New SD Regulatory Framework – illustration


Front Page Looking For… Quality Council for Trades & Occupations (QCTO) New SD Regulatory Framework – illustration

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #67652
    Pierre Wepener
    Participant

    Good Afternoon Everyone,

    I am searching for an illustration/ structure/ organogram that makes sense of/or illustrate the Relationship between the Skills Development Statutory Framework, the Skills Development Legislation and the Statutory structures that resulted from the Regulation?

    If anyone on the “Skills-Universe” can help with a simple illustration it would greatly,-sincerely,-immensely,-gigantically be appreciated, and be rewarded with Chocolates and Biltong!

    Kindly save a fellow Universe traveler, if you would!?? ?

    Warm Regards and Thanking You!
    Pierre Wepener
    pierre@m3i.co.za or wepener.pc@gmail.con

    Share on Social Media
    #67655
    Des Squire
    Participant

    Hi Pierre, I am not sure if such a thing exists. Will investigate and advise soonest.

    #67660
    Tass Schwab
    Participant

    Great idea!!

    #67661
    Pierre Wepener
    Participant

    Hello Des,

    It would be great thank you! I’ve searched the web to and throw but only get partial illustrations that demonstrate functional roles per institution but not something the depicts the entire “thing” from example the NSDS further down. A Lot based on Policy perspective but not actual structure.

    Really would appreciate assistance. I am trying to put something together and will place it here, i presume to my own detriment! 😉

    Thank you.

    #67668
    Pierre Wepener
    Participant

    Another cause of concern is how organisations and people hap hazardously are using Terminology, for example; Law, Regulation, Policy, Framework, Procedures, Standards, Processes.

    No wonder people appear confused, dazed disorientated as terminology is carelessly being thrown around. When lawmakers start using terminology incorrectly it will follow the same path down to the very bottom. Terminology is not ‘semantics”. it is very essence of quality and having a standardised approach to whatever is being presented described or depicted.

    We must fix/ address the wrong use of “terminology”, we should not stand back to highlight “error” in application. As long as it is constructive, we must not refrain from indicating or correcting the misuse of terminology.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Share on Social Media