
M
p value 0.00
Logistics affairs-related
STD
p value
p value
STD
0.00 4.19 0.38 2.65 0.35 Table 8: Respondents’ perception of the importance of port and logistics affairs-related sub-groups of competencies Business-related
Port & Logistics Affairs-related
M
STD
M
STD
3.62
0.37
3.64
0.27
35
p value 0.38
Business-related
Management-related
M
STD
M
STD
3.62
0.37
4.18
0.51
Port & Logistics Affairs-related
p value 0.00
Management-related
M
STD
M
STD
3.64
0.27
4.18
0.51
p value 0.00
Table 9: Respondents’ perception of the importance of business-, port and logistics affairs-and management-related groups of competencies Competency
Container M
STD
General purpose M
STD
Sig.
Competency
Container M
STD
General purpose M
STD
Sig.
POCOM1
3.33
0.50
2.96
0.82
0.13 POCOM34
4.56
0.73
4.09
0.73
0.12
POCOM2
3.44
1.01
2.91
0.90
0.19 POCOM35
4.44
0.73
4.04
0.93
0.21
POCOM3
3.56
0.88
3.00
0.74
0.12 POCOM36
4.44
0.53
4.39
0.58
0.81
POCOM4
3.56
1.01
3.17
0.94
0.35 POCOM37
4.56
0.53
4.17
0.72
0.11
POCOM5
3.56
1.24
3.04
0.93
0.28 POCOM38
4.22
0.83
3.70
0.70
0.12
POCOM6
3.67
0.71
3.17
0.89
0.12 POCOM39
3.67
0.71
4.17
0.78
0.10
POCOM7
3.22
0.83
3.13
0.81
0.78 POCOM40
3.89
0.78
3.74
0.75
0.63
POCOM8
3.11
1.05
3.13
1.01
0.96 POCOM41
4.44
0.73
4.13
0.63
0.27
POCOM9
3.44
0.88
3.22
1.09
0.55 POCOM42
4.33
0.71
4.30
0.76
0.92
POCOM10
3.22
0.97
3.22
1.24
0.99 POCOM43
2.44
0.53
2.74
0.81
0.24
POCOM11
3.44
0.73
3.17
0.89
0.39 POCOM44
2.67
0.87
2.78
0.95
0.74
POCOM12
2.78
0.83
3.17
0.98
0.27 POCOM45
2.11
0.33
2.48
0.67
0.05
POCOM13
2.89
1.05
3.39
0.78
0.22 POCOM46
2.89
1.05
2.48
0.73
0.31
POCOM14
3.22
0.67
2.78
0.85
0.14 POCOM47
2.22
0.44
2.96
0.82
0.00
POCOM15
3.22
0.83
2.96
0.82
0.43 POCOM48
2.78
0.67
2.91
1.04
0.67
POCOM16
3.56
0.73
3.74
0.69
0.52 POCOM49
3.00
1.00
2.74
0.86
0.50
POCOM17
4.22
0.67
4.35
0.88
0.67 POCOM50
2.56
0.73
2.52
0.79
0.91
POCOM18
4.11
0.33
4.13
0.63
0.91 POCOM51
2.67
0.50
2.48
0.67
0.40
POCOM19
4.56
0.53
4.22
0.67
0.15 POCOM52
4.22
0.44
4.17
0.72
0.82
POCOM20
4.33
0.71
3.70
0.82
0.04 POCOM53
3.44
0.73
3.78
1.00
0.30
POCOM21
4.00
0.71
3.74
0.69
0.36 POCOM54
3.22
0.44
3.91
0.90
0.01
POCOM22
4.33
0.50
4.13
0.69
0.37 POCOM55
4.33
0.71
4.09
0.85
0.41
POCOM23
4.78
0.44
4.13
0.69
0.00 POCOM56
4.33
0.50
4.09
0.79
0.30
POCOM24
4.11
0.60
3.74
0.69
0.15 POCOM57
3.11
0.33
3.83
0.94
0.00
POCOM25
4.33
0.50
4.09
0.60
0.25 POCOM58
3.78
0.67
4.22
0.85
0.14
POCOM26
4.44
0.53
4.13
0.69
0.18 POCOM59
3.56
0.73
3.65
0.78
0.74
POCOM27
4.11
0.60
4.13
0.63
0.94 POCOM60
4.44
0.88
4.43
0.79
0.98
POCOM28
4.33
0.50
4.17
0.49
0.43 POCOM61
3.78
0.67
4.13
0.81
0.22
POCOM29
4.44
0.53
4.22
0.52
0.29 POCOM62
4.00
0.00
4.22
0.74
0.17
36
POCOM30
4.11
0.60
4.13
0.76
0.94 POCOM63
4.44
0.53
4.35
0.78
0.69
POCOM31
4.00
0.71
3.52
0.79
0.12 POCOM64
4.22
0.67
4.43
0.84
0.46
POCOM32 POCOM33
4.78 0.44 4.39 0.58 0.06 POCOM65 4.67 0.50 4.22 4.33 0.71 4.43 0.66 0.72 Table 10: Respondents’ perception of the proposed framework by types of port
0.60
0.05
37
