Plotting the survival of maritime training

From reflection to action: are we ready to rethink maritime training?

There is something useful about getting a room full of maritime people together and asking them to stop and think. Not just about where we want the industry to go, but where we are now; how we got here and whether the way we have always done things is still the right way.

That was at the heart of the strategic dialogue held at Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) under the theme Systemic Transformation for Maritime Safety and Sustainability, sponsored by Lloyd’s Register Foundation (LRF) earlier this week.

Frank discussions during the course of the day highlighted the levels of commitment that people continue to have for addressing the challenges that persist and engaging on uncomfortable topics. By the end of the programme, several possibilities had been tabled.

But, with government and regulatory representatives notably absent from the room, many of these may not translate from conversation to reality. This creates a frustration that was evident.  One delegate noted that many of the systemic issues could be fixed if government simply listened to those who work in and understand the industry.

Questioning the status-quo

The 30-year journey of the CPUT Survival Centre was part of the agenda for discussion. Thirty years creates a useful vantage point for deliberating on what we have learned and what we should be doing differently going forward.

While it is tempting to get caught up in reflections that celebrate our achievements, it is ultimately more useful to interrogate the uncomfortable questions.

Are our training pathways still fit for purpose? Are there enough flexible routes between academic, technical, vocational and practical training? And are those pathways designed around what people actually need to be able to do, rather than simply what they need to qualify? Answering these questions requires us to consider whether we are giving enough attention to what needs to change rather than relying on the way things have always been done.

Matching solutions to challenges

Input during the session highlighted the distinction between challenges and tensions. Not every difficult issue has a neat solution. Some require us to recognise competing needs and find a workable balance that manages the underlying tensions.

While access to sea time continues to be a challenge, the bigger question we need to ask and answer is whether the system fosters competence or whether it is too focused on compliance. A certificate can demonstrate that a requirement has been met. It cannot, on its own however, demonstrate that someone can make the right decision when things go wrong. This means finding the right balance between academic learning and practical competence.

Digitalisation, automation, alternative fuels and artificial intelligence are changing the industry and the skills we need, while regulation and training requirements must still continue to evolve.

But technology cannot replace practical experience, seamanship, navigation and sound judgement. It is clear that the more technology we introduce, the more important it becomes to stay tethered to the fundamental knowledge required at sea.

Moving towards actionable outcomes

Although delegates exhibited a desire for the possibility to action change, the follow-up is where the real test begins. Participants are now being asked what they are prepared to take forward; where they need support as well as which partnerships could help turn the discussion into something practical.

These questions point towards issues raised during the dialogue that related to learning and professional pathways, sea time, curriculum and practical training, research and data as well as the skills needed for a changing maritime sector.

Without a commitment to action, these questions are not yet outcomes. Industry stakeholders need to be willing to take responsibility for moving them forward. And that is a distinction that matters in the context of plotting the survival of South Africa’s maritime training capacity.

Maritime has no shortage of conferences, workshops and well-intentioned calls for collaboration. What it often lacks is what comes afterwards – ownership, coordination and sustained follow-through.

The acting Head of Department of Maritime Studies at CPUT, Samkelisiwe Ntuli, clearly voiced what comes next: “The expectation is that the work that was started today doesn’t end up just being another talking conference that yields no tangible results. That this time we do strive to finish what we started and onwards to more fruitful collaborations.”

And that, for me, is the real test.

The next stage cannot simply be another conversation about the same issues. The right people need to be at the table; the ideas need ownership, and the work needs to become visible.

PHOTO: A diverse group of delegates took the time to convene to discuss matters affecting maritime training in South Africa. (Photo by Aubrey Sosibo)

ON THE QUAYSIDE