Elements and Performance Criteria

Context
Organisations with whom partnerships can be established include:
· parent company
· joint venture partners
· organisations within a given geographical radius
· external agencies

The framework describes the structure, policy and processes of the partnership to best meet stakeholder needs.
Measures of success refers to the quantifiable and qualitative goals that the partnership has developed to indicate that its purposes are being achieved.

Challenges facing the partnership refers to establishing a cohesive network for effective incident response, rebuilding the partnership in the event of an incident with partners and promoting a positive image of the Company.

Opportunities for learning refers to practices of reflection throughout the workings of the partnership to seek opportunities for improvement in the organisation's incident response, learning from incidents or systems/processes/procedures in own company and partner organisations.

Agreed measurement systems refers to the process of measuring the identified success criteria as established by the partners.

HSE
All operations to which this unit applies are subject to stringent Health, Safety and Environment requirements, which may be imposed through State or federal legislation, and these must not be compromised at any time. Where there is an apparent conflict between performance criteria and HSE requirements, the HSE requirements take precedence.

Relationship to Major Hazard Facility Legislation
· Organisations within the Chemical, Hydrocarbons and Oil Refining industries may find themselves falling under the provisions of various Major Hazard Facilities legislation. In developing this unit consideration has been given to the requirements of Sections 8 and 9 of the National Standard For The Control Of Major Hazard Facilities [NOHSC:1014(2002)] and the National Code Of Practice For The Control Of Major Hazard Facilities [NOHSC:2016(1996)].
· This unit will assist individuals to meet some of their obligations under the relevant State or Territory legislation. Responsibility for appropriate contextualisation and application of the unit to ensure compliance however, remains with the individual organisation.

Assessment context and methods
· Assessment for this unit of competency will be by way of simulation or observation under incident conditions. The unit will be assessed in as holistic a manner as is practical and may be integrated with the assessment of other relevant units of competency. Assessment will occur over a range of situations which can include a variety of incident circumstances.
· Simulations must, as closely as possible, approximate actual incident conditions and should be based on the actual facility. Assessments should include 'walk throughs' of the relevant competency components and may include the use of case studies/scenarios and role plays.
· This unit of competency requires a significant body of knowledge which will be assessed through questioning and the use of 'what if' scenarios both in the facility (during demonstration of normal operations and walk throughs of abnormal operations) and off the site.

Critical aspects
Competence must be demonstrated in the ability to recognise and analyse potential situations requiring action and then in implementing appropriate responsive action. The emphasis should be on the ability to deal effectively with the incident or to contribute effectively to the recovery from the incident.

Consistent performance should be demonstrated. In particular look to see that:
· strategic communication and conflict resolution skills are demonstrated
· strategic planning is evident including the developing of objectives, strategies and relevant budgets
· partnerships are identified and inclusive proposals developed
· benefits to potential partners and the organisation are identified
· ability to initiate, co-ordinate and conduct discussions with pertinent external organisations in a manner that promotes a positive image of the company is present
· learnings from partnership are brought back into the organisation and analysed for adaptation where appropriate to improve incident response
· effective consultation occurs with team members or appropriate personnel on issues; and follow-up occurs on all issues until resolution is achieved
· actions taken enhance incident response effectiveness

These assessment activities should include a range of problems, including new, unusual and improbable situations which may have been generated from past workplace incident history, incidents in similar workplaces around the world, hazard analysis activities and/or similar sources.

Resource implications
Assessment will require (1) access to an accurately simulated environment or (2) a suitable method of gathering evidence of responding ability over a range of situations. A bank of scenarios/case studies/what ifs and a bank of questions to probe the reasoning behind the observable actions will likewise be required.

Other assessment advice
In all facilities it may be appropriate to assess this unit concurrently with other relevant units.

Essential knowledge
The knowledge referred to in the evidence guide for this Unit includes:
· company incident response structures and operations
· one's role within the incident response structure, including its parameters, boundaries and/or limitations
· roles, responsibilities and needs of one's own organisation
· roles, responsibilities and needs of other organisations
· understanding of the mission, values and culture of the organisations targeted for and within the partnership
· clarity of 'chain of command' - who will drive the partnership and how it relates to decision making in the organisations
· company security, confidentiality and communication requirements

Competence also includes the ability to isolate the causes of problems within the incident response system and to be able to distinguish between causes of problems indicated by:
· inability to contact key partners in the event of a crisis
· response times or objectives confused or outside agreed parameters
· gaps or overlaps in response, which reduce effectiveness of the response
· lack of ability to communicate effectively within the organisation