ISA Certified Automation Professional CAP

ISA Certified Automation
Professional (CAP)
Job Analysis Study
2004
Notice
The information presented in this publication is for the general education of the reader. Because neither the
author nor the publisher has any control over the use of the information by the reader, both the author and the
publisher disclaim any and all liability of any kind arising out of such use. The reader is expected to exercise sound
professional judgment in using any of the information presented in a particular application.
Additionally, neither the author nor the publisher have investigated or considered the effect of any patents on
the ability of the reader to use any of the information in a particular application. The reader is responsible for
reviewing any possible patents that may affect any particular use of the information presented.
Any references to commercial products in the work are cited as examples only. Neither the author nor the
publisher endorses any referenced commercial product. Any trademarks or tradenames referenced belong to the
respective owner of the mark or name. Neither the author nor the publisher makes any representation regarding the
availability of any referenced commercial product at any time. The manufacturer's instructions on use of any
commercial product must be followed at all times, even if in conflict with the information in this publication.
Copyright © 2004
ISA–The Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society
67 Alexander Drive
P.O. Box 12277
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 1-55617-903-0
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data in Progress

Table of Contents
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................3
Phase I: Initial Development and Evaluation ............................................................................................4
Phase II: Validation Study.........................................................................................................................5
I. Questionnaire Design, Sampling Plan, and Distribution..........................................................5
II. Characteristics of the Sample .................................................................................................5
III. Evaluation of Performance Domains......................................................................................20
A. Validation Scales.........................................................................................................20
B. Panelists’ Evaluations .................................................................................................21
C. Respondents’ Evaluations ..........................................................................................22
D. Comparison of Panel Members’ and Respondents’ Evaluations ................................24
E. Survey Respondent Subgroups’ Evaluations..............................................................25
IV. Reliability Analysis for Domain Scales...................................................................................33
V. Delineation of Required Knowledge and Skills .......................................................................33
VI. Summary of Results...............................................................................................................34
V. Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................34
Phase III: Test Specifications..................................................................................................................35
Domain, Task, and Knowledge and Skill Statements..................................................................36
Appendix A: Contributors for the Practice Analysis Study ......................................................................59
Appendix B: Other Responses................................................................................................................60
Appendix C: Major/Focus of Highest Degree..........................................................................................62
Appendix D: Job Analysis Survey ...........................................................................................................63

Introduction
ISA- The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society works to protect the public by identifying
individuals who are competent to practice in several related career fields. Consistent with this mission,
the intended function of the ISA Certified Automation Professional (CAP) examination program is to
assess competence in the automation professional. Passing scores on the examination indicate that the
Certified Automation Professional has achieved a level of ability consistent with requirements for
competence on the job.
The development of a quality credentialing or licensing examination must follow certain logically sound
and well-researched procedures. These principles and methods are outlined in federal regulation
(Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures) and manuals, such as Standards for
Educational and Psychological Testing (published by the American Educational Research Association,
1999), and Standards for Accreditations of Certification Programs (published by The National
Commission for Certifying Agencies, 2002), as well as standards set by American National Standards
Institute (ANSI). Through its relationship with CASTLE Worldwide, Inc., ISA follows these standards in
developing examinations for its credentialing program.
The guidelines hold that it is necessary to determine the knowledge and skills needed to be a competent
practitioner in the field in order to develop a practice-related examination. The process for identifying
these competency areas includes a job analysis study, which serves as a blueprint for examination
development. A job analysis also helps to determine the type of examination, such as multiple-choice, to
be developed in order to assess essential competence in the most appropriate manner.
The critical reason for conducting a job analysis study is to ensure that the examination has content
validity. In psychometric terms, validation is the way a test developer documents that the competence to
be inferred from a test score is actually measured by the examination. Content validity is the most
commonly applied and accepted validation strategy used in establishing certification examinations. A
content-valid examination for ISA’s Certified Automation Professional program, then, appropriately
evaluates knowledge and skill required to function as a competent practitioner in the automation
profession. A content-valid examination in automation contains a representative sample of items that
measure the knowledge and skills essential to the job.
The job analysis study is an integral part of ensuring that the examination is content-valid—that the
aspects of automation covered on the examination reflect the tasks performed in the range of practice
settings throughout the United States and Canada. For both broad content areas and tasks, the study
validates importance and criticality to practice. These ratings play an important role in determining the
content of the examination.
The ISA Certified Automation Professional practice analysis study consisted of the following three
phases, which are the focus of this report:
I. Initial Development and Validation. In January 2004, a panel of 15 experts assembled by

ISA met in Research Triangle Park, NC, with representatives from CASTLE Worldwide,
Inc., to define the essential elements of the profession of automation. The panel identified
the domains, tasks, knowledge, and skills consistent with this purpose.
II. Validation Study. A representative sample of 1,500 practicing automation professionals

was asked to review and validate the work of the job analysis panel.
III. Development of Test Specifications. Based on the ratings gathered from the
representative sample of automation professionals, the test specifications for the
examination were developed.
ISA Certified Automation Professional 3

Job Analysis Study
PHASE I
INITIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
Since 1996, ISA has offered a well-recognized certification program for control systems technicians.
Certified Control System Technicians (CCSTs) work in a variety of industries to monitor and calibrate
devices that control the manufacturing process. In 2004, ISA began the first steps in the development of
a new credentialing program for Certified Automation Professionals.
The first steps in analyzing the automation profession included the identification of the major content
areas or domains, the listing of tasks performed under each domain, and the identification of the
knowledge and skills associated with each task. To conduct the study, ISA assembled a 15-member
panel of automation experts to discuss the practice. The panel members represented automation
professionals practicing in various job settings, all geographic regions of the United States, and various
experience levels as well as educators. A complete list of panel members is provided in Appendix A.
The following steps were undertaken to complete Phase I:
A. The panel determined that the profession could be divided into six major domains of practice. The six
domains of practice denote major responsibilities performed by automation professionals. These
performance domains are:
1. Feasibility Study
2. Definition
3. System Design
4. Development
5. Deployment
6. Operation and Maintenance
B. Next, the panel delineated essential tasks in each of the six domains. The tasks define the domains
and focus the automation professional on public safety, health, and welfare. The panel subsequently
generated a list of knowledge and skills required to perform each task.
C. The panel members then evaluated each performance domain and task, rating each on importance
and criticality to the automation practice.
Based on the work of the panel of experts, CASTLE developed a electronic survey and distributed it to a
sample of automation professionals. The results of the survey are the focus of Phase II.

Job Analysis Study
PHASE II
VALIDATION STUDY
I. Questionnaire Design, Sampling Plan, and Distribution
Using the domains and tasks identified by the panel of experts, CASTLE developed an electronic
questionnaire to be completed by a sample of automation professionals. ISA provided CASTLE with a list
of 1,500 names of professionals in the automation field. CASTLE distributed the questionnaire to these
1,500 professionals to consider, rate, and provide other feedback on the domain and task lists delineated
by the panel of experts. The questionnaire also solicited biographical information from the respondents in
order to ensure a representative response and completion by appropriately qualified individuals.
Of the 1500 individuals who were asked to participate online, 219 submitted usable responses.
Discounting undeliverable e-mail addresses, out of office individuals, individuals unable to log into the
survey, and individuals opting out of the survey, the overall response rate was 14.95%. Given that the
survey required approximately 20 minutes to complete and that it was unsolicited, the response rate
achieved is reasonable.
Not all individuals responded to every question, therefore, the total number of responses per question
may vary.
II. Characteristics of the Sample
The characteristics of the sample are important as a means to assess the degree to which the group of
respondents represents the automation profession along key dimensions. The panel of experts
discussed key variables that might have an impact on how members of the profession view their work
and developed 14 questions that accounted for them. Survey respondents were asked to provide this
information by responding to the questions. The following tables summarize the information provided by
survey respondents. Due to the fact some respondents elected not to respond to the various questions,
the frequencies reported below do not total the number of respondents.

Job Analysis Study
Table I. Gender
As shown in the chart and graph below, the majority of respondents (203, or 94.4%) are male.
GENDER
Frequency Percent
Male 203 94.4
Female 12 5.6
TOTAL 215 100.0
GENDER
300
200
Number of Respondents
100
0
Male Female

Job Analysis Study
Table II. Age
As shown in the chart and graph below, the majority of the sample was more than 40 years old. Thirteen
individuals (6%) reported their age as under 30 years old.
AGE
Frequency Percent
Under 30 years 13 6.0
31- 40 years 79 36.7
41-50 years 82 38.1
51-60 years 34 15.8
61 years and
7 3.3
above
TOTAL 215 99.9*
*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not always equal 100.
AGE
100
80
60
40
20
0
Under 30 years 41-50 years 61 years and above
31-40 years 51-60 years

Job Analysis Study
Table III. Location
As shown in the graph below, states were grouped into geographic regions. All regions were
represented in the sample.
Alaska
1
3
2
4
5
Puerto
Rico
Ha waii
LOCATION
Frequency Percent
1 17 8.5
2 50 25.0
3 33 16.5
4 53 26.5
5 47 23.5
Total 200 100.0

Job Analysis Study
Table IV. Level of Experience
The table and graph below present the status of the respondents according to the years of experience
they reported. As evidenced by the table and graph, the respondents tended to be very experienced in
the automation profession with 97 individuals (45.1%) reporting more than 15 years of experience in the
field.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
Frequency Percent
I’m not an
automation 3 1.4
professional
Less than
3 1.4
1 year
1-5 years 19 8.8
6-10 years 47 21.9
11-15 years 46 21.4
More than
97 45.1
15 years
TOTAL 215 100.0
EXPERIENCE
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
not an AP 1-5 years 11-15 years
Less than one year 6-10 years More than 15 years

Job Analysis Study
Table V. Percentage of Time Spent Working as an Automation Professional in Current Position
The respondents were asked to provide the percentage of their time spent working as an automation
professional in their current position. Over half of the respondents (65.6%) reported spending 76 to 100
percent of their time working as an automation professional in their current position
PERCENT OF TIME SPENT
Frequency Percent
I’m not an
automation 4 1.9
professional
Less than
6 2.8
25 percent
25-50 percent 27 12.6
51-75 percent 37 17.2
76-100 percent 141 65.6
TOTAL 215 100.1*
PERCENT OF TIME SPENT

160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Not an AP 25-50 percent 76-100 percent
Less than 25 percent 51-75 percent

Job Analysis Study
Level VI: Control Areas Worked in on a Daily Basis
The majority of the respondents reported working in both discrete/machine control and process/liquid/dry
control areas on a daily basis.
PROCESS AREAS
Frequency Percent
Discrete (Machine
16 7.5
Control)
Process (Liguid, dry) 47 22.0
Both Discrete and

151 70.6
Process
TOTAL 214 100.1*
CONTROL AREA
200
100
0
Discrete Process Both

Job Analysis Study
Table VII. Primary Responsibility in Current Position
The majority of respondents (73.3%) reported that Project/Systems Engineering was their primary
responsibility in their current position.
PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY
Frequency Percent
Field Engineering 0 0.0
Information
5 2.5
Systems
Operations and
24 11.9
Maintenance
Project/Systems
148 73.3
Engineering
Other 25 12.4
TOTAL 202 100.1*
PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Information Systems Project/System Eng
Operations & Maint Other

Job Analysis Study
Table VIII: Industry Worked In
Respondents were asked to select the responses that best described the industry in which they worked.
The responses are provided in the table below and the chart on the following page.
INDUSTRY
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Metals
Aerospace 1 0.5 3 1.4
Manufacturing
Automotive Petroleum
4 1.9 12 5.6
Manufacturing Manufacturing
Building Pharmaceutical
6 2.8 27 12.6
Automation Manufacturing
Chemical Plastics
25 11.7 4 1.9
Consumer Pulp and Paper

6 2.8 5 2.3
Goods Manufacturing
Electrical Textiles/
/Electronic 11 5.1 Fabrics 0 0.0
Engineering
and 26 12.1 Transportation 2 .9
Construction
Environmental/
0 0.0 Utilities 16 7.5
Waste
Food and
Beverage 19 8.9 Water/waste 15 7.0
Manufacturing
Machinery
10 4.7 Other 22 10.3
Manufacturing
TOTAL 214 100.0

Job Analysis Study
14
e
er st
th a
O r/w f
e
at n nu
W i es ati o Ma
it rt er
til
U spo ap
P f nu f
an d
Tr an anu Ma
l p M cal
Pu ti cs uti uf
as ce n
Pl rma Ma
a m f
Ph l eu nu uf f
t ro Ma an nu
INDUSTRY
Pe ls M M a
a y
et er ge
M hin ra n
e o
ac v ti
M /B e truc
od ns nu
F o Co M a s
g / i c od
En tron Go f
r
ec e nu n
El um Ma ti o
s l a
on a m
C mi c uto uf
n
he A a
C i ng e M
i ld tiv
Bu mo
t o ace
Au s p
ro
Ae
ISA Certified Automation Professional

30
20
10
0
Job Analysis Study

Table IX. Current Employer’s Company or Organization
The table and graph below present the status of the respondents according to their current employer’s
company or organization. As shown below, the greatest number (82, or 38.1%) of respondents reported
their current employer is best described as end-users. Only 13 individuals, or 6.0%, responded that their
employer did not fit a listed category.
CURRENT EMPLOYER
Frequency Percent
Control
Systems 15 7.0
Suppliers
End-Users 82 38.1
Engineering
and Design 44 20.5
Firm
Original
Equipment
22 10.2
Manufactur
er (OEM)
Systems
39 18.1
Integrators
Other 13 6.0
TOTAL 215 99.9*
CURRENT EMPLOYER
100
80
60
40
20
0
Control Sys Supplier Eng/Design Firm Systems Integrators
End-Users OEM Other

Job Analysis Study
Table X. Certifications/Licenses
Respondents were asked to indicate which, if any, certifications and licenses they held.
CERTIFICATIONS/LICENSES
Frequency
CEM 1
CQE 1
CCST 2
CSE 10
MSCE 2
PE 51
PMP 3
Other 22

Job Analysis Study
Table XI. Professional Societies and/or Organizations
Respondents were also asked to provide which, if any, professional societies, they were a member of.
ORGANIZATION MEMBERSHIP
Frequency
AIChE 13
ASME 3
CSIA 13
IBEW 27
IEEE 27
ISA 124
UA 1
Other 32

Job Analysis Study
Table XIII. Level of Education
The table and chart below show that a significant majority of respondents (62.6%) reported their highest
level of education as the bachelor degree. Respondents were also asked to provide the major/focus of
their highest degree. The responses are provided in Appendix C.
HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION
Frequency Percent
High
school/Secondary 15 7.0
school
Associate Degree 22 10.3
Bachelor’s Degree 134 62.6
Master’s Degree 36 16.8
Doctoral Degree 3 1.4
Other 4 1.9
TOTAL 214 100.0
HIGHTEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION

160
140
120
100
80
Number of Respndents
60
40
20
0
High school Bachelor's Degree Doctoral Degree
Associate degree Master's Degree Other

Job Analysis Study
Table XIV. Annual Income
The responses for annual income are provided in the table and graph below. Only three individuals
(1.4%) reported earning an annual income level of less than $20,000 while 28 individuals (13.4%)
reported earning an annual income level greater than $110,000.
ANNUAL INCOME
Frequency Percent
Less than $20,000 3 1.4
$20,000 - $49,999 20 9.6
$50,000 - $79,999 83 39.7
$80,000 - $110,000 75 35.9
More than
28 13.4
$110,000
TOTAL 209 100.0
ANNUAL SALARY
100
80
60
40
20
0
Less than $20,000 $50,000 to $79,999 More than $110.000
$20,000-$49,999 $80,000 to $110,000

Job Analysis Study
III. Evaluation of Performance Domains
A. Validation Scales. The panel of experts reviewed a number of scales that are often used in job
analysis and other validation studies for the purpose of collecting data that would account for how
members of the profession evaluate the domains and tasks. In making its selection, the panel considered
which scales seemed most appropriate for the automation profession and the purpose of the study. After
considerable discussion and rehearsal using the scales, the panel selected three, one for importance,
one for criticality and one for frequency. These scales then were used to collect preliminary validation
data from members of the panel of experts and final validation data from survey respondents.
Participants (panel members and survey respondents) were asked to use four-point scales to express
their evaluation of the importance and criticality for each performance domain and task, with a “4”
representing the highest rating. The scale anchors for importance and criticality are listed below as a
reference. The description for frequency is also provided below.
Importance
Participants were asked to rate each domain on a rating of importance, or the degree to which
knowledge in the domain is essential to the minimally competent practice of interior design. The rating
anchors are provided below.
1. Slightly Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is only slightly essential to the job
performance of the certified automation professional .
2. Moderately Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is only moderately essential to the
job performance of the certified automation professional.
3. Very Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is clearly essential to the job performance
of the certified automation professional.
4. Extremely Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is absolutely essential to the job
performance of the certified automation professional.
Criticality
Participants were asked to rate each domain on a scale for criticality, or the degree to which adverse
effects (of some type) could result if the certified automation professional is not knowledgeable in the
domain. The rating anchors are provided below.
1. Minimal or No Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this performance domain would lead to
error with minimal adverse consequences.
2. Moderate Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this domain would lead to error with moderate
adverse consequences.
3. Substantial Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this domain would lead to error with
substantial adverse consequences.
4. Extreme Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this domain would definitely lead to error with
severe consequences.
Frequency
Participants were asked to provide the percent of time the certified automation professional spent
performing the duties associated with each domain. Directions in the survey required respondents to
ensure that percentages given for each domain added to 100%.

Job Analysis Study
B. Panelists’ Evaluations. The panelists’ ratings of importance of the domains is provided below. The
mean ratings ranged from 1.69 to 3.92 on the four point scale.
IMPORTANCE
Sample Standard
Standard
Domain Size Mean Error of
Deviation
(N) Mean
I. Feasibility Study 14 1.69 .1929 .722
II. Definition 14 2.62 .1972 .738
III. System Design 14 3.54 .1993 .746
IV. Development 14 3.92 .1267 .474
V. Deployment 14 3.38 .1972 .738
VI. Operation and Maintenance 14 2.54 .2696 1.009
The panelists rated the criticality of the domains as seen in the table below. Domain V (Deployment)
was the area seen as having the greatest potential for harmful results if the automation professional were
not competent in the domain.
CRITICALITY
Sample Standard
Standard
Deviation
(N) Mean
II. Definition 14 2.77 .2993 1.120
IV. Development 14 3.62 .1670 .625
V. Deployment 14 3.69 .1619 .606
As shown in the table on the following page, the panelists reported spending the least amount of time in
Domain I (Feasibility Study) and the most time in Domain IV (Development).

Job Analysis Study
FREQUENCY
Sample Standard
Standard
Deviation
(N) Mean
I. Feasibility Study 15 6.21 .7444 2.883
II. Definition 15 12.86 2.1971 8.509
III. System Design 15 25.36 3.9480 15.291
IV. Development 15 26.43 1.5758 6.103
V. Deployment 15 17.86 1.8070 6.999
VI. Operation and Maintenance 15 12.00 2.1536 8.341
C. Survey Respondents’ Evaluations. Survey respondents employed the scales for importance,
criticality, and frequency to evaluate all domains and tasks. Their responses are summarized in the
tables on the following page.
As depicted in the table that follows, survey respondents indicated that all domains are very important.
Domain III (System Design) was seen as the most important of the six domains. Domain II (Definition)
was considered the second-most important, followed closely by Domain IV (Deployment). Domain VI
(Operation and Maintenance) was considered to be the least important, although it was considerably
higher than the scale mid-point.
IMPORTANCE
Sample Standard
Standard
Deviation
(N) Mean
II. Definition 217 3.35 .0470 .692
IV. Development 217 2.99 .0586 .863
V. Deployment 217 3.12 .0499 .736
VI. Operation and Maintenance 217 2.58 .0590 .869

Job Analysis Study
The respondents considered Domain III (System Design) as the most critical of the six domains; followed
closely by Domain V (Deployment). Domain I (Feasibility Study) was seen as the least critical, although
it too is well above the scale mid-point.
CRITICALITY
Sample Standard
Standard
Deviation
(N) Mean
II. Definition 217 2.79 .0515 .758
IV. Development 217 3.04 .0542 .798
V. Deployment 217 3.21 .0498 .734
VI. Operation and Maintenance 217 2.48 .0606 .893
The panelists rated Domain III (System Design) as being the most frequency performed while Domain VI
(Operation and Maintenance) was rated as being performed the least often.
FREQUENCY
Sample Standard
Standard
Deviation
(N) Mean
I. Feasibility Study 212 10.29 .4965 7.229
II. Definition 212 14.55 .5179 7.540
III. System Design 212 27.06 .7265 10.578
IV. Development 212 23.92 .8668 12.621
V. Deployment 212 14.37 .5050 7.353

Job Analysis Study
D. Comparison of Panel Members’ and Respondents’ Evaluations. The evaluations of domains by
the panel of experts were compared to the ratings of survey respondents to determine if the results were
similar.
As depicted in the chart that follows, both groups rated the importance of the domains similarly. As
shown in the following table, Domain I (Feasibility Study) had the greatest difference in ratings.
IMPORTANCE
Domain Survey Panel Difference
I. Feasibility Study 3.03 1.69 1.34
II. Definition 3.35 2.62 0.73
III. System Design 3.50 3.54 -0.04
IV. Development 2.99 3.92 -0.93
V. Deployment 3.12 3.38 -0.26
VI. Operation and Maintenance 2.58 2.54 0.04
The two groups rated the criticality of the domains similarly with Domain IV (Development) having the
greatest difference (.58).
CRITICALITY
III. System Design 3.32 3.31 0.01
IV. Development 3.04 3.62 -0.58
V. Deployment 3.21 3.69 -0.48
VI. Operation and Maintenance 2.48 2.46 0.02

Job Analysis Study
The panelists and survey respondents also rated the frequency of the domains similarly. The greatest
difference in the ratings was found in Domain I (Feasibility Study).
FREQUENCY
II. Definition 14.55 12.86 1.69
IV. Development 23.92 26.43 -2.51
V. Deployment 14.37 17.86 -3.49
VI. Operation and Maintenance 9.82 12.00 -2.18
E. Survey Respondent Subgroups’ Evaluations. When using a survey to collect information regarding
a profession, the possibility that individuals in various settings have differing views of the profession is to
be expected. Finding meaningful differences in domain or task ratings among the various subgroups
might indicate that one should not generalize the survey results from one subgroup to another. With this
in mind, the responses of specific subgroups were compared using the criterion that more than one unit
of the four-point scale or 10 points on the frequency scale would indicate the possibility of meaningful
difference if any of the calculated values was lower than the scale mid-point. Subgroups were defined by
age, level of experience, time spent working as an automation professional in current position, control
areas worked in on a daily basis, area of responsibility, employer, and highest level of education.
Although three between-group differences were slightly greater than ten points on the frequency scale,
the importance and criticality means for the domain ratings were within one scale point for each
comparison. Consequently, the mean responses of the various subgroups do not vary to a practical
extent, indicating general agreement between and among the different subgroups of participants.
The following charts illustrate the similarities in means, or averages, for the responses of subgroups of
respondents. Only minor variations occur between the responses. The similarity in the ratings provides
support for generalizing from the survey results to the general population of qualified automation
professionals.

Job Analysis Study
AGE
IMPORTANCE
Domain Under 61 years
31-40 41-50 51-60
30 and
years years years
years above
I. Feasibility Study 2.75 3.01 3.04 3.18 **
II. Definition 2.75 3.33 3.41 3.47 **
III. System Design 3.75 3.54 3.39 3.53 **
IV. Development 3.25 3.04 3.04 2.88 **
V. Deployment 3.00 3.06 3.18 3.24 **

VI. Operation and
2.67 2.49 2.65 2.53 **
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Domain Under 61 years
31-40 41-50 51-60
30 and
years years years
years above
II. Definition 2.38 2.84 2.76 2.88 **
IV. Development 3.00 3.08 3.07 3.06 **
V. Deployment 3.15 3.17 3.29 3.18 **

VI. Operation and
2.69 2.40 2.57 2.50 **
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Under 61 years
31-40 41-50 51-60
Domain 30 and
years years years
years above
II. Definition 11.54 14.14 14.77 15.39 **
IV. Development 25.38 26.80 22.78 22.42 **
V. Deployment 18.46 14.20 14.98 12.88 **

VI. Operation and
10.77 8.57 11.44 9.03 **
Maintenance
**Sample size is insufficient to support conclusions.

Job Analysis Study
LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE
IMPORTANCE
Less More
1-5 6-10 11-15
Domain Not an AP than 1 than 15
years years years
year years
I. Feasibility Study ** ** 3.21 2.89 3.00 3.10
II. Definition ** ** 3.16 3.20 3.38 3.45
III. System Design ** ** 3.58 3.54 3.51 3.48
IV. Development ** ** 2.84 3.13 3.13 2.88
V. Deployment ** ** 3.00 3.15 3.22 3.10

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.63 2.54 2.73 2.49
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Domain Less More
1-5 6-10 11-15
Not an AP than 1 than 15
years years years
year years
II. Definition ** ** 2.53 2.57 2.93 2.84
IV. Development ** ** 2.89 3.07 3.02 3.06
V. Deployment ** ** 3.05 3.28 3.20 3.24

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.79 2.54 2.46 2.39
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Less More
Not an 1-5 6-10 11-15
Domain than 1 than 15
AP years years years
year years
II. Definition ** ** 11.28 12.82 15.20 15.70
IV. Development ** ** 19.83 28.11 24.60 22.77
V. Deployment ** ** 18.56 15.07 14.13 13.55

VI. Operation and
** ** 10.61 10.32 8.82 9.84
Maintenance

Job Analysis Study
TIME SPENT
IMPORTANCE
Less than 25-50 51-75 76-100
Domain Not an AP
25 percent percent percent percent
I. Feasibility Study ** ** 3.15 2.95 3.04
II. Definition ** ** 3.33 3.43 3.32
III. System Design ** ** 3.48 3.65 3.47
IV. Development ** ** 2.78 2.86 3.07
V. Deployment ** ** 3.26 2.89 3.16

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.78 2.57 2.54
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Domain Less than 25-50 51-75 76-100
Not an AP
II. Definition ** ** 2.89 2.62 2.78
IV. Development ** ** 2.89 2.92 3.12
V. Deployment ** ** 3.19 3.19 3.24

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.59 2.54 2.46
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Domain Less than 25-50 51-75 76-100
Not an AP
II. Definition ** ** 16.00 13.03 14.61
IV. Development ** ** 19.20 25.47 24.93
V. Deployment ** ** 14.12 12.78 15.01

VI. Operation and
** ** 7.68 9.83 10.20
Maintenance

Job Analysis Study
CONTROL AREA(S)
IMPORTANCE
Domain Discrete Process Both
IV. Development 3.44 2.93 2.98
V. Deployment 3.00 3.13 3.13

VI. Operation and
2.38 2.46 2.64
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Domain Discrete Process Both
IV. Development 3.13 3.00 3.06
V. Deployment 2.94 3.26 3.24

VI. Operation and
1.88 2.62 2.52
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Automation Controls
Domain Other
Engineer Engineer
II. Definition 16.56 15.11 14.21
IV. Development 27.38 22.52 24.19
V. Deployment 12.94 15.15 14.32

VI. Operation and
6.75 10.63 9.90
Maintenance

Job Analysis Study
AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY
IMPORTANCE
Domain Operations Project/
Field Information
and Systems Other
Engineering Systems
Maintenance Engineering
I. Feasibility
** ** 2.96 3.01 3.16
Study
II. Definition ** ** 3.33 3.36 3.44
IV. Development ** ** 2.67 3.09 2.72
V. Deployment ** ** 2.96 3.16 2.88

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.83 2.51 2.24
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Field Information
and Systems Other
Engineering Systems
I. Feasibility
** ** 2.18 2.33 2.72
Study
II. Definition ** ** 2.68 2.75 2.84
III. System
** ** 2.86 3.32 3.56
Design
IV. Development ** ** 2.64 3.11 3.08
V. Deployment ** ** 3.05 3.23 3.12

VI. Operation and
** ** 2.82 2.37 2.44
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Field Information
and Systems Other
Engineering Systems
I. Feasibility
** ** 9.65 9.48 13.04
Study
II. Definition ** ** 13.17 13.96 17.83
III. System
** ** 25.43 27.29 28.04
Design
IV. Development* ** ** 15.87 26.58 21.30
V. Deployment ** ** 15.96 14.27 12.39

VI. Operation and
** ** 19.91 8.44 7.39
Maintenance*
*Differences greater than 10 percentage points exist.

Job Analysis Study
EMPLOYER
IMPORTANCE
Control Engineering
End- Systems
Domain Systems and Design OEM Other
Users Integrators
Suppliers Firm
I. Feasibility Study 3.20 2.98 3.07 2.82 3.13 3.23
II. Definition 3.53 3.38 3.20 3.36 3.36 3.46
III. System Design 3.47 3.45 3.59 3.41 3.59 3.38
IV. Development 2.67 2.90 3.07 2.95 3.33 2.92
V. Deployment 2.80 3.10 3.20 2.95 3.26 3.31

VI. Operation and
2.67 2.75 2.27 2.36 2.49 3.08
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Control Engineering
End- Systems
Domain Systems and Design OEM Other
Users Integrators
Suppliers Firm
II. Definition 3.00 2.68 2.84 2.86 2.87 2.69
IV. Development 2.67 3.01 3.16 3.09 3.18 2.92
V. Deployment 2.93 3.31 3.34 2.82 3.26 3.15

VI. Operation and
2.13 2.75 2.41 2.09 2.28 2.77
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Domain Control Engineering
End- Systems
Systems and Design OEM Other
Users Integrators
Suppliers Firm
II. Definition 19.00 14.46 13.72 15.59 12.56 16.92
IV. Development* 18.33 22.11 23.84 24.32 32.42 20.00
V. Deployment 13.33 14.88 15.02 14.91 12.56 15.00

VI. Operation and
7.67 12.86 8.47 6.32 6.11 14.17
Maintenance
. *Differences greater than 10 percentage points exist.

Job Analysis Study
HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION
IMPORTANCE
Domain High Associate Bachelor’s Master’s Doctoral
Other
school Degree degree degree degree
I. Feasibility Study 3.21 2.86 2.95 3.33 ** **
II. Definition 3.21 3.41 3.32 3.44 ** **
III. System Design 3.29 3.55 3.53 3.44 ** **
IV. Development 2.79 3.00 3.10 2.72 ** **
V. Deployment 2.79 3.27 3.14 3.00 ** **

VI. Operation and
2.57 2.64 2.57 2.50 ** **
Maintenance
CRITICALITY
Other
I. Feasibility Study 2.13 2.32 2.41 2.67 ** **
II. Definition 2.60 2.86 2.80 2.81 ** **
IV. Development 2.60 2.95 3.14 2.92 ** **
V. Deployment 2.93 3.14 3.30 2.97 ** **

VI. Operation and
2.33 2.18 2.48 2.61 ** **
Maintenance
FREQUENCY
Other
I. Feasibility
10.00 9.36 9.48 12.77 ** **
Study
II. Definition 14.67 14.59 13.79 16.43 ** **
IV. Development 20.67 20.91 26.69 19.09 ** **
V. Deployment 13.67 16.59 14.33 12.86 ** **

VI. Operation and
8.67 7.95 10.38 9.43 ** **
Maintenance

Job Analysis Study
IV. Reliability Analysis for Domain Scales
CASTLE assessed the reliability of the scales in order to determine how consistently the tasks measured
the domains of interest. Reliability refers to the degree to which tests or surveys are free from
measurement error. It is important to understand the consistency of the data along the importance and
criticality dimensions in order to draw defensible conclusions. With inconsistency (i.e., unreliability), it
would be impossible to reach accurate conclusions. Reliability was estimated as internal consistency
(Cronbach’s Alpha) using the respondents’ ratings of importance and criticality for each domain. This
calculates the extent to which each task rating within each domain consistently measures what other
tasks within that domain measure. Reliability coefficients range from 0 to 1 and should be above 0.7 to
be judged as adequate. Reliability values below 0.7 indicate an unacceptable amount of measurement
error. As shown below, all domains easily exceed this critical value.
RELIABILITY
Domain Importance Criticality Frequency
I. Feasibility Study .8464 .8653 .8870
II. Definition .8234 .8437 .8832
III. System Design .9014 .8981 .9251
IV. Development .9169 .8954 .9352
V. Deployment .9228 .9210 .9639

VI. Operation and
.9334 .9259 .9104
Maintenance
V. Delineation of Required Knowledge and Skills
Working under the direction of CASTLE, the panel of experts developed a comprehensive list of the
knowledge and skills that the qualified automation professional must possess in order to provide
competent service in each task area. Members of the expert panel drafted these lists at the time that the
panel reached consensus on the tasks. CASTLE then circulated the list throughout the panel of experts
and collected revisions and editorial suggestions for each list from the entire panel.
Following the meeting, CASTLE and ISA arranged for a special committee to review the lists online using
software designed for that purpose in combination with a series of conference calls. CASTLE facilitated
the review meetings, which led to the final listing presented in Phase III of this report.
It is useful when conducting a job analysis in connection with the content validation of a credentialing
examination to understand that knowledge is normally considered a matter of the cognitive domain
(Bloom, et al., 1956). Within the cognitive domain, predominating taxonomies use different levels to
describe the learning outcomes desired. For a credentialing examination such as the CAP, the most
common levels are knowledge (which includes recall and comprehension), application, and analysis.
Knowledge refers to the remembering of previously learned subject matter and a grasp of its meaning.
Application is the ability to use subject matter in job-related situations, and analysis refers to the ability to
break subject matter into component parts in order to reveal its organization and structure. Skills may be
psychomotor or they may involve cognitive skills, such as critical thinking. The CAP examination should
target the objective of having questions with each cognitive domain.

Job Analysis Study
VI. Summary of Results
As shown in the charts on the preceding pages, the survey respondents indicated that all domains are
very important. Each of the six domains has an average importance of at least 2.58 on the four-point
rating scale, with 2 being “Moderately Important” and 3 being “Very Important.” Similarly, the respondents
considered all domains to be critical. Each of the six domains has an average criticality rating of at least
2.43 on the four-point scale, which means that incompetent performance of tasks in each domain could
result in “Moderate Harm” to “Substantial Harm” (of some type) to the public. It is of further value to note
that the panel of experts and survey respondents agreed on the average ratings for importance and
criticality of domains, with only one difference greater than one scale point. These data support the
validity of the six domains as major categories of responsibility in the practice of automation.
Of interest in the analysis was the possibility that respondents’ status along biographical dimensions
might influence their views about the practice of automation. All subgroups rated the domains within one
scale point or ten points on the frequency scale with the exception of three cases. In these three
instances, the highest between-group difference exceeded the lowest by greater than ten points on the
frequency scale. Two of these differences occurred when the area of primary responsibility was
examined. Differences were found in the ratings of frequency for Domain IV (Development) and Domain
VI (Operation and Maintenance). These differences were not unexpected as those respondents who
reported working in Operations and Maintenance as their primary area of responsibility reported
spending 12.52 percent more time performing duties associated with Domain V (Operations and
Maintenance) than did those individuals who reported having another area of primary responsibility.
Respondents reporting their primary area of responsibility as Project/Systems Engineering reported
spending 10.71 percent more time in Domain IV (Development) than those individuals reporting their
primary area of responsibility as Domain IV. However, no differences greater than one scale point were
found on the Importance and Criticality ratings. The final difference was found when examining subgroup
differences based on current employer’s company or organization. The respondents reporting their
current employers were best described as System Integrators reported spending 14.09 percent more
time in Domain IV (Development) than those reporting their current employers were best described as
Control Systems Suppliers. However, no differences greater than one scale points were found on the
Importance and Criticality ratings. Therefore, the differences observed were not considered meaningful
in terms of influencing test specifications.
VII. Conclusion
The results of the job analysis survey validate the results of the panel of experts. This conclusion means
that the domains and tasks developed by the job analysis panel constitute an accurate definition of the
work of qualified automation professionals
Based on a psychometric analysis of the tasks, knowledge, and skills identified by the job analysis study
and given the depth of knowledge and skill implied for protection of the public, competence in the
profession can best be assessed using a multiple-choice examination format.

Job Analysis Study
PHASE III
TEST SPECIFICATIONS
The final phase of a job analysis study is the development of test specifications which identify the
proportion of questions from each domain and task that will appear on the CAP examination. Test
specifications are developed by combining the overall evaluations of importance, frequency, and
criticality, and converting the results into percentages. Importance, frequency, and criticality ratings were
weighted equally in this computation. These percentages are used to determine the number of questions
related to each domain and task.
TEST BLUEPRINT
Domain # of Items
% of Test
on Test
I. Feasibility Study 11.60% 20
II. Definition 15.23% 26
III. System Design 24.94% 44
IV. Development 22.04% 39
V. Deployment 15.24% 27
VI. Operation and Maintenance 10.95% 19
TOTAL 100.00 175

Job Analysis Study
DOMAINS, TASKS, AND KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL STATEMENTS
This section of the report contains the domains, tasks, and knowledge and skill statements as delineated
by the practice analysis panel of experts and validated with data from the practice analysis survey.
Domain I. Feasibility Study
Domain II. Definition
Domain III. System Design
Domain IV. Development
Domain V. Deployment
Domain VI. Operation and Maintenance
Performance Domain I: Feasibility Study
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain I
RATINGS
% of Items on # of Items on
Task Importance Criticality Frequency
Test Test
1 2.68 2.18 1.80 1.96% 4
2 2.63 2.13 1.84 1.95% 3
3 2.84 2.37 1.88 2.09% 4
4 2.55 2.24 1.84 1.95% 3
5 2.39 2.00 1.61 1.77% 3
6 2.57 2.11 1.70 1.88% 3
TOTAL 11.60% 20
Domain I: Feasibility Study

Task 1: Define the preliminary scope through currently established work practices in order to
meet the business need.
Knowledge of:
1. Established work practices
2. Basic process and/or equipment
3. Project management methodology
4. Automation opportunity identification techniques (e.g., dynamic performance
measures)
5. Control and information technologies (MES) and equipment

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
1. Automating process and/or equipment
2. Developing value analyses
Task 2: Determine the degree of automation required through cost/benefit analysis in order to
meet the business need.
Knowledge of:
1. Various degrees of automation
2. Various cost/benefit tools
3. Control and information technologies (MES) and equipment
4. Information technology and equipment
Skill in:
1. Analyzing cost versus benefit (e.g., life cycle analysis)
2. Choosing the degree of automation
3. Estimating the cost of control equipment and software
Task 3: Develop a preliminary automation strategy that matches the degree of automation
required by considering an array of options and selecting the most reasonable option
in order to prepare feasibility estimates.
Knowledge of:
1. Control strategies
2. Principles of measurement
3. Electrical components
4. Control components
5. Various degrees of automation
Skill in:
1. Evaluating different control strategies
2. Selecting appropriate measurements
3. Selecting appropriate components
4. Articulating concepts
Task 4: Conduct technical studies for the preliminary automation strategy by gathering data
and conducting an appropriate analysis relative to requirements in order to define
development needs and risks.
Knowledge of:
1. Process control theories
2. Machine control theories and mechatronics
3. Risk assessment techniques
Skill in:
1. Conducting technical studies
2. Conducting risk analyses
3. Defining primary control strategies
Task 5: Perform a justification analysis by generating a feasibility cost estimate and using an
accepted financial model to determine project viability.
Knowledge of:
1. Financial models (e.g., ROI, NPV)
2. Business drivers
3. Costs of control equipment
4. Estimating techniques

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
1. Estimating the cost of the system
2. Running the financial model
3. Evaluating the results of the financial analysis for the automation portion of the
project
Task 6: Create a conceptual summary document by reporting preliminary decisions and
assumptions in order to facilitate "go"/"no go" decision making.
Knowledge of:
1. Conceptual summary outlines
Skill in:
1. Writing in a technical and effective manner
2. Compiling and summarizing information efficiently
3. Presenting information
Performance Domain II: Definition
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain II
RATINGS
Task % of Items on # of Items on
Importance Criticality Frequency
Test Test
1 3.11 2.55 2.05 3.23% 5
2 2.60 2.18 1.89 2.79% 5
3 3.23 2.87 2.10 3.43% 6
4 2.69 2.23 1.89 2.85% 5
5 2.83 2.35 1.84 2.94% 5
TOTAL 15.23% 26
Domain II: Definition
Task 1: Determine operational strategies through discussion with key stakeholders and using
appropriate documentation in order to create and communicate design requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Interviewing techniques
2. Different operating strategies
3. Team leadership and alignment
Skill in:
1. Leading a individual or group discussion
2. Communicating effectively
Job Analysis Study
4. Building consensus
5. Interpreting the data from interviews
Task 2: Analyze alternative technical solutions by conducting detailed studies in order to define
the final automation strategy.
Knowledge of:
1. Automation techniques
2. Control theories
3. Modeling and simulation techniques
4. Basic control elements (e.g., sensors, instruments, actuators, control systems,
drive systems, HMI, batch control, machine control)
5. Marketplace products available
6. Process and/or equipment operations
Skill in:
1. Applying and evaluating automation solutions
2. Making intelligent decisions
3. Using the different modeling tools
4. Determining when modeling is needed
Task 3: Establish detailed requirements and data including network architecture, communication
concepts, safety concepts, standards, vendor preferences, instrument and equipment
data sheets, reporting and information needs, and security architecture through
established practices in order to form the basis of the design.
Knowledge of:
1. Network architecture
2. Communication protocols, including field level
3. Safety concepts
4. Industry standards and codes
5. Security requirements
6. Safety standards (e.g., ISAM, ANSI, NFPA)
7. Control systems security practices
Skill in:
1. Conducting safety analyses
2. Determining which data is important to capture
3. Selecting applicable standards and codes
4. Identifying new guidelines that need to be developed
5. Defining information needed for reports
6. Completing instrument and equipment data sheets
Task 4: Generate a project cost estimate by gathering cost information in order to determine
continued project viability.
Knowledge of:
1. Control system costs
2. Estimating techniques
3. Available templates and tools
Skill in:
1. Creating cost estimate
2. Evaluating project viability

Job Analysis Study
Task 5: Summarize project requirements by creating a basis-of-design document and a user-
requirements document in order to launch the design phase.
Knowledge of:
1. Basis of design outlines
2. User-requirements document outlines
Skill in:
2. Compiling and summarizing information
3. Making effective presentations

Job Analysis Study
Performance Domain III: System Design
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain III
RATINGS
Test Test
1 3.31 3.26 2.16 3.15% 5
2 2.83 2.42 1.98 2.61% 5
3 3.04 2.69 2.22 2.87% 5
4 2.80 2.41 2.02 2.61% 5
5 2.79 2.45 1.97 2.60% 4
6 3.13 2.76 2.21 2.92% 5
7 2.86 2.59 1.97 2.68% 5
8 2.97 2.66 2.26 2.85% 5
9 2.80 2.59 2.01 2.67% 5
TOTAL 24.94% 44
Domain III: System Design
Task 1: Perform safety and/or hazard analyses, security analyses, and regulatory compliance
assessments by identifying key issues and risks in order to comply with applicable
standards, policies, and regulations.
Knowledge of:
1. Applicable standards (e.g., ISA S84, IEC 61508, 21 CFR Part 11, NFPA)
2. Environmental standards (EPA)
3. Electrical, electrical equipment, enclosure, and electrical classification standards
(e.g., UL/FM, NEC, NEMA)
Skill in:
1. Participating in a Hazard Operability Review
2. Analyzing safety integrity levels
3. Analyzing hazards
4. Assessing security requirements or relevant security issues
5. Applying regulations to design

Job Analysis Study
Task 2: Establish standards, templates, and guidelines as applied to the automation system using
the information gathered in the definition stage and considering human-factor effects in
order to satisfy customer design criteria and preferences.
Knowledge of:
1. Process Industry Practices (PIP) (Construction Industry Institute)
2. IEC 61131 programming languages
3. Customer standards
4. Vendor standards
5. Template development methodology
6. Field devices
7. Control valves
8. Electrical standards (NEC)
9. Instrument selection and sizing tools
10. ISA standards (e.g., S88)
Skill in:
1. Developing programming standards
2. Selecting and sizing instrument equipment
3. Designing low-voltage electrical systems
4. Preparing drawing using AutoCAD software
Task 3: Create detailed equipment specifications and instrument data sheets based on vendor
selection criteria, characteristics and conditions of the physical environment, regulations,
and performance requirements in order to purchase equipment and support system
design and development.
Knowledge of:
1. Field devices
2. Control valves
3. Electrical standards (NEC)
4. Instrument selection and sizing tools
5. Vendors' offerings
6. Motor and drive selection sizing tools
Skill in:
1. Selecting and sizing motors and drives
2. Selecting and sizing instrument equipment
3. Designing low-voltage electrical systems
4. Selecting and sizing computers
5. Selecting and sizing control equipment
6. Evaluating vendor alternatives
7. Selecting or sizing of input/output signal devices and/or conditioners
Task 4: Define the data structure layout and data flow model considering the volume and type of
data involved in order to provide specifications for hardware selection and software
development.
Knowledge of:
1. Data requirements of system to be automated
2. Data structures of control systems
3. Data flow of controls systems
4. Productivity tools and software (e.g., InTools, AutoCAD)
5. Entity relationship diagrams

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
1. Modeling data
2. Tuning and normalizing databases
Task 5: Select the physical communication media, network architecture, and protocols based on
data requirements in order to complete system design and support system development.
Knowledge of:
1. Vendor protocols
2. Ethernet and other open networks (e.g., Devicenet)
3. Physical requirements for networks/media
4. Physical topology rules/limitations
5. Network design
6. Security requirements
7. Backup practices
8. Grounding and bonding practices
Skill in:
1. Designing networks based on chosen protocols
Task 6: Develop a functional description of the automation solution (e.g., control scheme, alarms,
HMI, reports) using rules established in the definition stage in order to guide development
and programming.
Knowledge of:
1. Control theory
2. Visualization, alarming, database/reporting techniques
3. Documentation standards
4. Vendors' capabilities for their hardware and software products
5. General control strategies used within the industry
6. Process/equipment to be automated
7. Operating philosophy
Skill in:
1. Writing functional descriptions
2. Interpreting design specifications and user requirements
3. Communicating the functional description to stakeholders
Task 7: Design the test plan using chosen methodologies in order to execute appropriate testing
relative to functional requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Relevant test standards
2. Simulation tools
3. Process Industry Practices (PIP) (Construction Industry Institute)
4. General software testing procedures
5. Functional description of the system/equipment to be automated
Skill in:
1. Writing test plans
2. Developing tests that validate that the system works as specified

Job Analysis Study
Task 8: Perform the detailed design for the project by converting the engineering and system
design into purchase requisitions, drawings, panel designs, and installation details
consistent with the specification and functional descriptions in order to provide detailed
information for development and deployment.
Knowledge of:
1. Field devices, control devices, visualization devices, computers, and networks
2. Installation standards and recommended practices
3. Electrical and wiring practices
4. Specific customer preferences
5. Functional requirements of the system/equipment to be automated
6. Applicable construction codes
Skill in:
1. Performing detailed design work
2. Documenting the design
Task 9: Prepare comprehensive construction work packages by organizing the detailed design
information and documents in order to release project for construction.
Knowledge of:
1. Applicable construction practices
Skill in:
1. Assembling construction work packages

Job Analysis Study
Performance Domain IV: Development
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain IV
RATINGS
Test Test
1 2.99 2.61 2.33 2.82% 5
2 2.75 2.35 2.18 2.59% 4
3 3.23 3.08 2.56 3.15% 6
4 2.78 2.53 2.09 2.63% 5
5 3.00 2.87 1.95 2.78% 5
6 2.95 2.65 2.13 2.75% 5
7 3.17 2.91 2.11 2.91% 5
8 2.73 2.22 1.85 2.42% 4
TOTAL 22.04% 39
Domain IV: Development
Task 1: Develop Human Machine Interface (HMI) in accordance with the design documents in
order to meet the functional requirements.
Knowledge of
1. Specific HMI software products
2. Tag definition schemes
3. Programming structure techniques
4. Network communications
5. Alarming schemes
6. Report configurations
7. Presentation techniques
8. Database fundamentals
9. Computer operating systems
10. Human factors
11. HMI supplier options
Skill in:
1. Presenting data in a logical and aesthetic fashion
2. Creating intuitive navigation menus
3. Implementing connections to remote devices
4. Documenting configuration and programming
5. Programming configurations

Job Analysis Study
Task 2: Develop database and reporting functions in accordance with the design documents in
order to meet the functional requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Relational database theory
2. Specific database software products
3. Specific reporting products
4. Programming/scripting structure techniques
6. Structured Query language
7. Report configurations
8. Entity diagram techniques
10. Data mapping
Skill in:
1. Presenting data in a logical and aesthetic fashion
2. Administrating databases
3. Implementing connections to remote applications
4. Writing queries
5. Creating reports and formatting/printing specifications for report output
6. Documenting database configuration
7. Designing databases
8. Interpreting functional description
Task 3: Develop control configuration or programming in accordance with the design documents
in order to meet the functional requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Specific control software products
2. Tag definition schemes
5. Alarming schemes
6. I/O structure
7. Memory addressing schemes
8. Hardware configuration
10. Processor capabilities
11. Standard nomenclature (e.g., ISA)
12. Process/equipment to be automated
Skill in:
1. Interpreting functional description
2. Interpreting control strategies and logic drawings
3. Programming and/or configuration capabilities
5. Documenting configuration and programs
6. Interpreting P&IDs
7. Interfacing systems

Job Analysis Study
Task 4: Implement data transfer methodology that maximizes throughput and ensures data
integrity using communication protocols and specifications in order to assure efficiency
and reliability.
Knowledge of:
1. Specific networking software products (e.g., I/O servers).
2. Network topology
3. Network protocols
4. Physical media specifications (e.g., copper, fiber, RF, IR)
6. Interfacing and gateways
7. Data mapping
Skill in:
1. Analyzing throughput
2. Ensuring data integrity
3. Troubleshooting
4. Documenting configuration
5. Configuring network products
6. Interfacing systems
7. Manipulating data
Task 5: Implement security methodology in accordance with stakeholder requirements in order to
mitigate loss and risk.
Knowledge of:
1. Basic system/network security techniques
2. Customer security procedures
3. Control user-level access privileges
4. Regulatory expectations (e.g., 29 CFR Part 11)
5. Industry standards (e.g., ISA)
Skill in:
1. Documenting security configuration
2. Configuring/programming of security system
3. Implementing security features
Task 6: Review configuration and programming using defined practices in order to establish
compliance with functional requirements.
Knowledge of:
6. Network communication
7. Alarming schemes
8. I/O structure
10. Hardware configurations
12. Defined practices
13. Functional requirements of system/equipment to be automated

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
2. Documenting configuration and programs
3. Reviewing programming/configuration for compliance with design requirements
Task 7: Test the automation system using the test plan in order to determine compliance with
functional requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Testing techniques
7. Alarming schemes
8. I/O structure
10. Hardware configurations
Skill in:
2. Executing test plans
3. Documenting test results
6. Interpreting functional requirements of system/equipment to be automated
7. Interpreting P&IDs
Task 8: Assemble all required documentation and user manuals created during the development
process in order to transfer essential knowledge to customers and end users.
Knowledge of:
1. General understanding of automation systems
3. Documentation practices
4. Operations procedures
Skill in:
1. Documenting technical information for non-technical audience
2. Using documentation tools
3. Organizing material for readability

Job Analysis Study
Performance Domain V: Deployment
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain V
RATINGS
Test Test
1 2.75 2.49 2.05 1.16% 2
2 2.86 2.74 2.14 1.24% 2
3 2.82 2.46 2.11 1.18% 2
4 3.34 3.01 2.51 1.41% 3
5 3.18 2.96 2.29 1.34% 3
6 2.99 2.74 2.16 1.26% 2
7 3.52 3.51 2.23 1.48% 3
8 3.02 2.83 1.99 1.25% 2
9 2.87 2.52 1.81 1.15% 2
10 3.11 2.89 2.01 1.28% 2
11 3.07 2.74 2.21 1.28% 2
12 2.97 2.58 2.06 1.21% 2
TOTAL 15.24% 27
Domain V: Deployment
Task 1: Perform receipt verification of all field devices by comparing vendor records against
design specifications in order to ensure that devices are as specified.
Knowledge of:
1. Field devices (e.g., transmitters, final control valves, controllers, variable speed
drives, servo motors)
2. Design specifications
Skill in:
1. Interpreting specifications and vendor documents
2. Resolving differences

Job Analysis Study
Task 2: Perform physical inspection of installed equipment against construction drawings in
order to ensure installation in accordance with design drawings and specifications.
Knowledge of:
1. Construction documentation
2. Installation practices (e.g., field devices, computer hardware, cabling)
3. Applicable codes and regulations
Skill in:
1. Interpreting construction drawings
2. Comparing physical implementation to drawings
3. Interpreting codes and regulations (e.g., NEC, building codes, OSHA)
4. Interpreting installation guidelines
Task 3: Install configuration and programs by loading them into the target devices in order to
prepare for testing.
Knowledge of:
1. Control system (e.g., PLC, DCS, PC)
2. System administration
Skill in:
1. Installing software
2. Verifying software installation
3. Versioning techniques and revision control
4. Troubleshooting (i.e., resolving issues and retesting)
Task 4: Solve unforeseen problems identified during installation using troubleshooting skills in
order to correct deficiencies.
Knowledge of:
1. Troubleshooting techniques
2. Problem-solving strategies
3. Critical thinking
4. Processes, equipment, configurations, and programming
5. Debugging techniques
Skill in:
1. Solving problems
2. Determining root causes
3. Ferreting out information
4. Communicating with facility personnel
5. Implementing problem solutions
6. Documenting problems and solutions
Task 5: Test configuration and programming in accordance with the design documents by
executing the test plan in order to verify that the system operates as specified.
Knowledge of:
1. Programming and configuration
2. Test methodology (e.g., factory acceptance test, site acceptance test, unit-level
testing, system-level testing)
3. Test plan for the system/equipment to be automated
4. System to be tested
5. Applicable regulatory requirements relative to testing

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
Task 6: Test communication systems and field devices in accordance with design
specifications in order to ensure proper operation.
Knowledge of:
1. Test methodology
2. Communication networks and protocols
3. Field devices and their performance requirements
4. Regulatory requirements relative to testing
Skill in:
1. Verifying network integrity and data flow integrity
2. Conducting field device tests
3. Comparing test results to design specifications
Task 7: Test all safety elements and systems by executing test plans in order to ensure that
safety functions operate as designed.
Knowledge of:
1. Applicable safety
2. Safety system design
3. Safety elements
4. Test methodology
5. Facility safety procedures
Skill in:
3. Testing safety systems
Task 8: Test all security features by executing test plans in order to ensure that security
functions operate as designed.
Knowledge of:
1. Applicable security standards
2. Security system design
3. Test methodology
4. Vulnerability assessments
Skill in:
3. Testing security features

Job Analysis Study
Task 9: Provide initial training for facility personnel in system operation and maintenance
through classroom and hands-on training in order to ensure proper use of the system.
Knowledge of:
1. Instructional techniques
2. Automation systems
3. Networking and data communications
4. Automation maintenance techniques
6. System/equipment to be automated
5. Operating and maintenance procedures
Skill in:
1. Communicating with trainees
2. Organizing instructional materials
3. Instructing
Task 10: Execute system-level tests in accordance with the test plan in order to ensure the
entire system functions as designed.
Knowledge of:
1. Test methodology
2. Field devices
4. Networking and data communications
5. Safety systems
6. Security systems
Skill in:
3. Testing of entire systems
4. Communicating final results to facility personnel
Task 11: Troubleshoot problems identified during testing using a structured methodology in
order to correct system deficiencies.
Knowledge of:
1. Troubleshooting techniques
2. Processes, equipment, configurations, and programming
Skill in:
1. Solving problems
2. Determining root causes
3. Communicating with facility personnel
4. Implementing problem solutions

Job Analysis Study
Task 12: Make necessary adjustments using applicable tools and techniques in order to
demonstrate system performance and turn the automated system over to operations.
Knowledge of:
1. Loop tuning methods/control theory
2. Control system hardware
3. Computer system performance tuning
4. User requirements
Skill in:
1. Tuning control loops
2. Adjusting final control elements
3. Optimizing software performance
4. Communicating final system performance results

Job Analysis Study
Performance Domain VI: Operation and Maintenance
Evaluation and Allocation of Questions for Domain VI
RATINGS
Test Test
1 2.39 2.10 1.65 0.91% 2
2 2.76 2.26 2.15 1.06% 2
3 2.17 1.91 1.39 0.81% 1
4 2.39 2.05 1.42 0.87% 1
5 2.41 2.13 1.89 0.95% 2
6 2.20 1.94 1.56 0.84% 1
7 2.39 1.88 1.81 0.90% 2
8 2.47 1.78 1.44 0.84% 1
9 2.33 1.87 1.34 0.82% 1
10 2.34 2.16 1.45 0.88% 2
11 2.66 2.49 1.62 1.00% 2
12 2.77 2.51 1.95 1.07% 2
TOTAL 10.95% 19
Domain VI: Operation and Maintenance
Task 1: Verify system performance and records periodically using established procedures in
order to ensure compliance with standards, regulations, and best practices.
Knowledge of:
1. Applicable standards
2. Performance metrics and acceptable limits
3. Records and record locations
4. Established procedures and purposes of procedures
Skill in:
1. Communicating orally and written
2. Auditing the system/equipment
3. Analyzing data and drawing conclusions
Task 2: Provide technical support for facility personnel by applying system expertise in order to
maximize system availability.
Job Analysis Study
Knowledge of:
1. All system components
2. Processes and equipment
3. Automation system functionality
4. Other support resources
5. Control systems theories and applications
6. Analytical troubleshooting and root-cause analyses
Skill in:
2. Investigating and listening
3. Programming and configuring automation system components
Task 3: Perform training needs analysis periodically for facility personnel using skill assessments
in order to establish objectives for the training program.
Knowledge of:
1. Personnel training requirements
2. Automation system technology
3. Assessment frequency
4. Assessment methodologies
Skill in:
1. Interviewing
2. Assessing level of skills
Task 4: Provide training for facility personnel by addressing identified objectives in order to
ensure the skill level of personnel is adequate for the technology and products used in
the system.
Knowledge of:
1. Training resources
2. Subject matter and training objectives
3. Teaching methodology
Skill in:
1. Writing training objectives
2. Creating the training
3. Organizing training classes (e.g., securing demos, preparing materials, securing
space)
4. Delivering training effectively
5. Answering questions effectively
Task 5: Monitor performance using software and hardware diagnostic tools in order to support
early detection of potential problems.
Knowledge of:
2. Performance metrics
3. Software and hardware diagnostic tools
4. Potential problem indicators
5. Baseline/normal system performance
6. Acceptable performance limits

Job Analysis Study
Skill in:
1. Using the software and hardware diagnostic tools
2. Analyzing data
Task 6: Perform periodic inspections and tests in accordance with written standards and
procedures in order to verify system or component performance against requirements.
Knowledge of:
1. Performance requirements
2. Inspection and test methodologies
3. Acceptable standards
Skill in:
1. Testing and inspecting
2. Analyzing test results
3. Communicating effectively with others in written or oral form
Task 7: Perform continuous improvement by working with facility personnel in order to increase
capacity, reliability, and/or efficiency.
Knowledge of:
1. Performance metrics
2. Control theories
3. System/equipment operations
4. Business needs
5. Optimization tools and methods
Skill in:
1. Analyzing data
2. Programming and configuring
3. Communicating effectively with others
4. Implementing continuous improvement procedures
Task 8: Document lessons learned by reviewing the project with all stakeholders in order to
improve future projects.
Knowledge of:
1. Project review methodology
2. Project history
3. Project methodology and work processes
4. Project metrics
Skill in:
1. Communicating effectively with others
2. Configuring and programming
3. Documenting lessons learned
4. Writing and summarizing

Job Analysis Study
Task 9: Maintain licenses, updates, and service contracts for software and equipment by
reviewing both internal and external options in order to meet expectations for capability
and availability.
Knowledge of:
1. Installed base of system equipment and software
2. Support agreements
3. Internal and external support resources
4. Lifecycle state and support level (including vendor product plans and future
changes)
Skill in:
1. Organizing and scheduling
3. Applying software updates (i.e., keys, patches)
Task 10: Determine the need for spare parts based on an assessment of installed base and
probability of failure in order to maximize system availability and minimize cost.
Knowledge of:
1. Critical system components
2. Installed base of system equipment and software
3. Component availability
4. Reliability analysis
5. Sourcing of spare parts
Skill in:
1. Acquiring and organizing information
2. Analyzing data
Task 11: Provide a system management plan by performing preventive maintenance,
implementing backups, and designing recovery plans in order to avoid and recover from
system failures.
Knowledge of:
2. Acceptable system downtime
3. Preventative and maintenance procedures
4. Backup practices (e.g., frequency, storage media, storage location)
Skill in:
1. Acquiring and organizing
2. Leading
3. Managing crises
4. Performing backups and restores
5. Using system tools

Job Analysis Study
Task 12: Follow a process for authorization and implementation of changes in accordance with
established standards or practices in order to safeguard system and documentation
integrity.
Knowledge of:
1. Management of change procedures
2. Automation systems and documentation
3. Configuration management practices
Skill in:
2. Updating documentation

Job Analysis Study
Appendix A:
Contributors
ISA would like to thank these individuals and their employers for their contribution of time, expertise, and enthusiasm for the
Certified Automation Professional (CAP) program.
CAP Steering Team:

Vernon Trevathan, Chair, Principal Consultant Gerald Wilbanks, Principal
Control & Integration Management ,LLC, MO Documentation & Engineering Services, LLC, AL
Ken Baker (retired) Paul Galeski, President

Eli Lilly, IN Maverick Technologies, IL
Additional Contributors:
Dave Adler, Senior Engineering Consultant Greg McMillan (retired)
Eli Lilly, IN Austin, TX
Dan Bielski, Vice President Jeff Miller, Director of Project Management

Benham Systems, MI Interstates Control Systems, Inc., IA
Joe Bingham, Environmental Specialist Dave Panish, President

Sempra Energy Solutions, CA Enterprise Automation, Inc., CA
Brent Carlson, Systems Engineer Art Pietrzyk, Automation Engineer

3M, MN Rockwell Automation, OH
Alan Carty, President Jonathan Pollet, President

Automationtechies.com, MN PlantData Technologies, TX
Dr. Gerald Cockrell, Professor Doug Ratzlaff, VP Americas Project Excellence

Indiana State University, IN Emerson Process Management, AB
Skip Holmes, Associate Director – Control & Information Joe Ruder, Principal Controls Engineer
Systems, Nestle' Purina Petcare, MO
Corporate Engineering Technologies
Proctor & Gamble, OH Nicholas Sands, Control Engineer
E I du Pont, NJ
Gavin Jacobs, Principal Engineer
Emerson Process Management, AB George Skene, Senior Controls Engineer
The Benham Companies, Inc., MI
Lee Lane, Manager of Applications Engineering
Rockwell Automation, OH Chris Stephens, Design Engineer III
Fluor Corporation, TX
Bob Lindeman, Senior Project Manager
Aerospace Testing Alliance, TN Ken Valentine, Director Design Engineering – Control
Systems
Ron Lutes, Vice President Performance Solutions Fluor Corporation, TX
COMPEX, MO
Jeff White, Control Engineer
Paul Maurath, Technical Section Head Interstates Control Systems, Inc., IA
P&G, OH

Job Analysis Study
Appendix B: Other Responses
Table VII. Other Primary Responsibility in Semiconductor (2)

Current Position Semiconductor manuf./inhouse const.
Software consultancy
automation sales/support Systems Integration (all industries)
Control System Engineering
Corp Controls Manager & Tech Direction Setting Table IX. Other Employer’s Company or
Corporate management Organization
Corporate Management
CSE Automation distributor
design consultant Cable TV
Engineering Consultant Central Engineering
Engineering Management Combonation of End User and OEM
Engineering Research Consultant
Environmental Engineering Control Systems Manufacturer
General Management Education
Instrumentation Sales Instrument systems calibrations to NIST
Management (2) Manufacturing
Management of automation teams across the Pharmaceutical Manufacturer
US Pharmaceutical Mfg
Manufacturing systems and Computer systems Semiconductor Process Manufacturing
validat University
Project Manufacturing Eng.
research and development
Sales and Marketing Table X. Other Certifications and Licenses
Sales Management
Senior management Chartered Eng
Staff Engineer Chartered Engineer (UK)
System construction. Project management CPNE
commish. CSAT (Previously)
System Design CSVA
Systems Design EIT (4)
Technical support Elec. contractorjourneyman electrician
electrical contractor NARTE
Table VIII: Other Industry Worked In Electro-mechanical tech Process Control
Technologi
all FCC
Amunition/Exsplosives MCP
Bulding Materials MCSA MCDBA CCNA
education MIChemE CEng
Education N3 & T1 + 28years Exp.
Food/PHarm/SPecialty Chemical not certified in canada
Industrial gas P.E. from Ontario Canada
Management PhD Chem Eng
Manufacturer - Vendor RPT (Eng)
Manufacturing - general WTP & WWTP Operator Licenses
mining
Mining Table XI. Other Professional Societies
Mining and Metals and/or Organizations
mining and refining
Non-Metals Mining ACM
oil and gas pipelines and facilities APEGGA
oil well- field control APEO
Process Automation Supplier ashrae
Job Analysis Study
ASHRAE PMI (2)
ASME SEMI Sematech
AWWA SME (2)
British IChemE SME NSPE
control engineering WBF (2)
CPNE WEF
IChemE (UK)
IChemE WBF
ispe Table XIII. Other Level of Education
ISPE (4)
ISPE ACM 3 year college diploma
MBAA A.A.S.E. with approx. 3 years toward a B.S.I.T.
NFPA MSEE and MBA
NSPE Technical College/Technicon
NSPE ISPE ASQ
PDA

Job Analysis Study
Appendix C: Major/Focus of Highest Degree
Accounting (2) Electronics Engineering

Aircraft Maintenance Electronics Engineering Technology
Architectural Electronics Technology
Automation (2) Electroninc Technology
automation engineering Engineering Mgmt
biological sciences Engineering Science-Control Systems option
Bioscience Environmental
Business (2) environmental science
Business Administration (9) Environmental Sciences
Business Management Forestry
ChE Industrial Maintenace
Chemical Engineering (28) Industrial Technology w/ Electronics minor
Chemistry Information Systems
civil engineer Information Technology
Computer engineering Information Technology & Management
Computer Engineering instrumentation
computer information systems Instrumentation
computer integrated manufacturing Instrumentation & Control (from DeVry
Computer Integrated Manufacturing Technology Technical)
Computer Science (2) Instrumentation and control engineering
Computers Science management information systems
control Manufacturing Systems Engineering
Control Engineering Manufacturing Systems; MBA
Control System Engineering MBA (3)
control systems Measurement
Control Systems Mech.engHVAC sub-specialty
control systems engineering Mechanical Engineering (11)
Controls Engineering mechanical engineering (Automatic Controls)
Drafting&Design metallurgical engineering
education Nuclear Engineering
EE (2) Operations
EE/control systems Physics
EET Power Electronics
electrical & computer Engineering process control
ELECTRICAL & COMPUTER ENGINEERING Process Control
Electrical Engineering (68) Science & Mathematics
electronic engineering technology Thermal/Fluid Sciences
Electronics (2) Welding

Job Analysis Study
Appendix D: Practice Analysis Survey
ISA – THE INSTRUMENTATION, SYSTEMS,

AND AUTOMATION SOCIETY
CERTIFIED AUTOMATION PROFESSIONAL
ROLE DELINEATION SURVEY

MARCH 2004
Instructions for Completing the
Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society
Role Delineation Survey for the
Certified Automation Professional
This booklet contains the ISA – The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society role delineation survey
for the Certified Automation Professional along with instructional materials to aid you in completing it.
Directions are provided at the beginning of each section of the survey.
ISA – The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society is developing a new certification for automation
professionals to cover the entire field of automation application. We appreciate your time in completing this
survey and we value your important input.
In Section A, you are asked to complete a Confidential Survey, which provides us with the demographic
information necessary to ensure that automation professionals working in various settings with differing
backgrounds are represented in the data collection.
In Section B, we have provided you with a list of definitions and terms that are used throughout the survey.
We suggest that you review the Definition of Terms before responding to any survey questions.
ISA-The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society CAP Survey - March 2004 63
In Section C, you are asked to review the Task Statements required for competent performance in each
performance domain by the Certified Automation Professional, and rate each for importance, criticality, and
frequency as they pertain to the role of the Certified Automation Professional.
In Section D, you are asked to review the Performance Domains that define the role of the Certified
Automation Professional. We ask that you rate the importance, criticality, and frequency of these domains as
they pertain to the role of the Certified Automation Professional.
Please review the entire booklet before responding to any of the questions. Your review will help you to
understand our terminology and the structure of the role delineation survey.
Please mark your responses directly in this booklet. Please return your completed survey by 2 April 2004 in
the enclosed, self-addressed, stamped envelope to:
CASTLE Worldwide, Inc.

Post Office Box 570
Morrisville, North Carolina 27560-0570
Thank you in advance for your help with this very important project. ISA will use your responses to help
determine the blueprint for the ISA Certified Automation Professional Examination.
Section A
Confidential Survey
Please fill in the following demographic information, which will be used to ensure that automation professionals
working in various settings with differing backgrounds are represented in the data collection.
All responses are kept strictly confidential by CASTLE Worldwide, Inc. Computer programs are used to sort the
data. Neither individual persons or companies nor their particular data will be identifiable in any report
generated using information obtained through this survey.
Please check the appropriate boxes, or print your responses.

1. Gender (Please select one.)
Male Female
2. Age (Please select one.)

Under 30 years 41-50 years 61 years and above
31-40 years 51-60 years
3. In which state/province do you work? (Please list one.)

____________________________________________________________________________________
4. How much experience do you have as an automation professional? (Please select one.)
I am not an automation professional. 6-10 years
Less than 1 year 11-15 years
1-5 years More than 15 years
5. What percentage of your time do you spend working as an automation professional in your current
position? (Please select one.)
I am not an automation professional. 51-75 percent
Less than 25 percent 76-100 percent
25-50 percent
6. Which control area(s) do you work in on a daily basis? (Please select one.)
Discrete/Machine Control Both Discrete/Machine Control and
Process/Liquid/Dry
Process/Liquid/Dry
7. What is your primary responsibility in your current position? (Please select one.)
Field Engineering Project/System Engineering
Information Systems Other (Please specify.)
Operations and Maintenance ___________________________________
8. Which of the following best describes the industry in which you work? (Please select one.)
Aerospace Petroleum Manufacturing
Automotive Manufacturing Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Building Automation Plastics Manufacturing
Chemical Manufacturing Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
Consumer Goods Textiles/Fabrics Manufacturing
Electrical/Electronic Manufacturing Transportation
Engineering and Construction Utilities
Environmental/Waste Water/Waste
Food and Beverage Manufacturing Other (Please specify.)
Machinery Manufacturing ___________________________________
Metals Manufacturing
9. Which of the following best describes your current employer's company or organization? (Please select one.)
Control Systems Suppliers Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)
End-Users (petro-chem, food and beverage, Systems Integrators
pulp and paper)
Other (Please specify.)
Engineering and Design Firm
10. What certifications/licenses do you currently hold? (Please select all that apply.)
CEM CSE PMP
CQE MSCE Other (Please specify.)
CCST PE ___________________
11. In which professional societies and/or organizations do you currently hold membership? (Please select
all that apply.)
AIChE ISA
ASME UA
CSIA Other (Please specify.)
IBEW ___________________________________
IEEE
12. What is your highest level of education? (Please select one.)
High School/Secondary School Doctoral Degree
Associate Degree Other (Please specify.)
Bachelor’s Degree ___________________________________
Master’s Degree
13. What is the major/focus of study of your highest degree? (e.g., measurement, business administration,
mechanical engineering, electrical engineering)
__________________________________________________________________________________
14. What is your annual income? (Please select one.)

Less than $20,000 $80,000 to $110,000
$20,000 to $49,999 More than $110,000
$50,000 to $79,999
Section B
Definition of Terms
Below are definitions of the terms found in this role delineation survey.
Certified Automation Professional (CAP): The ISA Certified Automation Professional (CAP) has
completed a four-year technical degree* and five years of experience working in automation. CAPs are
responsible for the direction, definition, design, development/application, deployment, documentation, and
support of systems, software, and equipment used in control systems, manufacturing information systems,
systems integration, and operational consulting.
* There may be a variety of ways to combine education and experience to satisfy eligibility
requirements for an introductory two-year period.
Performance Domain: The performance domains are the major responsibilities or duties that define the
role of the Certified Automation Professional. Each performance domain may be considered a major
heading in an outline and may include a brief behavioral description. There are six performance domains
included in this survey, as identified by an expert panel:
• Feasibility Study
• Definition
• System Design
• Development
• Deployment
• Operation and Maintenance
Task Statement: A task is an activity performed within a performance domain. Each performance domain
consists of a series of tasks that collectively form a comprehensive and detailed description of each
performance domain. Typically, task statements answer such questions as:
• What activity did you perform?
• To whom or to what was your activity directed?
• Why did you perform that activity?
• How did you accomplish the activity?
Section C
Evaluation of Performance Domains
Instructions: You will be rating each performance domain identified by an expert panel on three
dimensions: importance, criticality, and frequency.
Please remember, the performance domains are the major responsibilities or duties that define the role of
the Certified Automation Professional. Each performance domain may be considered a major heading in an
outline. There are six performance domains included in this survey, as identified by an expert panel. Each
performance domain consists of a series of tasks that collectively form a comprehensive and detailed
description of each performance domain. A task is an activity performed within a performance domain. In
this section, you will validate the performance domains. If you are unclear what areas a performance
domain covers, please review Section D.
Importance: Importance is defined as the degree to which knowledge in the performance domain is
essential to the role of the Certified Automation Professional. Indicate how important each performance
domain is to the Certified Automation Professional. Rate each of the six performance domains by using the
scale below. Please assign each performance domain only one rating. DO NOT RANK THE DOMAINS.
Select the number of the description below that best exemplifies your rating for each performance domain,
and write that number in the space provided next to each performance domain.
1 = Slightly Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is only slightly essential to the job
performance of the Certified Automation Professional.
2 = Moderately Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is only moderately essential to the job
3 = Very Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is clearly essential to the job performance of
the Certified Automation Professional.
4 = Extremely Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is absolutely essential to the job
Rating of
Importance Performance Domain
2. Definition
3. System Design
4. Development
5. Deployment
Criticality: Criticality is defined as the potential for harmful consequences to occur if the Certified
Automation Professional is not knowledgeable in the performance domain. Indicate the degree to which the
inability of the Certified Automation Professional to perform tasks within the performance domain would be
seen as causing harm to employers, employees, the public, and/or other relevant stakeholders. Harm may
be physical, emotional, financial, etc. Rate each of the six performance domains by using the scale below.
Please assign each performance domain only one rating. DO NOT RANK THE DOMAINS. Select the
number of the description that best exemplifies your rating for each performance domain, and write that
number in the space provided next to each performance domain.
1 = Minimal or No Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this performance domain would lead to error
with minimal adverse consequences.
2 = Moderate Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this performance domain would lead to error with
moderate adverse consequences.
3 = Substantial Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this performance domain would lead to error with
substantial adverse consequences.
4 = Extreme Harm. Inability to perform tasks within this performance domain would definitely lead to
error with severe adverse consequences.
Rating of
Criticality Performance Domain
2. Definition
3. System Design
4. Development
5. Deployment
Frequency: What percent of time does the Certified Automation Professional spend performing duties
associated with each domain? Write the percentage in the space provided next to each domain. The total
must equal 100 percent.
Percent of
Time Performance Domain
2. Definition
3. System Design
4. Development
5. Deployment
100%
Section D
Evaluation of Task Statements
In this section you will rate the task statements associated with each of the six domains on three
dimensions – importance, criticality, and frequency – according to the scales below.
Please remember, a task is an activity performed within a performance domain. As previously discussed,
the performance domains are the major responsibilities and duties that define the role of the Certified
Automation Professional. In this section, you will validate the tasks. If you are unclear about the relationship
between the performance domains and the tasks, please review Section C.
Rating Scales
Importance Criticality* Frequency
1 – Slightly Important 1 – Causing Minimal or No Harm 1 – About Once Per Year or Never
2 – Moderately Important 2 – Causing Moderate Harm 2 – About Once Per Month
3 – Very Important 3 – Causing Substantial Harm 3 – About Once Per Week

4 – About Once Per Day or More
4 – Extremely Important 4 – Causing Extreme Harm
Often
*The amount of harm that could be caused by performing the task incompetently.
Circle the number corresponding to the Importance, Criticality, and Frequency rating for each task statement.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
__________
DOMAIN I: FEASIBILITY STUDY IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 1: Define the preliminary scope through currently established
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
work practices in order to meet the business need.
Task 2: Determine the degree of automation required through
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
cost/benefit analysis in order to meet the business need.
Task 3: Develop a preliminary automation strategy that matches
the degree of automation required by considering an array
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
of options and selecting the most reasonable in order to
prepare feasibility estimates.
Task 4: Conduct technical studies for the preliminary automation
strategy by gathering data and conducting an appropriate
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
analysis relative to requirements in order to define
development needs and risks
Task 5: Perform a justification analysis by generating a feasibility
cost estimate and using an accepted financial model in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to determine project viability.
Task 6: Create a conceptual summary document by reporting
preliminary decisions and assumptions in order to facilitate 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
"go"/"no go" decision making.
Please list any tasks related to Domain I that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
DOMAIN II: DEFINITION IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 1: Determine operational strategies through discussion with
key stakeholders and using appropriate documentation in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to create and communicate design requirements.
Rating Scales

Often
DOMAIN II: DEFINITION (CONTINUED) IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 2: Analyze alternative technical solutions by conducting
detailed studies in order to define the final automation 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
strategy.
Task 3: Establish detailed requirements and data including network
architecture, communication concepts, safety concepts,
standards, vendor preferences, instrument and equipment
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
data sheets, reporting and information needs, and security
architecture through established practices in order to form
the basis of the design.
Task 4: Generate a project cost estimate by gathering cost
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
information in order to determine continued project viability.
Task 5: Summarize project requirements by creating a basis-of-
design document and a user-requirements document in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to launch the design phase.
Please list any tasks related to Domain II that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
DOMAIN III: SYSTEM DESIGN IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY
Task 1: Perform safety and/or hazard analyses, security analyses,
and regulatory compliance assessments by identifying key
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
issues and risks in order to comply with applicable
standards, policies, and regulations.
Task 2: Establish standards, templates, and guidelines as applied to
the automation system using the information gathered in the
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
definition stage and considering human-factor effects in
order to satisfy customer design criteria and preferences.
Task 3: Create detailed equipment specifications and instrument
data sheets based on vendor selection criteria,
characteristics and conditions of the physical environment,
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
regulations, and performance requirements in order to
purchase equipment and support system design and
development.
Task 4: Define the data structure layout and data flow model
considering the volume and type of data involved in order to
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
provide specifications for hardware selection and software
development.
Task 5: Select the physical communication media, network
architecture, and protocols based on data requirements in
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to complete system design and support system
development.
Task 6: Develop a functional description of the automation solution
(e.g., control scheme, alarms, HMI, reports) using rules
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
established in the definition stage in order to guide
development and programming.
Task 7: Design the test plan using chosen methodologies in order to
execute appropriate testing relative to functional 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
requirements.
Rating Scales

Often
DOMAIN III: SYSTEM DESIGN (CONTINUED) IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY
Task 8: Perform the detailed design for the project by converting
the engineering and system design into purchase
requisitions, drawings, panel designs, and installation
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
details consistent with the specification and functional
descriptions in order to provide detailed information for
development and deployment.
Task 9: Prepare comprehensive construction work packages by
organizing the detailed design information and documents 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
in order to release project for construction.
Please list any tasks related to Domain III that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
DOMAIN IV: DEVELOPMENT IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 1: Develop Human Machine Interface (HMI) in accordance
with the design documents in order to meet the functional 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
requirements.
Task 2: Develop database and reporting functions in accordance
with the design documents in order to meet the functional 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
requirements.
Task 3: Develop control configuration or programming in
accordance with the design documents in order to meet 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
the functional requirements.
Task 4: Implement data transfer methodology that maximizes
throughput and ensures data integrity using
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
communication protocols and specifications in order to
assure efficiency and reliability.
Task 5: Implement security methodology in accordance with
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
stakeholder requirements in order to mitigate loss and risk.
Task 6: Review configuration and programming using defined
practices in order to establish compliance with all design 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
requirements.
Task 7: Test the automation system using the test plan in order to
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
determine compliance with functional requirements.
Task 8: Assemble all required documentation and user manuals
created during the development process in order to 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
transfer essential knowledge to customers and end users.
Please list any tasks related to Domain IV that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Rating Scales

Often
DOMAIN V: DEPLOYMENT IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 1: Perform receipt verification of all field devices by
comparing vendor records against design specifications in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to ensure that devices are as specified.
Task 2: Perform physical inspection of installed equipment against
construction drawings in order to ensure installation in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
accordance with design drawings and specifications.
Task 3: Install configuration and programs by loading them into the
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
target devices in order to prepare for testing.
Task 4: Solve unforeseen problems identified during installation
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
using troubleshooting skills in order to correct deficiencies.
Task 5: Test configuration and programming in accordance with
the design documents by executing the test plan in order 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
to verify that the system operates as specified.
Task 6: Test communication systems and field devices in
accordance with design specifications in order to ensure 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
proper operation.
Task 7: Test all safety elements and systems by executing test
plans in order to ensure that safety functions operate as 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
designed.
Task 8: Test all security features by executing test plans in order to
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
ensure that security functions operate as designed.
Task 9: Provide initial training for facility personnel in system
operation and maintenance through classroom and hands- 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
on training in order to ensure proper use of the system.
Task 10:Execute system-level tests in accordance with the test
plan in order to ensure the entire system functions as 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
designed.
Task 11:Troubleshoot problems identified during testing using a
structured methodology in order to correct system 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
deficiencies.
Task 12:Make necessary adjustments using applicable tools and
techniques in order to demonstrate system performance 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
and turn the automated system over to operations.
Please list any tasks related to Domain V that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Rating Scales

Often
DOMAIN VI: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE IMPORTANCE CRITICALITY FREQUENCY

Task 1: Verify system performance and records periodically using
established procedures in order to ensure compliance with 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
standards, regulations, and best practices.
Task 2: Provide technical support for facility personnel by applying
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
system expertise in order to maximize system availability.
Task 3: Perform training needs analysis periodically for facility
personnel using skill assessments in order to establish 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
objectives for the training program.
Task 4: Provide training for facility personnel by addressing
identified objectives in order to ensure the skill level of
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
personnel is adequate for the technology and products
used in the system.
Task 5: Monitor performance using software and hardware
diagnostic tools in order to support early detection of 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
potential problems.
Task 6: Perform periodic inspections and tests in accordance with
written standards and procedures in order to verify system 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
or component performance against requirements.
Task 7: Perform continuous improvement by working with facility
personnel in order to increase capacity, reliability, and/or 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
efficiency.
Task 8: Document lessons learned by reviewing the project with all
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
stakeholders in order to improve future projects.
Task 9: Maintain licenses, updates, and service contracts for
software and equipment by reviewing both internal and
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
external options in order to meet expectations for capability
and availability.
Task10:Determine the need for spare parts based on an
assessment of installed base and probability of failure in 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
order to maximize system availability and minimize cost.
Task 11:Provide a system management plan by performing
preventive maintenance, implementing backups, and
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
designing recovery plans in order to avoid and recover
from system failures.
Task 12:Follow a process for authorization and implementation of
changes in accordance with established standards or
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
practices in order to safeguard system and documentation
integrity.
Please list any tasks related to Domain VI that you think may have been overlooked.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ISBN - 1-55617-903-0

ISA Certified Automation Professional CAP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISA Certified Automation Professional CAP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISA Certified Automation

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data in Progress

Phase I: Initial Development and Evaluation ............................................................................................4

Phase II: Validation Study.........................................................................................................................5

I. Questionnaire Design, Sampling Plan, and Distribution..........................................................5

II. Characteristics of the Sample .................................................................................................5

III. Evaluation of Performance Domains......................................................................................20

B. Panelists’ Evaluations .................................................................................................21

C. Respondents’ Evaluations ..........................................................................................22

D. Comparison of Panel Members’ and Respondents’ Evaluations ................................24

E. Survey Respondent Subgroups’ Evaluations..............................................................25

IV. Reliability Analysis for Domain Scales...................................................................................33

V. Delineation of Required Knowledge and Skills .......................................................................33

VI. Summary of Results...............................................................................................................34

Phase III: Test Specifications..................................................................................................................35

Domain, Task, and Knowledge and Skill Statements..................................................................36

Appendix A: Contributors for the Practice Analysis Study ......................................................................59

Appendix B: Other Responses................................................................................................................60

Appendix C: Major/Focus of Highest Degree..........................................................................................62

Appendix D: Job Analysis Survey ...........................................................................................................63

I. Initial Development and Validation. In January 2004, a panel of 15 experts assembled by

II. Validation Study. A representative sample of 1,500 practicing automation professionals

ISA Certified Automation Professional 3

The following steps were undertaken to complete Phase I:

ISA Certified Automation Professional 4

I. Questionnaire Design, Sampling Plan, and Distribution

II. Characteristics of the Sample

ISA Certified Automation Professional 5

Male 203 94.4

TOTAL 215 100.0

ISA Certified Automation Professional 6

Under 30 years 13 6.0

31- 40 years 79 36.7

41-50 years 82 38.1

51-60 years 34 15.8

TOTAL 215 99.9*

*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not always equal 100.

ISA Certified Automation Professional 7

Total 200 100.0

ISA Certified Automation Professional 8

1-5 years 19 8.8

6-10 years 47 21.9

11-15 years 46 21.4

TOTAL 215 100.0

ISA Certified Automation Professional 9

PERCENT OF TIME SPENT

25-50 percent 27 12.6

51-75 percent 37 17.2

76-100 percent 141 65.6

TOTAL 215 100.1*

*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not always equal 100.

PERCENT OF TIME SPENT

ISA Certified Automation Professional 10

Process (Liguid, dry) 47 22.0

Both Discrete and

TOTAL 214 100.1*

*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not always equal 100.

ISA Certified Automation Professional 11

Field Engineering 0 0.0

TOTAL 202 100.1*

*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not always equal 100.

ISA Certified Automation Professional 12

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent