Also available as PDF (figures and tables appear in the PDF).
Delphi studies are widely used for expert-based consensus building in education and social sciences; however, the absence of a universally accepted standard for determining consensus remains a persistent methodological challenge. Different studies employ varying statistical thresholds and decision rules, leading to inconsistencies in indicator selection and interpretation. Addressing this methodological gap, the study employed a cross-sectional, multi-phase Delphi design to develop communication competencies by applying a tailored calibrated multi-criteria Delphi framework. A panel of thirty experts participated in three iterative rounds and consensus was established with context-specific thresholds using a combination of median values, interquartile range (IQR), quartile deviation (QD), and percentage agreement. The process resulted in the identification of 11 key communication skill indicators demonstrating high consensus (QD ≤ 0.5; IQR ≤ 1) and very high importance (Median ≥ 4; ≥80% agreement). To assess practical relevance, a Training Need Index (TNI) analysis was conducted among 210 postgraduate students from three leading agricultural institutions in India. The findings revealed moderate to high training needs, particularly in interactive communication competencies such as initiating discussions, persuasive communication, and voice modulation. Grounded in Social Cognitive Theory and communication competence perspectives, the study highlights the role of structured, evidence-based framework with calibrated criteria in identifying skill gaps. The proposed calibrated consensus approach offers a transparent and replicable model for Delphi studies, with implications for strengthening communication capacity in professional education and public health-related extension systems.
Keywords: Capacity building; communication competencies; consensus calibration; Delphi technique; higher education; Training Need Index; Capacitybuilding; communicationcompetencies; consensuscalibration; Delphitechnique; TrainingNeedIndex
Communication competence is increasingly recognizedasacoreprofessionalrequirementforgraduates inhighereducation,particularlyindisciplineswhere knowledgedissemination,stakeholderengagement, andbehaviouralinfluencearecentral.Inagricultural andruralsystems,professionalsfrequentlyoperateat theinterfaceofeducation,extension,andcommunity engagement,whereeffectivecommunicationplaysa key role in translating technical knowledge into actionable practices [23]. In contemporary extension systems,professionalsmusttranslatescientificknowledgeintoactionableinformationforvariedaudiences, makingcommunicationcompetenceanessentialcomponentofprofessionaleffectiveness.
However, several studies have identified persistent communicationskillgapsamongprofessionals,particularly in scientific writing, oral presentation, and interpersonalcommunication[3].Thishasdirectimplicationsnotonlyforprofessionaleffectivenessbut alsoforbroaderpublichealthoutcomes,includingnutritionawareness,environmentalsafety,andadoption ofsustainablepractices.
Fromatheoreticalperspective,communicationcompetencecanbeviewedasamultidimensionalconstruct involvingcognitive,behavioural,andcontextualelementsofcommunicationability.Educationaltheories such as Social Cognitive Theory [2] highlight the interactionbetweenpersonalcapabilities,behavioural practice,andenvironmentalinfluencesinskilldevelopment.Similarly,ExperientialLearningTheory[15] emphasizestheimportanceoflearningthroughexperience,reflection,andpracticeindevelopingprofessionalcompetencies. Withinthecommunicationdomain,CommunicationCompetenceTheorysuggests thateffectivecommunicationdependsontheintegration of knowledge, skills, and motivation necessary toperformcommunicationtasksappropriatelyindifferent contexts [20]. These theoretical perspectives underscoretheneedtoidentifymeasurableindicators thatreflectthemultipledimensionsofcommunication competenceamongstudentsinhigheragriculturaleducation.
Thedevelopmentofcompetencyindicatorsinprofessionaldevelopmentresearchhastraditionallyreliedon avarietyofmethodologicalapproachesthatcombine theoreticalinsightswithexpertjudgment.Literaturebased indicator identification is commonly used to establishconceptualfoundations;however,suchapproachesmayoverlookemergingprofessionalexpectationsandcontextualrealitieswithinspecificdisciplines.Otherparticipatoryapproachessuchasfocus pertworkshopsallowforcollaborativebrainstorming anddiscussionamongexperts.Whilethesemethods cangeneratediverseperspectives,theyofteninvolve directinteractionamongparticipants,whichmayintroducesocialpressures,dominanceeffects,andgroup conformitythatinfluenceindividualjudgmentsand potentiallybiastheoutcomesofthediscussion[12]. In addition, more structured decision-making approachessuchastheAnalyticHierarchyProcess(AHP) andothermulti-criteriadecisionanalysistechniques havebeenappliedinindicatordevelopmentandprioritizationstudies.Theseapproachesareparticularly usefulwhenresearchersneedtoassignweightstopredefinedindicatorsorrankalternativesbasedonmultiple evaluation criteria. However, such techniques requireclearlydefineddecisionstructuresandevaluationframeworks, makingthemlesssuitableforexploratorycontextswhereindicatorsmustfirstbegenerated,refined,andvalidatedthroughexpertknowledge [26]. Similarly, conventional survey-based approachescancaptureexpertopinionsbutlacktheiterativefeedbackmechanismsnecessarytofacilitatethe refinementandconvergenceofexpertjudgmentsover time.
Insituationswhereempiricalevidenceislimitedand expert knowledge must be systematically synthesized, the Delphi technique offers a more appropriatemethodologicalapproach.Originallydevelopedby theRANDCorporation,theDelphitechniqueisdefined asastructuredcommunicationprocessinwhichexpertsprovidetheirjudgmentsthroughmultiplerounds ofquestionnaireswithcontrolledfeedbackbetween rounds[18].Unliketraditionaldiscussion-basedmethods,theDelphitechniquemaintainsanonymityamong panelmembers,therebyreducingtheinfluenceofdominantindividualsandenablingexpertstoexpresstheir opinionsindependently.
SeveralmethodologicalcharacteristicsmaketheDelphi technique particularly suitable for competency identificationandindicatordevelopmentstudies.The methodallowsresearcherstocollectknowledgefrom geographically dispersed experts without requiring physical meetings. The iterative nature of the processenablesexpertstoreconsidertheirresponsesafterreviewingaggregatedgroupfeedback,whichgradually promotes convergence of opinions [16]. Furthermore,anonymityamongpanelmembersreduces group pressure and encourages independent judgment,therebyimprovingthereliabilityofexpertconsensus[12].Therefore,theDelphimethodremainsparticularlyvaluableinhealthcommunicationresearch where expert-driven synthesis is required in the absenceofdefinitiveempiricalevidence.
Withinprofessionaldevelopmentcontexts,Delphistudieshavebeenwidelyusedtoidentifyprofessionalcompetenciesrequiredforagriculturaleducators,extensionprofessionals,andstudents.ThesestudiesdemonstratetheusefulnessofDelphiinsynthesizingexpert knowledge and developing structured competency frameworksforemergingskilldomains[9]. Furthermore,recentstudieshaveincreasinglyappliedtheDelphitechniqueinpublichealthresearchtodevelopcommunicationcompetencyframeworks,assessriskcommunicationstrategies,andidentifyhealthliteracycompetencies. Atthesametime,methodologicaldiscussionshighlightgrowingvariabilityinconsensusdetermination,emphasizingtheneedformorestandardized andtransparentapproaches.
TheliteratureindicatesthatthereisnouniversallyacceptedcriterionfordefiningconsensusinDelphistudies[13].Researchershaveadoptedvariousstatistical measurestodetermineconsensus,includingpercentageagreement,meanscores,medianvalues,standard deviation,interquartilerange(IQR),anddisagreement indices[28].Somestudiesdefineconsensusbasedon minimumpercentageagreementamongrespondents, whileothersrelyondispersionmeasuressuchasdisagreementindicesorstandarddeviationthresholds[8]. Consequently,thereisconsiderablemethodological variationinhowDelphistudiesdetermineandreport consensus.
To address this methodological challenge, several scholarsrecommendusingmultiplestatisticalindicatorssimultaneouslytoevaluateboththeimportanceof itemsandthelevelofagreementamongexperts.Measuresofcentraltendencysuchasthemedianhelpdeterminetheperceivedimportanceofindicators,while dispersionmeasuressuchastheinterquartilerange (IQR)andquartiledeviationprovideinsightintothe degreeofagreementamongpanelmembers.Themedianisparticularlyappropriateforanalysingordinal databecauseitislesssensitivetoextremevaluesthan themean[11],whiletheinterquartilerangeiswidely consideredarobustindicatorofconsensusinDelphi studies[5].
Recognizing this methodological limitation, the presentstudyemploystheDelphitechniquetoidentify andvalidatecommunicationskillindicatorsrelevant for professional development. Since Delphi studies do not follow a universal consensus standard, the study adopts a calibrated multi-criteria consensus approach, integrating median values, interquartile range,quartiledeviation,andpercentageagreement to determine both the importance of indicators and the level of expert consensus. Thus, beyond identifyingcommunicationindicators,thestudycontributesmethodologicallybyproposingacalibrated multi-criteriaconsensusframeworkforDelphi-based indicatordevelopment.
In view of the communication skill gaps observed amongpostgraduateagriculturalstudentsandtheabsenceofauniversallyacceptedcriterionfordeterminingconsensusinDelphistudies,thepresentstudyaims todevelopandvalidatecommunicationskillindicators relevanttohigheragriculturaleducation.Specifically, thestudyseekstoachievethefollowingobjectives: 1. ToidentifyanddevelopcommunicationcompetencyindicatorsusingastructuredDelphitechnique.
2. Toestablishexpertconsensusontheidentified indicatorsusingacalibratedmulti-criteriaconsensusframework.
3. Toexaminetheapplicabilityofthedeveloped competencies in professional education and publichealth-relatedcommunicationcontexts.
Thestudyfollowedamulti-phaseresearchframework integratingexpert-basedconsensusdevelopmentand empirical validation. A three-round iterative Delphi process was conducted, as two to three rounds are generallyconsideredsufficientforachievingstableconsensusinDelphistudies[6,19].Panelmemberswere chosenbasedontheirexpertise,professionalexperience,andwillingnesstoparticipateinmultiplerounds ofconsultation.Thepanelcompositionfollowedrecommendationssuggestingthat15–30expertsareappropriateforhomogeneousDelphipanels[1,27]. Inthefirstround,expertswereinvitedthroughanopenendedquestionnairetoidentifykeycommunication competenciesrequiredforextensionprofessionaldevelopment. Responseswereanalysedusingcontent analysis,andsimilarstatementsweregroupedandconsolidatedtogenerateapreliminarylistofcommunicationskillindicators.
Inthesecondround,theidentifiedindicatorswerepresentedtothepanelmembersinastructuredquestionnaireandevaluatedusingafive-pointLikertscalerangingfrom1(notimportant)to5(veryimportant).The responseswereanalysedtoassessboththeperceived importanceofeachindicatorandthelevelofagreementamongexperts.
Thethirdroundprovidedexpertswithsummarizedresultsfromthepreviousroundandallowedthemtoreconsidertheirratings.Thiscontrolledfeedbackmechanismenabledexpertstoreviewthecollectiveopinion ofthegroupandrefinetheirjudgments,therebyfacilitatingconvergencetowardconsensus.
Since Delphi studies do not follow a universally acceptedcriterionfordeterminingconsensus[13],the presentstudyadoptedacalibratedmulti-criteriaconsensus approach. The importance of each indicatorwasassessedusingthemedian,whileagreement amongexpertswasevaluatedusingtheinterquartile range(IQR)andquartiledeviation.Inaddition,percentageagreementwasusedtodeterminetheproportion ofexpertsassigninghighimportancetoeachindicator. Indicatorswithhighermedianvaluesandlower dispersionstatisticswereconsideredtodemonstrate strongerexpertconsensus.
Thecriteriausedforevaluatingindicatorimportance andconsensusaresummarizedinthefollowingtable. TheDelphiprocessconcludedafterthreeroundsonce stable patterns of expert agreement were observed. Anonymity of the panel members was maintained throughouttheprocesstoensureindependentjudgmentandminimizepotentialbias.Byintegratingmultiplestatisticalindicatorsratherthanrelyingonasingleconsensusmeasure, theapproachimprovesthe transparency,reliability,andmethodologicalrigorof indicatordevelopmentineducationalresearch. Toexaminethepracticalrelevanceofthegenerated indicators, atrainingneedsanalysiswasconducted among students in agriculture and nutrition education. Forthispurpose, threeleadingagriculturalinstitutionsinIndiawerepurposivelyselectedbasedon theirperformanceintheNationalInstitutionalRanking Framework(NIRF,MinistryofEducation,2024),which evaluatesuniversitiesonparameterssuchasresearch, graduationoutcomes,outreach,andperception. Tocaptureinstitutionaldiversity,thestudyincludeda DeemedUniversity(IndianAgriculturalResearchInstitute, IARI), a State Agricultural University (G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, GBPUAT), and a Central University (Banaras Hindu University, BHU).Theseinstitutionsrepresentprominentcentres ofhigheragriculturalandnutritioneducationinIndia. The study targeted postgraduate students. Respondentswererequiredtoberegisteredinmaster’sordoctoralprogramsandtohaveexposuretoacademiccommunicationactivitiessuchasseminars,coursework, andresearchpresentations.Usingstratifiedsampling, seventystudentswereselectedfromeachinstitution, resultinginatotalsampleof210respondents,representingdiverseagriculturaldisciplines.
TheTrainingNeedIndex(TNI)forthegeneratedcommunicationskillindicatorswascomputedusingthe followingformula[25].TheTrainingNeedIndexiscalculatedbydividingthetotalobtainedscorebythemaximumobtainablescoreandmultiplyingby100:
(cid:18) TotalObtainedScore (cid:19) TNI = × 100 (1) MaximumObtainableScore
Theskillgaportrainingneediscalculatedas:
SkillGap(TrainingNeed) = 100 − TNI (2)
AlowervalueofTNIindicatesagreatermagnitudeof trainingneed,andviceversa.TheTrainingNeedIndex isalsousedtoprioritizetrainingrequirements. The respondents were classified into three groups—low, medium,andhighlevelsoftrainingneeds—following the approach suggested by [14]. The cumulative squarerootfrequencymethodwasusedtocategorize respondentswithineachuniversity.
The communication competencies assessed in this studyarebasedonstudents’self-perceivedlevelsof competenceandimportanceofspecificcommunicationskills.Therefore,theTrainingNeedIndexreflects perceivedcommunicationtrainingneedsratherthan objectivelymeasuredcommunicationproficiency. Perception-basedassessmentiswidelyusedintraining need analysis because it captures learners’ subjectiveevaluationoftheirownskillgapsandidentifiesareaswheretheyfeeladditionaltrainingorsupportisrequired.However,suchassessmentsmayalso beinfluencedbyindividualself-evaluationtendencies. Therefore,thefindingsshouldbeinterpretedasindicatorsofperceivedcommunicationskillgapsamong postgraduatestudents.
Apanelof30expertsrepresentingthefieldsofextension,education,andcommunicationrelatedtoagricultureandnutritionwasconstitutedtoidentifyandvalidatecommunicationskillindicatorsrelevanttopostgraduatestudents.Themajorityofexpertshadmore than8yearsofprofessionalexperienceineducation andcommunicationtraining.Thediverseprofessional backgroundsofthepanelensuredcomprehensiveexpertperspectivesduringtheindicatordevelopment process.
Median
InterquartileRange(IQR) Measuresagreementamongexperts LowerIQRindicatesstrongerconsensus
QuartileDeviation(QD) Assessesdispersionofresponses
PercentageAgreement
Toensureadequateparticipation,reminderemailsand follow-upphonecallswereusedthroughouttheDelphiprocess.Outofthe30expertsinvited,25experts participatedinRoundI,resultinginan83.3%response rate,while23expertsparticipatedinbothRoundIIand RoundIII,yieldinga76.6%participationrate. ThefirstroundoftheDelphiprocessaimedtogenerate communicationskillindicatorsrelevanttopostgraduateagriculturalstudents. Expertsrespondedtoan open-endedquestionnairedesignedtoidentifycompetenciesconsideredessentialforeffectiveprofessional communication.Theresponseswereanalysedusing contentanalysisandtheconstantcomparativemethod. Similarstatementsweremergedandduplicateswere removed,resultingintheidentificationof37preliminarycommunicationskillindicators.
TheindicatorsidentifiedinRoundIwereevaluatedin RoundIIusingastructuredquestionnaireinwhichexpertsratedeachitemonafive-pointLikertscalerangingfrom1(notimportant)to5(veryimportant). Fordeterminingconsensus,[30]suggestedthatconsensusmaybeassumedwhenatleast60%ofrespondentsagreeonafive-pointscale.Theuseofinterquartile range (IQR) as a rigorous measure of consensus wasrecommendedby[5], whonotedthatanIQR 1 indicates strong agreement. Similarly, dispersionbasedapproachesusingquartiledeviationhavebeen supportedinDelphimethodologyliterature[11].
Theseestablishedcriteriaguidedtheconsensusthresholds adopted in the present study. Indicator importancewasclassifiedasveryhighifthemedianvalue was 4andatleast80%ofrespondentsratedtheitem ≥ as4or5[7].SinceDelphistudiesdonotfollowauniversallyacceptedcriterionfordeterminingconsensus, thestudyadoptedacontext-specificcalibratedmulticriteriaapproachcombiningmeasuresofcentraltendencyanddispersiontoevaluatebothexpertagreementandindicatorimportance.
Consensuslevelswereassessedusingquartiledevia-
Determinesperceivedimportance Highermedianindicatesgreater ofindicators importance
LowerQDreflectshigherstability ofresponses Indicatesproportionofexperts Higheragreementsupports ratingtheindicatorasimportant strongerconsensus
tion(QD)andinterquartilerange(IQR).Indicatorswere consideredtodemonstrate: • HighconsensuswhenQD ≤ 0.5andIQR ≤ 1 • MediumconsensuswhenQDrangedbetween0.5 and1andIQRrangedbetween1and2 • NoconsensuswhenQD > 1andIQR > 2 Indicatorimportancewasdeterminedusingthemedianvalueandpercentageagreement. Anindicator wasconsideredtohaveveryhighimportancewhen themedianvaluewas ≥ 4andatleast80%ofexperts ratedtheitemaseither4or5.
Applyingthecalibratedcriteria,afterRoundII,atotalof 26communicationskillindicatorsdemonstratedhigh consensus(QD ≤ 0.5andIQR ≤ 1)andmoderateimportance,withamedianvaluegreaterthan4andatleast 66.6%ofexpertsratingtheindicatorsaseither4or5. Theseindicatorswereretainedforfurtherevaluation. InRoundIII,thesameindicatorswerepresentedtothe expertpanelalongwithstatisticalsummariesfromthe previousroundtoallowparticipantstoreconsidertheir ratings. Thiscontrolledfeedbackprocessfacilitated convergenceofexpertjudgments.AfterRoundIII,11 communicationskillindicatorssatisfiedthefinalconsensuscriteria,demonstratinghighconsensus(QD ≤ ≤ 0.5andIQR ≤ 1)andveryhighperceivedimportance (Median ≥ 4withatleast80%agreement). Theseindicatorswerethereforeretainedasthefinalvalidated communicationskillindicatorsforpostgraduateagriculturalstudents.
The Training Need Index (TNI%) was used to assess thepriorityoftrainingrequirementsacrossdifferent communicationskillindicators. Theresultsindicate varyinglevelsoftrainingneedsamongpostgraduate agriculturalstudentsacrosstheidentifiedcommunicationcompetencies.
Amongtheelevencommunicationskillindicatorsassessed,“Initiatinganattractiveopeningduringgroup discussions”recordedthelowestTNIvalue(66.95),in- Characteristic (selected
Professor >20 6 ssociate professor ssistant professor scientist ≥ 8 3 seniorscientist >8 2 Principal scientist
Table 3. Multi-CriteriaConsensusFrameworkUsedforDelphiIndicatorValidation
QuartileDeviation(QD)& ConsensusLevel InterquartileRange(IQR)
Indicator MedianValue Median ≥ 4 Indicatorconsideredhighlyim- Importance Percentage Agreement ≥ 80% Veryhighimportance (Respondentsrating ≥ 4) 66.6–80% Moderateimportance
Indicator Reten- CombinedCriteria QD ≤ 0.5,IQR ≤ 1,Median IndicatorretainedforRoundIII tion Rule (Round ≥ 4, ≥ II) Indicator Reten- CombinedCriteria QD ≤ 0.5,IQR ≤ 1,Median Indicatorretainedasfinalcontion(Final) ≥ 4, ≥
dicatingthehighestprioritytrainingneed. Thiswas followed by “Persuasion and vividness” (68.10) and “Voice modulation” (68.38). These findings suggest thatstudentsfacegreaterdifficultyininteractiveand spontaneouscommunicationcontexts,whichtypically demandhighercognitiveprocessingandreal-timeresponse[21].
Indicatorssuchassequencingcontent,technicalarticulation,andimpactfuldeliveryalsoreflectednotable training needs. In contrast, public speaking (71.52) recordedcomparativelylowerneed. Thismaybeattributedtothestructurednatureofpublicspeaking, wherepreparationreducesanxietyandimprovesper- Frequency Experience Frequency Frequency(round (years) (roundI) II&III) panel) 4 4
≥ 15 4 4 3
≥ 8 10 8 8
3 3 2 2
≥ 20 5 4 3
QD ≤ 0.5,IQR ≤ 1 High consensus and strong agreementamongexperts 0.5 < QD ≤ 1,1 < IQR ≤ 2 Moderateconsensusandagreement QD > 1,IQR > 2 Noconsensusandweakagreement
portant
< 66.6% Lessimportance
66.6%agreement
80%agreement sensus
formance [10]. Overall, the results indicate that unstructuredandinteractivecommunicationsituations pose greater challenges than formal presentations, consistentwithcommunicationapprehensionliterature[20].
Institution-wise analysis revealed that GBPUAT recordedthehighestproportionofstudentswithhigh training need (37.14%), whereas IARI showed the highestproportionoflowtrainingneed(45.71%).This variation may be linked to differences in academic exposure,communicationtrainingopportunities,and institutional emphasis on soft skills development
RoundI
RoundII
Re-evaluationofindicators RoundIII withcontrolledfeedbackto [23]. BHU reported the highest proportion in the mediumcategory(51.43%),suggestingthatstudents possessbasiccommunicationcompetencebutrequire furtherrefinementandpractice.Thesefindingsalign
Generationof communicationskill 25 — 37 indicatorsthroughopenendedresponses Evaluationofindicators usingLikertscaleand 23 37 26 preliminaryconsensus analysis
23 26 11 achievefinalconsensus with earlier studies indicating that students often exhibitmoderatecommunicationproficiencybutlack advancedarticulationandconfidence[3].
TheFriedmantestrevealedasignificantdifferencein
a. Voicequality*** b. Volume(loudness) c. Toneandpitch(intonation) d. Speedofspeaking e. Fillers f. Pauses
a. Pronunciation b. Spontaneousarticulation c. Enunciation(consciousaboutsyllables) d. Accent
I. Vocabulary II. Clarityofexpressionandthoughts*** III. Multiplelanguageproficiency IV. Grammar V. Adequateandappropriatecontent VI. Useofexamples,idioms,quotes 3. Negotiation 4. Persuasionandvividness***
I. Technicalknowledge***
a. Initiatingattractiveopening*** b. Sequencingbodyoftopic*** c. Questioning/clarification*** d. Articulatingsummary*** III. Repeatingkeyinformation IV. Fluencyandengagement V. Admirngdifferencesasdiversity VI. Questionhandling VII. Confidence 6. UseofAudio-VisualAids 7. TelephoneEtiquette 8. Focusonlisteners 9. FacilitationSkills*** 10. InterviewSkills 11. PublicSpeaking*** 12. ConflictResolution 13. PuttingComplexContentintoSimple
communicationskillsacrossinstitutions( 2 , p = 0.004). MeanrankvaluesindicatedhigherperformanceinBHU(2.19)andIARI(2.12)comparedto GBPUAT(1.69).
SincetheFriedmantestonlyindicatesthepresence of statistically significant differences among groups withoutspecifyingwherethosedifferencesoccur,the Wilcoxonsigned-ranktestwasperformedforpairwise comparisons. The results showed significant differencesbetweenIARI–GBPUAT( )andGBPUAT– BHU( ),whilenosignificantdifferencewas p < 0.001 observedbetweenBHU–IARI( ).
4 2 1 81.8 86.2 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 2 1 54.5 Dropped 4 1 0.5 68.2 72.4 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped
4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 2 1 54.5 Dropped
5 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 1 0.5 95.5 100 3 0 0 13.6 Dropped 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 2 1 68.2 68.2 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 1 0.5 81.8 86.2
4 1 0.5 95.5 96.5
4 1 0.5 81.8 86.2 4 0 0 81.8 86.2 4 0 0 81.8 86.2 4 1 0.5 81.8 86.2 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 1 0.5 54.5 Dropped 4 1 0.5 68.2 68.9 5 2 1 68.2 Dropped 5 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 1 0.5 68.2 72.4 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 2 1 68.2 Dropped 4 1 0.5 95.5 100 4 1 0.5 68.2 72.4 4 0 0 81.8 86.2
χ = 10.941 Discussion Thestudyprovidesacomprehensiveassessmentof communication skill gaps among postgraduate studentsanddemonstratestheeffectivenessofaDelphibasedmulti-criteriaconsensusframeworkinidentifyingandvalidatingkeycommunicationcompetencies. Thefindingsrevealthatstudentsexhibitmoderateto hightrainingneedsincommunicationskills,particularlyininteractivedomainssuchasinitiatingdiscussions, persuasive communication, and voice modup = 0.005 lation. These competencies are critical for effective participation in academic and professional commup = 0.838 S.N. CommunicationskillsIndicators 1 Voicequality(Modulation) 2 Clarityofexpressionandthoughts(VE) 70.10 9 3 Initiatingattractiveopening(GD) 4 Sequencingbodyoftopic(GD) 5 Questioning/clarificationandlinkingwithothers 69.24 8 6 Articulationofsummary(GD) 7 Technicalknowledgeofthetopicwithsupportivedataandex- 68.76 5 amples(GD) 8 PersuasionAndVividness 9 PublicSpeaking 10 PuttingComplexContentintoSimpleWords 68.95 7 11 ImpactfullDelivery
Table 7. DistributionofStudentsBasedonTrainingNeedLevels
1 High < 57.31 26 37.14 2 Medium 57.31–74.22 22 31.43 3 Low > 74.22 22 31.43 nicationcontexts,yetsimilardeficiencieshavebeen consistentlreportedinagriculturalandtechnicaleducation(Bharathi,2016;Qizi,2020).Theapplicationof theDelphitechniqueinthisstudyresultedintheidentificationof11validatedcommunicationskillindicators, achievinghighconsensus(QD 0.5,IQR 1)andstrong importanceratings(Median 4;80%agreement).This confirmstherobustnessoftheDelphimethodincompetencyidentification,particularlyinexploratoryeducationalcontexts.Consistentwithearlierstudies,the iterativefeedbackmechanismenabledconvergenceof expertopinions,transforminganinitialpoolofindicatorsintoarefinedandactionableframework(Franklin, 2011).Importantly,thestudyaddressesakeymethodologicallimitationinDelphiresearch,theabsenceof a universal consensus criterion (Hung et al., 2008), byadoptingacalibratedmulti-criteriaconsensusap- TNI% Rank 68.38 3
66.95 1 68.67 4
70.29 10
68.10 2 71.52 11
68.76 5 TNI%=TrainingNeedIndexPercentage
14 20.00 6 8.57 46 21.90 24 34.29 36 51.43 82 39.05 32 45.71 28 40.00 82 39.05
proachintegratingmeasuresofcentraltendency,dispersion,andagreement.ThisalignswithrecommendationsbyDeVetetal.(2006)andGordon(2009),thereby enhancingthetransparencyandreliabilityofconsensusdetermination. Theprogressiveincreaseinconsensusacrossroundsreflectsthecommonlyobserved convergence or bandwagon effect in Delphi studies (VonderGracht,2012). Whilesomescholarscaution thatthismayreducediversityofopinionorintroduce groupthink(Mitchell,1991),italsohighlightstheeffectivenessofcontrolledfeedbackinrefiningexpertjudgments.Therelativelyhighconsensusachievedinthis studymayfurtherbeattributedtothehomogeneityof theexpertpanelandthefocusedscopeofcommunicationskills,asbroaderormoreheterogeneousdomains tendtoproduceloweragreement(Hsuamp;Sandford, 2007;Schmidt,1997). Additionally,thefindingssupporttheviewthatDelphiisparticularlyeffectivefor structuredcompetencydevelopmentineducational contexts(Okoli&Pawlowski,2004;Duncanetal.,2014; Yousuf,2007;Linstoneamp;Turoff,1975;Helmer,1983). TheTrainingNeedIndexanalysisfurtherindicatesthat interactiveanddelivery-orientedcommunicationcompetenciesrepresentthemostcriticalgapsamongpostgraduatestudents.Skillssuchasinitiatinggroupdiscussions,persuasivecommunication,andvoicemodulationemergedashigh-prioritytrainingneeds,highlightingdeficienciesinbothengagementandexpressivedimensionsofcommunication.Thesefindingsare supportedbyDuncanetal. (2014),whoemphasized
Communicationskills
theimportanceofvocaldeliveryandclarityineffective communication.However,theypartiallycontrastwith studiessuchasSubramanian,K.R.(2017),whichplace greateremphasisoncontentstructuring.Thepresent studysuggeststhatinthecontextofagriculturaland nutritioneducation,particularlywhereextensionand stakeholderinteractionarecentral,bothdeliveryand content-relatedcompetenciesareequallyimportant. Thesegapscanbefurtherinterpretedthroughtheoreticalperspectives. SocialCognitiveTheory(Bandura, 1997)suggeststhatskillacquisitiondependsonpractice,observation,andself-efficacy,whileExperiential LearningTheory(Kolb,1984)emphasizestheroleof activeengagementandreflection.Theobservedtrainingneedsindicatethatsuchexperientialandparticipatory learning opportunities may be insufficiently integratedintoexistingagriculturalcurricula. Moreover, the findings align with Communication Apprehension Theory (McCroskey, 1977), suggesting that higher training needs in interactive communication contextsmayreflectunderlyingcommunicationanxiety.Studentsmayfindspontaneouscommunication situationsmorechallengingthanstructuredtasks,reinforcingtheneedforinterventionsthataddressboth skilldeficitsandpsychologicalbarriers.Thestudyalso revealedstatisticallysignificantdifferencesincommunicationskillsacrossinstitutions,indicatingthatcommunicationcompetenceisinfluencedbyinstitutional contextandacademicexposure. StudentsfromIARI andBHUdemonstratedcomparativelystrongercommunication competencies than those from GBPUAT, suggesting that institutional emphasis on seminars, presentations,andinteractivelearningenvironments playsacriticalroleinskilldevelopment.Thisfinding
GBPUAT 1.69
2.12 10.941 0.004**
BHU 2.19
b b b Z -2.781 -0.205 -3.494
Sig(2-tailed) 0.005** < 0.001** 0.838 *Significancelevelat5percent, bBasedonnegativeranks
isconsistentwithRobinsonandGarton(2008), who highlightedtheimportanceofexperientialacademic environmentsinenhancingemployabilityskills.Overall,thestudycontributestotheexistingliteraturein twoimportantways. First, itprovidesempiricalevidenceoncommunicationskillgapsamongpostgraduate agricultural students, with a specific focus on communicationcompetencies. Second, itadvances Delphimethodologybyproposingacalibratedmulticriteriaconsensusframeworkthatenhancestherigor andtransparencyofconsensusdetermination.Thisapproachoffersareplicablemodelforfuturecompetency andindicatordevelopmentstudiesineducationaland professionalresearchcontexts. Fromabroaderperspective,thefindingsreinforcetheneedtoreposition communication competence as a core professional skill in higher education. Agricultural and nutrition graduatesarerequiredtooperateincomplex,multistakeholderenvironmentswhereeffectivecommunicationisessentialforresearchdissemination,extension services,andpolicyengagement(Mooreamp;Morton, 2017).Theintegrationofavalidatedcommunication competency framework, supported by a robust Delphimethodology,providesastrongfoundationfordesigningtargetedtraininginterventions.Byincorporatingexperientiallearningapproaches,communication practicemodules,andconfidence-buildingstrategies, agriculturaluniversitiescanenhanceboththecompetenceandconfidenceofstudents,ultimatelyimproving theeffectivenessofagriculturalextensionsystemsand knowledgetransferprocesses.
Thefindingshaveimportantimplicationsforprofessionaleducationandpublichealth-relatedcommunicationsystems,wherecommunicationcompetencies arecentraltoknowledgedissemination,stakeholder engagement,andbehaviouralchange,particularlyin ruralandagriculturalcontexts(Leeuwisamp;Vanden Ban, 2004; Davis, 2008). The Delphi-based identification of communication skill indicators provides a validatedframeworktoguidecurriculumdesignand capacity-buildingprograms.Theidentifiedgaps,especiallyindiscussioninitiation,persuasion,andclarity ofexpression, highlighttheneedforstructuredand practice-orientedcommunicationtrainingwithinuniversities. Experiential learning approaches such as groupdiscussions,roleplays,mockpresentations,and field-basedsimulationscanenhancecommunication competence (Kolb, 1984). In addition, context- specifictrainingisessentialtopreparestudentstoengage effectivelywithdiversestakeholders,includingfarmers,policymakers,andinterdisciplinaryteams.From apublichealthperspective,strengtheningcommunicationcompetenciesisimportantforeffectivelyconveyinginformationrelatedtonutrition,environmentalhealth,andsustainablepractices(Riveraamp;Sulaiman,2004).Thefindingsalsoemphasizetheneed forinstitutionalsupportsystems,suchascommunicationskilldevelopmentcentresandcontinuoustraining programs. Integrating communication training as a structured,credit-basedcomponentwithincurricula cansupportsystematicskilldevelopmentandimprove professional preparedness (Robinson amp; Garton, 2008).Furthermore,thecalibratedDelphiframework offersatransparentandevidence-basedapproachfor developingcompetencyindicatorsapplicableacross interdisciplinary and public health communication contexts.
Despiteitscontributions,thestudyhascertainlimitations. First,theresearchwasconfinedtothreeleadinginstitutionsinextensionofagriculturalandnutrition,whichmaylimitthegeneralizabilityofthefindingstootheruniversitieswithdifferentinstitutional contexts.Futurestudiesmayincludealargerandmore diversesampleacrossregions. Second,thestudyrelied on self-reported data, which may be subject to response bias. Incorporating objective measures of communicationperformance,suchasobservational assessmentsorperformance-basedevaluations,could enhancetherobustnessofthefindings(Podsakoffet al.,2003).Third,whiletheDelphitechniqueensured systematicexpertvalidationofcommunicationskill indicators,theoutcomesmaybeinfluencedbypanel compositionandconvergenceeffectsacrossrounds. Futureresearchmayinvolvemorediverseexpertpanelsandcross-validationofindicatorsindifferenteducationalsettings.Finally,thestudyprimarilyfocusedon speakingskills,whereascommunicationcompetence isinherentlymultidimensional,encompassingwriting, listening,andnon-verbalcommunication.Futurestudiesmayadoptamorecomprehensiveapproachtoexaminethefullspectrumofcommunicationcompetenciesrequiredinagriculturaleducationandextension.
Thepresentstudyhighlightsthecriticalroleofcommunicationcompetence,particularlycommunication skills, in shaping the professional preparedness of postgraduate students. The findings reveal that a substantialproportionofstudentsexhibitmoderate tohightrainingneeds,especiallyininteractivecommunication domains such as initiating discussions, persuasiveexpression,andvoicemodulation.These gaps indicate that, despite strong technical knowledge,studentsfacechallengesineffectivelyexpressing ideas and engaging in professional communication contexts. The observed institutional variations furtherindicatethatcommunicationcompetencydevelopmentisinfluencedbytheacademicenvironment andexposuretocommunication-intensivelearningexperiences.Methodologically,thestudyaddressesakey limitationinDelphi-basedresearchbyproposingacalibratedmulti-criteriaframeworkforconsensusdetermination.Byintegratingmeasuresofcentraltendency anddispersion,theframeworkprovidesatransparent andreplicableapproachforidentifyingcommunicationcompetenciesthroughexpertconsensus.Theapplicationofthisapproachresultedinarefinedsetofindicatorsdemonstratinghighlevelsofimportanceand agreement,therebystrengtheningtherigorandconsistencyofcompetencydevelopmentprocesses.The observedinstitutionaldifferencesfurthersuggestthat communicationskilldevelopmentisinfluencedbyacademicenvironmentandexposuretocommunicationintensivelearningactivities.Thisunderscorestheneed forintegratingstructured,practice-orientedcommunicationtrainingwithinpostgraduatecurricula. Fromabroaderpolicyperspective,thefindingsalign withthevisionoftheNationalEducationPolicy(NEP) 2020,whichemphasizesthedevelopmentofholistic, multidisciplinary,andskill-orientededucation,includingcommunication,criticalthinking,andexperiential learning.Theidentifiedgapsincommunicationcompetencies indicate the need for stronger implementationofNEPrecommendationswithinhighereducation,particularlythroughtheintegrationofcommunicationskillmodules,experientiallearningapproaches, and continuous formative assessment mechanisms. Embeddingcommunicationtrainingasacore,creditbearingcomponentwithinpostgraduateprogramscan helpbridgethedisconnectbetweentechnicalknowledgeandprofessionalapplication.Strengtheningcommunicationcompetenciesisessentialnotonlyforacademicandprofessionaleffectivenessbutalsoforimprovingknowledgedissemination,extensionservices, andstakeholderengagement. Byadoptingtargeted interventions that combine skill development with confidence-building strategies, universities can betterpreparegraduatestomeetthecomplexcommunicationdemandsofmodernnutrition,environmental health,andsustainablesystemsandcontributeforimprovedprofessionalreadinessandsocietaloutcomes.