Review of Business qualifications, 2012
Summary of comments to the proposal for qualifications and their relationships, 20 August
The proposal for future Business qualifications and their relationships was distributed to
stakeholders on 26 July 2012, and published on the review webpage shortly after
(http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/qualifications-standards/qualifications/business-qualifications/review-ofbusiness-qualifications/). Submissions were invited by 13 August.
This summary is intended for the Governance Group, to help focus discussion at the meeting on
24 August which will result in a brief for the working groups to develop an outcome statement for
each qualification, 29-31 August and 13-14 September.
Submissions
45 separate submissions were received totalling over 100 pages, including 30 from the ITP sector:
- 16 ITP institutions responded, sometimes with one response on behalf of the entire organisation
and sometimes with several responses – 6 responses were received from one ITP for example,
including 3 from one staff member.
- both NBAF (National Business Administration Forum) and ABEF (Applied Business Education
Forum) contributed comments.
The remaining 15 submissions include:
- 4 from three ITOs, 2 from PTEs, and one from a wānanga
- 3 national organisations or peak bodies: Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU), NZ Defence Force,
Association of Administrative Professionals (AAPNZ)
- 5 individuals.
General issues
While the broad thrust of the proposal is supported in the main, respondents provide a range of
helpful comment.
The explicit inclusion of "soft skills" in these qualifications is widely supported.
There are requests for the needs analysis, the basis for this proposal, to be published.
Issues are raised that will be addressed by the working groups who, in drafting an outcome
statement for each qualification, will provide more detail of the qualification's relevance and
outcomes, as well as pathways between the qualifications.
There is widespread concern that 40-credit qualifications may have unwelcome effects on:
 programme design
 funding mechanisms
 inclusion of sufficient breadth of content, especially in relation to 'soft skills’.
ITPs in particular favour 60 credits for discrete qualifications, and/or aggregated blocks of 15
credits.
Some submissions discuss the proposed qualifications in terms of changes to the existing
qualifications.
The needs of business owners (especially SMEs) and self-employed are raised as having
apparently been ignored in the proposal. One submission in particular proposes an entire suite of
qualifications, levels 3 to 6, for this audience.
1
Review of Business qualifications, 2012
Summary of comments to the proposal for qualifications and their relationships, 20 August
Level 2
The proposal not to develop a business qualification at level 2 is a major issue, especially with
ITPs.
Of the 18 organisations and groups in the ITP sector who responded, 14 addressed the proposal
not to have a level 2 qualification in Business. All are opposed except for one whose
organisational response (as opposed to staff members' responses) accepts the proposal, provided
foundation and specialist skills are included in the level 3 qualification.
The two PTE responses are divided about this proposal, as are the two individuals who responded
on this topic.
NZCTU recommend retention of a level 2 qualification "to cover the skills and knowledge of
participating in a workplace team". This is echoed, sometimes implicitly, in other submissions, and
reflects an issue raised in connection with the NZCB Team Leadership, level 3 (see below).
The main reasons advanced for retaining a level 2 Business qualification are:
 the popularity of current programmes and their beneficial effects for learners
 providing pathways to employment and to further study, to BusAdmin and to other more
diverse opportunities
 meeting the foundation needs (including literacy and numeracy) of a range of groups, including
people returning to work, minority groups, ESOL learners, ...
 providing a "safe" reintroduction to education for people and building their confidence on
educational success.
Levels 3 and 4
Many respondents question whether Financial Skills (currently at level 3) and Application of
Business Technology (currently at level 4) are at the right level and/or whether they should be at
both levels 3 and 4. A financial skills pathway from levels 3 to 6 requires a level 4 qualification.
Because Business Administration uses a wide range of software applications, the boundary with
Application of Business Technology is not clear to some. It is also suggested that business
technology be included in other qualifications, rather than being certificated separately.
There is general support for the proposed Business Administration qualifications at all levels.
The title and focus of the proposed Team Leadership (level 3) qualification are queried. As
proposed, it appears to be relevant to someone with actual team leadership responsibilities.
Respondents identify a need for team working and allied skills for people without a leadership role.
This is a significant gap for some respondents.
Some respondents suggest that this qualification should be flexible enough to be relevant in all
team contexts, while others suggest greater contextualisation – even to individual work roles.
Respondents question the proposed Customer Service (level 3) qualification as a separate
qualification on two grounds:
 a focus on sales/selling will invalidate it as a generic business qualification and will focus on a
specific context
 customer service can be seen as one of the ‘soft skills’ that will be made explicit throughout the
business qualifications.
2
Review of Business qualifications, 2012
Summary of comments to the proposal for qualifications and their relationships, 20 August
The proposed First Line Management (level 4) qualification is generally well supported.
Suggestions promote the inclusion of leadership skills and greater contextualisation for specific
work roles.
In relation to the two proposed Business Management qualifications (level 4), respondents queried
their purpose and relevance.
Levels 5 and 6
Concerns are expressed about the “Applied” certificates:
 “applied” is interpreted in a range of different ways and is generally unclear
 some respondents question whether such a concept can and/or should be certificated
separately
 it is asked whether this can include the application of specialist skills / knowledge.
A range of further specialist areas was suggested, including:
Governance
public sector
human resources
entrepreneurship
marketing / sales
logistics
law/legal
purchasing and supply
finance
international business
e-business
risk management
SME management
IT
event management
quality management
specific industries.
The credits ratio at level 6 between core and specialist is queried, with the suggestion being that
80 credits is too much at that level for core skills. It is suggested that this be reduced to 60 or 40
credits, with the specialist areas being correspondingly increased.
Concerns are expressed about whether the aggregation of two qualifications to become a third are
possible under NZQA requirements.
Aligning the level 6 qualifications to suit pathways into degree programmes is advocated.
The NZ Defence Force and AgITO suggest outcomes for applied leadership and agribusiness
respectively.
A diploma with 240 credits is not supported, subject to the acceptability of proposed arrangements
for immigration requirements for international students.
3