Has Egan delivered change?

Kingston University
Professor Sarah Sayce and Judith Farren-Bradley

With this research project we explored the extent to which built environment professionals are able to learn the skills and attributes needed to effectively engage with local communities.

Key points

• We need to distinguish between soft skills and personal attributes learned ‘on the job’
• Appropriate and flexible learning environments are needed
• Professional bodies need to place greater emphasis on stakeholder engagement
• New professionals should be tested on their community engagement skills
• Empowering communities requires practitioners to become open to new ways of working
• Skills such as facilitation, listening and effective dialogue are vital.

We wanted to understand the learning and continuing professional development opportunities currently provided by employers, educational establishments and professional institutes. We examined how practitioners themselves acquire skills and knowledge throughout their working lives: at undergraduate and postgraduate level; through the process of professional registration; and through ongoing continuing professional development and lifelong learning.

Our key point of reference was the 2004 Egan Review which identified the generic skills which professionals such as architects, planners and surveyors needed if they were to help build sustainable communities. We also took on board key academic and policy reports which have demonstrated that public participation is essential if planning and regeneration initiatives are to deliver truly sustainable developments.

We wanted to understand the impact of the Egan Review on the way professionals, academic institutions and professional bodies approach learning and skills. In short, had Egan’s call for better generic skills been heeded? Were new ways of learning emerging – ones which are based on real-life practice and experience? The latter were seen as essential for the development of so called ‘soft skills’ and personal attributes such as self-awareness and leadership.

Conclusions

We found there was little evidence that professional bodies had begun to include explicit reference to generic skills in their requirements. Higher education curricula and professional and occupational standards do appear to place a degree of emphasis on such skills – although these tend to be placed in the context of the discipline or in relation to inter-professional interaction.

A distinction needs to be made between skills that can be taught and assessed, and the soft skills and personal attributes that are best acquired through more practical, ‘on the job’ learning. It is important to recognise that different skills and attributes lend themselves to different styles of learning and development.

For this to happen, higher education institutions need to provide appropriate and flexible learning environments. Professional bodies too need to play their part – by encouraging better cross-professional dialogue, and by placing greater emphasis on stakeholder engagement. They should also promote learning partnerships with higher education institutions, practitioners and local authorities, and test new professionals for their abilities in relation to community engagement.

There is also a role for educational support organisations such as the Centre for Education in the Built Environment (CEBE), the HCA and the Higher Education Academy in developing and improving generic skills, particularly those around facilitating better community participation in the development process. Mentors are also needed to promote self-awareness and self-development among learners, alongside technical skills.

For more information view the programmme website at http://gs.strath.ac.uk/suscoms