The Declining Volume of Workers’ Training in Britain
| Published date | 01 June 2016 |
| Author | Alan Felstead,Hande Inanc,Francis Green,Duncan Gallie,Nick Jewson |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12130 |
| Date | 01 June 2016 |
British Journal of Industrial Relations doi: 10.1111/bjir.12130
54:2 June 2016 0007–1080 pp. 422–448
The Declining Volume of Workers’
Training in Britain
Francis Green, Alan Felstead, Duncan Gallie,
Hande Inanc and Nick Jewson
Abstract
The conventional focus on the training participation rate, rather than training
volume, in ocial statistics and research has obscured a radical transformation
in workers’ training in Britain. To obtain a picture of the trend in training
volume, we synthesize a narrative through a new analysis of multiple surveys.
The duration of training fell sharply with the result that the training volume
per worker declined by about a half between 1997 and 2012. This fall is hard to
reconcile with optimistic rhetoric surrounding the knowledgeeconomy. Potential
explanations are discussed. We conclude with recommendations to improve the
collection of training statistics.
1. Introduction
Although much has been gleaned about workplace training and certain
regularities uncovered, the diversity of data sources and the sporadic
dissemination of their findings have delivered only a piece-meal appreciation
of the big picture surrounding the trends in job-related training. Many
commentators — ourselves included — have as a consequence hitherto missed
the fact that in the last 15 years there has been a sea change in the volume of
training received by the average worker in Britain.
Training matters enormously because of the importance of skill formation
at work in a modern-day economy. There is therefore a need to optimize
relevant government policies, and the European Union accordingly has set
targets for participation in adult learning. With the revelation of low and
unequal literacy and numeracyskills of young adults in England and Northern
Ireland, the training trend becomes especially important in Britain for the
Francis Green is at the UCL Institute of Education. Alan Felstead is at Cardi University.
Duncan Gallie is at Nueld College, OxfordUniversity. Hande Inanc is at the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development. Nick Jewsonis at Cardi University.
C
Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2015. Published by JohnWiley & Sons Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road,Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
The Declining Volume of Workers’ Training in Britain 423
future skills of the adult workforce (OECD 2013). Estimates of the returns to
training are generally positive and substantial, both in Britain and elsewhere
(e.g. Blundell et al. 1996; Booth and Bryan2005; Brunello et al. 2012; Dearden
et al. 2006; Vignoles et al. 2004).
Unfortunately, most analyses and ocial public statistics concerning
training havefocussed exclusively on the participation rate in training. Yet the
participation rate is a poor indicator for the contribution of training to skill
formation, because the durationof training varies very considerably over time
and between countries and workplaces. The focus on participation thus has
the potential to be misleading. Data on the volume of training — which,along
with quality, is the best indicator of training’s contribution to skill formation
— by contrast has been scattered and sparsely disseminated.
Our first main objective in this article is to demonstrate and call attention
to the major change in training volumes in Britain. This change has hitherto
been neither debated nor recognized. In order to achieve this, we draw on
multiple sources to synthesize a picture of training volume trends for the first
time. As a subsidiary to this first objective we also consider the significance
for skill formation of the revealedtrends, and point to what would be needed
to achieve an adequate understanding of what lies behind them. Our second
main objective follows from the first: by exposing the problems arising from
an exclusive focus on the participation rate, we hope to influence the future
collection and dissemination of training statistics.
Followinga review in Section 2 of how training trends relate to the concept
of the knowledge economy and of relevantprior empirical studies, in Sections
3 and 4 we bring together findings about training trends from multiple
high-quality surveys. Because the narrative has been scattered in multiple
sources, mostly unpublished, their messagehas been missed. Interpreting and
explaining the change is not straightforward;in Section 5 we discuss potential
explanations and suggest what might be needed to test them in future. In
the conclusion we propose that analysts and policy makers concerned with
training and learning would profit from an improved statistical service, and
conclude by oering recommendations.
2. Training and the knowledge economy1
Theories of the modern economy bring contrasting expectations about
training. The assumption that industrialized economies have become, or are
becoming, knowledge-based carries hypotheses about the level and trend of
workplace skill formation. The knowledge-based economy is characterized
also as a learning economy (OECD 1996). If technological change is
substantive and skill-biased, the new needed skills could not be delivered only
through the education system, for two fundamental reasons: first, most of
the adult population is at work, so the pace of expansion of skills in the
workforce would be limited by the natural pace at which new generations
of college-leavers replace retirees; second, many of the new skills can only
C
Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial