Professionalism: defining the Emergency Manager, Response Manager and Recovery Manager

Emergency management and the people who undertake the roles encompassed by this term are undergoing a process of professionalisation in Australia. To support the process of professionalisation, research has found that the term ‘emergency manager’ is undefined, conflated and confused in its current use across literature, emergency event inquiry reports and when used to recruit, train and deploy staff. This paper proposes the separation of the undefined ‘emergency manager’ into 3 new roles of Emergency Manager, Response Manager and Recovery Manager. This paper proposes a definition for each defined role. Comparison of the new roles is provided to support the broad understanding and implementation of the terms and their roles. A series of actions to support the implementation into practice of the newly defined terms is proposed across academic and practitioner environments. The definitions underpin further outcomes from this current research to be presented in forthcoming papers.

Introduction

Large scale, complex and cascading emergency events affecting Australian communities are becoming a regular occurrence. For example, the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience (AIDR) Major Incidents Report noted 9 major incidents during 2016–17 (AIDR 2017) but noted 30 major incidents in the 2023–24 report (AIDR 2024a). While the inclusion criteria for these reports are not the subject of this paper, these publications provide evidence of the increase in complex emergency events. In recent years, the bushfires of summer 2019–20 were followed by a global COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, emergency events in Australia have continued with multiple major floods and other emergency events in many states. In these emergency events, many people undertook roles managing aspects of the prevention of, preparedness for, response to and recovery from the effects of the emergency.

Previously, the people managing these events have been referred to by many titles. One such title used is ‘emergency manager’, but emergency manager is amorphous and undefined. Arising from current research into the human capacities of the emergency manager, this paper proposes a definition of an ‘Emergency Manager’. To support this newly defined term, further definitions are proposed of ‘Response Manager’ and ‘Recovery Manager’. Defining these terms, it is argued, will allow for a detailed understanding of each separate role. This detailed understanding will support the recognition of the skills required of each role as well as the work undertaken by the people in each role. Clear descriptions and identification of the skills applied allow for the development of people undertaking the discrete roles. Further, defined roles will help lessons management activities by allocating lessons identified to a commonly understood position or role. Clarity and agreement of these separate but sometimes confused or conflated roles will enhance the professionalisation of emergency management in Australia.

Background

This paper arises from research to determine the human capacities of the emergency manager in Australia. In developing an understanding of human capacities, the importance of the definitions of the task being undertaken, and the individual undertaking that task, has arisen.

Emergency management is not recognised in Australia as a profession. A profession was described as early as 1915 by Flexner (republished in 2001) to involve intellectual activities with responsibilities for an outcome, based on science, supported by techniques arising from education and with an altruistic motive (Flexner 2001). Since Flexner’s early work considerable research has been undertaken to explore the concept of a profession and what is required for recognition as a profession. The pathway towards recognition as a profession requires achievement of criteria that include building extensive knowledge, increasing expertise, displaying altruistic commitment, having a degree of autonomy, applying a code of ethics and achieving a personal identity arising from the professionals occupation (Yam 2004).

Dippy (2020) summarised the requirements of, and the pathway to be traversed, for recognition of emergency management as a profession. The summary includes vocational and tertiary education, application of skills and experience and the application of a certification regime. Dippy (2020) concluded that emergency management recognition as a profession takes the occupational status of the individual to a new level. If emergency management is recognised as a profession, then the emergency manager could be further recognised as a professional within that profession. A professional has high levels of relevant education, independent decision-making abilities, and credentials and measurement of competence and experience (Dippy 2020). Dippy (2022) continued examination of professionalising the emergency manager by exploring required educational requirements. The conclusion was that professionalisation of emergency management is supported by qualifications in both the vocational and tertiary education sectors, but that broad agreement of those qualifications has not been reached in Australia (Dippy 2022). Examination of the pathway to professionalisation shows a need to define the supporting components that may lead to recognition of emergency management as a profession. Roles within the profession of emergency management, including the role of the emergency manager, require a level of clarity to be described and agreed to by practitioners and academics. This paper commences that discussion and process to seek agreement.

In the exploration of professionalisation, concepts of ‘extensive knowledge’, ‘tertiary education’ and ‘certification’ are all underpinned by clearly defining theknowledge, skills and abilities of the individual. Definition of the knowledge, skills and abilities is hampered if the actual roles being defined and undertaken are not also clearly explored and understood. The newly defined roles identified and described in this paper provide the broader concepts required for professionalisation.

In Australia the term ‘emergency management’ and ‘incident management’ have been agreed and defined in the Australian Disaster Resilience Glossary (AIDR 2020). However, these terms are still used interchangeably and are also affected by Australian state and territory legislative requirements. While the incident controller role within the incident management task has been defined in the AIDR Glossary the emergency manager role has not.

Research methodology

This research sought to address the research question ‘What human capacity demands should inform the development and appointment of an emergency manager?’. The research examined emergency events in Australian occurring over a 20-year period (1997–2017) that were subject to judicial or semi-judicial inquiries. Judicial inquiries include those conducted in a legal environment, such as Coroners or Criminal courts. Semi-judicial inquiries are those where there is an enforceable requirement to answer questions or provide information, but it is not led within a formal court-type process. Judicial and semi-judicial inquiries are conducted for serious and significant emergency events. Judicial or semi-judicial emergency event inquiry reports were analysed to determine human capacities. Interviews were conducted with authors of 8 emergency event inquiry reports to ascertain further human capacities required of the emergency manager.

The literature review examined the broader management literature and emergency event inquiry reports. Through this investigation of both theoretical and practice-based literature, human capacities of the emergency manager were distilled, analysed and themed. The literature described how the process of professionalisation currently underway within the emergency management sector applies human capacities in managing emergency events.

Targeted interviews were conducted with the authors of 8 judicial or semi-judicial emergency event inquiry reports. The responses from these interviews were analysed to determine human capacities required when leading an emergency event. The interviews provided a broad range of human capacities and other insights from which to examine the emergency manager role.

A Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutic approach was adopted as the research methodology (Gadamer 2004; van Manen 1997; Gadamer 2013). The emergency event inquiry reports examined generated over 15,000 pages of text. The interviews added over 230 pages of text. The broader literature review of general management-based literature added further pages of text to the total analysis task. The Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutic methodology supports the examination of large amounts of text and allows integration of the researcher’s world view (Gadamer 2004; van Manen 1997). The Gadamerian methodology acknowledged the researcher’s participation in the field being studied. As both a practitioner and a student, the Gadamerian methodology supported documenting, reflecting on, and reconsidering the initial world view brought to the research, and the changes to the researcher world view that occurred throughout the research journey. The application of Gadamer’s analysis methodology allowed the large amount of data to be analysed in a rigorous manner to allow replicable findings.

This paper focuses on the identified need for definitions that arose from analysis of the literature (including the emergency event inquiry reports) and the interviews. The literature identified the use of the term ‘emergency manager’ in numerous locations and contexts, but usage was inconsistent. The lack of definition of the term also arose in the insights of emergency event inquiry authors interviewed. To enable analysis of the human capacities of the emergency manager arising from the research, a consistent definition of the role was required. In preparing the first definition, it became clear that definition of additional roles that are conflated into the undefined term ‘emergency manager’ was also required. As a result, 3 distinct roles were identified, separated and explored.

Preparation of draft definitions underpinned further analysis of the human capacities identified in the literature and the interviews. The draft definitions proposed are discussed in this paper. The outcomes of the analysis applying the draft definitions will be discussed in forthcoming papers.

Findings: new proposed definitions

Three roles were identified from the research that were being conflated into the one term of ‘emergency manager’. Analysis of the term and its use allowed the separation and preparation of definitions for an Emergency Manager, a Response Manager and a Recovery Manager. While a person can undertake multiple roles, or a combination of roles, it is still necessary to separate the work undertaken into the 3 distinct roles defined as:

• Emergency Manager—a person who undertakes a managerial function, working within or across government, private or community sectors, to holistically plan, prevent, prepare for, respond to and/or recover from an emergency or potential emergency event.
• Response Manager—a person who undertakes a managerial role across government, private or community organisations in the response to (including preparation for response) an emergency event. This includes roles of incident controller or incident manager and agency commander or controller.
• Recovery Manager—a person who undertakes a managerial role across government, private or community organisations in the recovery from (including preparation for recovery) an emergency event. This includes roles of recovery manager and recovery coordinator.

Discussion

The Australian Emergency Management Glossary (AIDR 2020) provides the common emergency management definitions used by Australian, state, territory and local governments as well as non-government emergency management participants, but does not define the role of the emergency manager. The term ‘emergency manager’ is also not defined in the incident management systems used in Australia (AFAC 2017; ANZPAA 2022; Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry; 2012) nor is the term defined in the Emergency Management Professionalisation Scheme (AFAC 2020). However, the ‘emergency manager’ has been used in emergency event inquiry reports analysed in this research (Ferguson 2016; Doogan 2006; Comrie 2011; Binskin et al. 2020; Environment and Natural Resources Committee 2012; Inspector-General for Emergency Management 2017). None of these reports defined the term ‘emergency manager’.

An example of the amorphous use of ‘emergency manager’ is in the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements Report (Biskin et al. 2020). In the report, the term ‘emergency manager’ was used as a generic description for a person undertaking prevention or preparedness activities such as preparing plans or reviewing systems of work. Later in the report, the term ‘emergency manager’ is used to describe someone making land use planning decisions that are significantly before the emergency event occurred (Binskin et al. 2020). Additionally, ‘emergency manager’ was used to describe the sharing of information between critical infrastructure owners and people managing the response to a specific fire; that is, at the time of an emergency event (Binskin et al. 2020). The emergency manager referred to was undertaking specific response activities.

Under Australian emergency management arrangements, the person undertaking prevention activities before the emergency event (e.g. making the land use planning decisions described in the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements Report) may not be the same person leading the response during a specific fire or other emergency. It may be another person leading the recovery activities. However, in the royal commission report, the authors used the generic term to describe the person undertaking prevention and preparedness activities and the person leading a response activity. This use of ‘emergency manager’ in the report does not acknowledge that the term may apply to the actions of more than one person. It also does not recognise that actions ascribed to the emergency manager may be occurring before, during or after the emergency event.

Another example within the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements Report, Recommendations 13.1–13.6 relate to emergency information and warnings (Binskin et al. 2020) and actions required by the Australian, state or territory governments. In its supporting discussion, the commission noted that ‘governments should explore how to improve the engagement between emergency managers and media representatives before, during and after natural disasters’ (Binskin et al. 2020). Regarding the recommendations, the actions may have related to work required by the emergency manager undertaking pre-event planning in the prevention, preparedness, response or recovery aspects of emergency plans. Alternatively, they could have been targeted at a different response manager overseeing public information or the emergency manager who is the functional leader of the incident management team or the recovery manager’s public information staff in the recovery management team. It may be that the action was required by all 3 roles, but at strategic and operational levels.

The generic use of the undefined term ‘emergency manager’ can hamper understanding of emergency event inquiry reports. The reports reviewed in this research produced recommendations that action be taken by one body—for example, a government—but the discussion leading to the recommendation noted the work was for the emergency manager. The reports did not identify how the term ‘emergency manager’ was used. Thus, the applicability of recommendations arising from emergency event inquiry reports is unclear.

For inquiry recommendations, the question arises as to whether the recommendation is targeted at events, policy or training to occur before the next event. Is the recommendation seeking that an incident controller make certain decisions during the response to the next emergency event? Alternatively, is the recommendation that the recovery leader undertakes certain actions when implementing recovery tasks? The actual position, role or function to undertake the action sought by emergency event inquiry authors is unclear.

If the recommendation is unclear, then the ability to apply that recommendation to future emergency events is affected. It is left to the reader to determine how the recommendation should be interpreted. The reader of the emergency event inquiry report has not undertaken the same detailed examination as the inquiry author. This may lead to an incorrect interpretation of the actions required. The opportunity for improvements in the management of future emergency events provided by the preparation of an emergency event inquiry report may be lost or reduced. In the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements Report, the clarity of the recommended actions might be reduced because of the lack of clarity of the term emergency manager (Binskin et al. 2020). Confusion in the understanding of recommendations arising from the use of the undefined term ‘emergency manager’ may reduce the effectiveness of recommendations.

Emergency management is not yet considered a profession thus the lack of definition of terms is to be expected. It may be an aspect of the journey towards professionalisation of emergency management that the terms proposed for definition have not previously been considered in need of defining. As emergency management professionalisation has progressed, various functions and terms have been defined, for example, those associated with recovery management. It may be that the term ‘emergency manager’ has met the needs of the broader emergency management community up to this point and the work required to formulate a definition has not been recognised and undertaken. However, to address the human capacities of the emergency manager, it is important for ‘emergency manager’ to be defined.

Factors contributing to the development of new definitions

The most recent Australian academic review of emergency management teaching was published in 2017 (FitzGerald et al. 2017) and noted the application of core knowledge and skills to the ‘generic emergency manager’ but did not define ‘generic emergency manager’. The study by FitzGerald and colleagues examined existing tertiary education courses being delivered in Australia. Based on the findings, that study developed generic standards for the content and training of people studying emergency management at the tertiary level in Australia. While the methodology used was based on a similar task undertaken for medicine, the comparison of medicine and emergency management is not like for like. Medicine is a profession with accepted standards and tertiary education is the only means to enter the profession. Emergency management in Australia is not a profession and most practitioners undertake vocational training rather than tertiary education. Tertiary or vocational education are not the only pathways to enter the sector. Some emergency managers also undertake the role based on their occupation, such as being a fire officer or police officer.

FitzGerald et al. (2017) reviewed tertiary training and not the vocational training undertaken by many of Australia’s (undefined) emergency managers. That study also noted that the programs reviewed ‘reflect the diverse interests and “specific expertise” and focus of their designers’ (FitzGerald et al. 2017). This limitation reinforces the individuality of current tertiary programs. The tertiary programs examined were built on the views and expertise of their designers and are not specifically aligned with a common understanding or definition of the emergency manager. The development of a definition of an emergency manager, when applied to tertiary education delivered in Australia, may lead to a revision of education packages. Updating emergency management tertiary education in Australia, which underpinned the findings in FitzGerald et al. (2017) may provide opportunities to review and update the standards described in that work.

In the emergency management-specific literature (e.g. the Australian Emergency Management Glossary) no definition is provided for the emergency manager, even though there is a definition for emergency management (AIDR 2020). The glossary collates and includes terms found in various agreed policy systems used across Australia. An example is terms applied in the Australasian Interagency Incident Management System (AIIMS), such as incident controller, which is recognised and included with its AIIMS usage and definition in the glossary (AIDR 2023). The term ‘emergency manager’ may have met the needs of the emergency management sector and, thus, it was not included in the glossary. This research has identified that it is time to define the roles.

Foreseeable issues and roadblocks to adopt new terms

Implementation of the newly defined term ‘emergency manager’ will be straightforward once the definitions are accepted as part of the Australian emergency management nomenclature. However, emergency management practitioners, community members and academics may require time to apply the definition. There is a need to gain acceptance of the definition for it to take full effect in terms of policy development and application in practice.

For some people, their work may no longer meet the definition of an emergency manager. In that case, their roles will likely be included in the definition of one or both of the other terms of ‘response manager’ or ‘recovery manager’. This is to be expected as emergency management practitioners and stakeholders (e.g. future emergency event inquiry authors or policy developers) move from an undefined amorphous term to a newly introduced definition for an existing term. Recognition of these people and their skills in the newly defined roles of response manager and recovery manager will need to occur at the same time as implementation of the emergency manager defined role. This is just one example of the parallel activities required if the proposed new definitions are implemented.

It must be recognised that some people undertake multiple roles at different times in their work. While some people may have a single role and function that can be clearly defined by the new definitions, some may be employed (or volunteer) in a combination of roles. This duplication does not reduce the need for the new defined roles but does support the historical amorphous use of the term ‘emergency manager’. It is expected that the application of the new roles will help refine future job roles. For other people, their work will continue to address multiple descriptors. What these new proposed terms allows for is to explore and explain the roles being undertaken. By achieving clarity in the roles, the underpinning knowledge, skills and abilities can be applied to each role.

What is not addressed in these proposed definitions is the other response, emergency management or recovery tasks undertaken by people who are not an agency or organisational manager for that task. This research sought to identify the human capacities of a leader of these functions. Further research could determine if those human capacities can be applied to non-managerial tasks undertaken for response, recovery or emergency management.

In academia, journal articles in Australian publications such as the Australian Journal of Emergency Management are one method to enhance the adoption of the definitions. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management is an academic and practice journal and is widely read (AIDR 2024b). The journal is open-access, publicly available and does not require a subscription for access. The journal attracts academic researchers, practitioner readers and policy decision-makers primarily from Australian and New Zealand but also has a large international readership (AIDR 2024c).

A range of other publications will need to be revised to include the proposed new definitions, including the Australian Disaster Resilience Glossary (AIDR 2020). Adding to the glossary will require consideration by an expert panel and, if the proposed definitions are approved for inclusion, this will lead to its adoption in the Australian Disaster Resilience Handbook Collection. Including new terms mean they will be referenced in Australian vocational units of competency. This referencing will occur as the Australian Public Safety Emergency Management (Commonwealth of Australia 2020) units of competency use the Australian Disaster Resilience handbooks as required content in course delivery.

The acceptance and use of the now-defined Emergency Manager, Response Manager and Recovery Manager may take time. Indeed, professionalisation of the emergency management sector has been occurring over time. Time will be required for the adoption of these definitions into the research bodies, tertiary education providers and publications in Australia.

For emergency management practitioners, more work is required for the successful adoption of the definitions. To gain acceptance, there needs to be ongoing champions in roles of influence who understand the importance of the differentiation of the emergency management roles and can consistently encourage wider adoption. In Australia, this could occur in updates to the primary doctrines of Australasian Inter-service Incident Management System (AFAC 2017), the Incident Command and Control System Plus (ICCS+) (ANZPAA 2022) and the Biosecurity Incident Management System (Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry 2012).

How the response manager and recovery manager differ from the emergency manager

The response manager, recovery manager and emergency manager are unique roles. While there are consistent human capacities across the roles, the functions and application of these capacities in each role is different.

The definition for the emergency manager refers to activities undertaken across the entire prevention, preparedness, response and recovery aspects of emergency management. An emergency manager is recognised as having a role before, during and after the emergency event and for potentially all hazard types. An emergency manager has a broad range of knowledge, skills and abilities. That knowledge includes many emergency types and risks that may result in an emergency, as well as learnings from previous emergency events. They understand interactions and inter-dependencies between emergency events and responding agencies. Further, the emergency manager understands the cascading or compounding nature of many emergencies.

The emergency manager’s skills and abilities incorporate preventative actions such as land use planning and application of building codes to decide on the responsible placement of assets that may be affected during emergencies. Preventative knowledge may include consideration and effects of climate change and the resulting influence on future events, such as increasing numbers or complexities of flooding events.

The knowledge, skills and tasks of the emergency manager extend to preparation activities that include a broad suite of actions. Preparation can include the design, provision of and support to the training, education and exercising needs of communities and includes training of emergency services personnel, state and local government decision-makers, response personnel and recovery staff. The emergency manager may prepare or contribute to a plan for specific capabilities (e.g. evacuation) or geographic areas (e.g. township-wide plans).

During an emergency event, the emergency manager role includes leading or supporting aspects of the response on behalf of their organisation (recognising that they may not be their organisation’s overall manager or Response Manager) or supporting the Recovery Manager appointed to lead their agency’s recovery activities.

In the recovery phase, the emergency manager may be supporting a recovery manager who is leading recovery activities. An emergency manager may also manage the return of response resources and equipment to a state of readiness for future events or leading and implementing a lessons management process to identify and embed improvements.

The response manager and recovery manager roles as now defined recognise that emergency management activities predominantly occur during response and recovery operations. The roles acknowledge that a practitioner needs to train and practice before attending an emergency event. However, the proposed definitions of response manager and recovery manager recognise that the person’s main role is undertaking actions during the response or recovery phase.

The response manager and recovery manager definitions do not include actions taken in prevention or general emergency management preparedness, such as planning or policy development. The response manager or recovery manager may specialise in a hazard type, for example, bushfire or flood. The response manager and recovery manager may implement pre-existing plans prepared by an emergency manager or prepare new tactical plans for implementation at a specific emergency event.

Australian incident management systems require the response manager role to recognise the incident controller as a single position during an emergency event. However, the response manager also acknowledges that each of the many agencies supporting the incident controller have a person undertaking an organisation’s managerial role across their agency’s staff and functions.

In a similar vein to the incident controller being one role undertaken by one response manager, one of the multiple recovery managers at an emergency event may be given an additional title to recognise that they are the single overarching leader for recovery activities. This does not detract from an agency or organisation having its own recovery manager. The single leading person could be referred to as a Recovery Coordinator. Defining of the overall coordinating role title is outside of the scope of this paper and may be the subject of further discussion.

Response managers and recovery managers may have achieved certification to manage the emergency response to or recovery from emergency events. The certification process may acknowledge the skills of the response manager and recovery manager to lead smaller events or events that are large in scale and affect greater numbers of people or assets. The response manager and recovery manager are likely to have undertaken training commensurate with the level of emergency event that they lead. In many cases, the completion of that training may be required prior to nomination to the role. Organisations have legislative requirements for people managing staff that they have the required skills and training to safeguard staff (including volunteers).

The training undertaken by the response manager and recovery manager ranges from simple to extensive. Training may include in-house or external knowledge and skills development. Training may be non-accredited or subject to the rigour of a nationally accredited training package. In Australia, the nationally accredited response or recovery training packages are primarily contained in the vocational education sector, particularly the Public Safety Training Package (Commonwealth of Australia 2020) units of competency. The response manager and recovery manager may also be required to build an amount of experience. Experience may include attendance at exercises and live emergency events. Record keeping via logbook may be required to demonstrate the experience gained. There may be other requirements to continually develop knowledge, skills and experience through attendance at training or actual emergency events.

The name given to the leader of supporting agencies or organisations, be they government or private sector, varies. The response manager and recovery manager definitions bring all leaders together into a role definition that acknowledges the nuances of their specific tasks. Each emergency management role deserves recognition as the person who undertakes the emergency manager role has a broad skill set. The emergency manager undertakes their role over an extended period and may do this role as part of their work or as their primary occupation. The emergency manager may be a volunteer undertaking emergency management tasks for their organisation before, during and after the emergency.

The response manager or recovery manager has a deep, detailed and specialised understanding of their specific task of managing a response or recovery. They may specialise in responding to a single emergency type, such as a bushfire or biosecurity incident. The response manager and recovery manager may have been trained and accredited to manage a simple or a complex activity. Once the event is complete, the response manager and recovery manager may return to other tasks, either within the responding (or recovery) organisation or their original organisation. The response manager or recovery manager may be a volunteer or a full-time employee with another primary role.

While a response manager is often appointed from within an organisation or structure, the appointment of a recovery manager may be different. The person leading the recovery may be appointed externally. Each state and territory has its own structures in place to manage the recovery activities required after an emergency. The appointment may occur at local, regional or state level and may be supported by an Australian Government equivalent position or role. The recovery manager may be a local person or another person of some standing in the community. Alternatively, they may be a senior public servant. The names or titles given to the person leading the recovery are assigned by the appointing body. The title may denote a level of political authority or include the specific emergency event that it supports. Emergency recovery takes significantly longer than the initial event.

The externally appointed recovery manager may complete their appointment long before the community fully recovers. This may lead to the emergence of community leaders undertaking a recovery leadership role. The differences in the source, authority, financial resources, duration of appointment and titles attached to the person suggest the need for a single common term to be used when referring to a recovery manager.

Table 1 compares the roles of emergency manager, response manager and recovery manager. The comparisons arise from this study as well as previous discussions on accreditation by Dippy (2020).

Table 1: Comparison of emergency manager and response and recovery manager roles.

Conclusion

This paper explained 3 new definitions proposed for adoption in Australia by emergency management practitioners, stakeholders, academics and emergency event inquiry authors. The definitions split the historically amorphous, undefined, often conflated and easily confused term ‘emergency manager’ into 3 specific and clearly defined roles. The roles recognise the depth and breadth of knowledge, skills and abilities applied in the management of emergency events. The term ‘emergency manager’, with its newly proposed definition, recognises the breadth of knowledge applied to the prevention, preparedness, response and recovery from emergency events.

The other terms of ‘response manager’ and ‘recovery manager’ recognise the depth of skills and abilities applied by groups of people in leading the response and recovery stages of emergency events. In Australia, emergency management, response and recovery roles are often undertaken by different people. Having these roles separated, with clear definitions and a pathway for adoption, will support a greater understanding of the roles undertaken.