A major initiative in Australia is a general and pervasive obsession with competency-based training and assessment. There is a real danger that the selling of competency-based training (CBT) and competency-based assessment (CBA) is greater than what it can offer. One criticism focuses on CBT, the other on CBA, although in most instances where CBT is implemented these two issues could not be addressed independently. The first criticism derives from the assumption that CBT, done well, requires training and the the assessment of training in contexts as close as possible to actual on-the-job performance. This is incredibly expensive, yet implementing anything less in the name of CBT would be a severe limitation on CBT delivering what it claims it can. Because most businesses and industries cannot afford to implement CBT in this fashion, the money invested in developing and delivering CBT in whatever way they can could well end up being a waste of money. The second criticism is one that all forms of assessment should deal with but rarely, if ever, do. It focuses on the relationship between trainee knowledge and performance of skills at the time of assessment and some future time and different place where the same knowledge and skills would be required. CBA says nothing about whether trainees will perform to required standards under conditions other than training ones. (Contains 10 references.) (YLB)