European approaches to competence development Jonathan Winterton

1. Centre for the Economics of Education & TrainingAustralian Centre for Employment Rights ResearchMonash University, 26 February 2007 European approaches to competence development Jonathan Winterton Director of Research and International Development Professor of Human Resource Development Groupe ESC Toulouse

2. Overview • EU policy context • SALTSA project TUACD • three variables: • competence models • VET systems • social dialogue approaches • exploring and explaining diversity

3. EU Policy context

4. Policy context – employment • Luxembourg summit (November 1999) • European Employment Strategy • Luxembourg Process and NAPEs • re-defined problem as low employment • Lisbon summit (March 2000) • ‘more and better jobs’ • competitiveness with social inclusion 2010 • established new VET framework

5. Policy context – training • Bologna Declaration (June 1999) • formalised and generalised ECTS for HE • Barcelona summit (March 2002) • EU HE/VET world quality reference by 2010 • Copenhagen Declaration (November 2002) • DGs VET commit to ECVET • Berlin Communiqué (September 2003) • ECTS and ECVET compatibility demanded • Maastricht summit (December 2004) • ECVET framework adopted > EQF in 2006

6. Social dialogue at EU level • Laeken Declaration (December 2001) • tripartite concertation • social partner consultation and advisory committees • bipartite social dialogue • Barcelona European Council (March 2002) • The European social model is founded on a healthy economy, a high level of social protection, education and social dialogue. • Social partners (February 2002) • Framework of Actions for the Lifelong Development of Competencies and Qualifications

7. Low commitment Strong commitment Compendium of good employment practices Agreements on parental leave, part-time work, fixed-term contracts, telework Increasing autonomy of social partner activities Community initiative AUTONOMY Declarations or joint opinions Framework of actions (e.g.) for the lifelong development of competencies and qualifications Social partners’ initiative TAKING RESPONSIBILITY

8. Autonomous contribution Consultation European agreement on telework Framework of actions for the lifelong development of competencies and qualifications Increasing consultation on the employment package Meetings with the Employment Committee Meetings with Employment Ministers Increasing social partner involvement at all levels since Lisbon summit European level Tripartite agreements on employment in Portugal, in Finland, in Germany, in Ireland Involvement in the discussion and implementation of the National Action Plans for Employment National level Regional tripartite agreements in Germany and in Belgium Local level

9. SALTSA TUACD project

10. Competence as a key issue • competence development common thread in policy of OECD, ILO, EU, APEC • competence building as a panacea? Crouch, Finegold and Sako (1999) • High Level Group on IR and Change (2002) • ‘lifelong learning and competence building are the key challenges facing the EU’ • Social Partners Framework of Actions for the Lifelong Development of Competencies and Qualifications (2002)

11. SALTSA project TUACD • Trade Union Approaches to Competence Development • UK, FR, DE, SE, MA, TU, SL, LV • to analyse and explain different approaches to competence development by trade unions; • to identify good practice and explore its scope for transfer to other contexts; • to establish priorities for capacity building for trade unions in this area.

12. Research design • four EU15 member states representing different competence models: • UK, FR, DE, SE • four new and future member states paired with the above: • MA, TU, SL, LV • aim of isolating effects of three variables • competence model, VET system, SD approach

13. Key issues for the study • exploring diversity and convergence • explaining what approach and why • identifying areas of conflict, consensus and collaboration • establishing trade union added value • action research to develop more effective trade union engagement

14. What is competence? • policy definitions are rare and vague; terminology confused, usage inconsistent • beyondunderlying intellectual abilities, capabilities, intelligence • knowledge, declarative > procedural • skills, psycho-motor and cognitive • competence synonymous with all, usually in a work context

15. American origins • White (1959), McClelland (1973) • Hay-McBer competency framework • psycho-social attributes associated with superior performance • competency-based HRM end 1990s • knowledge and skills – functional • also motivation? (McLean 2004)

16. Four European competence models

17. UK model • 1980s competence-based VQs • occupational standards – functional • inadequate underpinning knowledge • parallel MCI ‘personal competencies’ • hybrid models since late 1990s including cognitive and behavioural • 5 out of 16 cases in 2001 had adopted a hybrid model

18. French model • 1991 AGRH Gestion Prévisionnelle des Emplois et les Compétences • 1993 ANPE Répertoire Opérationnel des Métiers et des Emplois • 1994 Bilan de compétence • 2002 MEDEF objectif compétence • conceptually comprehensive • savoir, savoir-faire, savoir être

19. German model • Kompetenz in context of Beruf (calling) • 1980s Schlüsselqualifikationen (person) • Sachkompetenz (general cognitive competence) • 1996 Handlungskompetenz (vocational action) • Fachkompetenz (domain/subject competence) • Methodenkompetenz (work process knowledge) • Personalkompetenz (personal competence) • Sozialkompetenz (social competence)

20. Interpretive model • most evident in Sweden • interpretive and constructivist approaches derived from phenomenology • accepts complexity of work situation • competence is a function of context in which it is employed • tacit competences and informal work process knowledge

21. Dimensions of competence occupational individual cognitive competence meta- competence conceptual functional competence social competence operational

22. Typology for ECVET and EQF • Knowledge (declarative knowledge, cognitive competence) know that, savoir • Skill (functional competence, psycho- motor and cognitive) know-how, savoir faire • Competence (social competence, behavioural, attitudinal) know how to be, savoir être • Proposed adoption of cognitive competence, functional competence and social competence as overall learning outcomes (meta competence as a facilitating competence)

23. cognitive competence meta-competence functional competence social competence Holistic competence model

24. Four European VET systems

25. VET systems • school-based versus work-based • dual system determined by work needs • state-regulated versus market-led • marketisation increasingly influential • volume and quality of provision • appropriateness to labour market needs

26. Taxonomy of VET systems Regulation market state work UK, MA DE, SE, SL Focus IT FR, TU, LV school

27. Outcomes of different systems • school based, state regulated EU norm • high level of qualifications in IVT • failure to meet labour market needs except under dual system which ensures relevance • lack of flexibility in CVT • work-based, market regulated • low level of qualifications • skills gaps and shortages • meets market needs through CVT

28. Diverse approaches to social dialogue

29. Country differences in social dialogue approaches • role of social partner organisations altered 1970s: • assumed convergence towards interest mediation • logic of industrialization (Dunlop 1958 systems) • globalization and policy coordination like EU • persistence of differences in economic policy, social welfare, production and labour market regimes and industrial relations systems • attempts to establish typology of IR systems by grouping countries based on union organisation and bargaining structure

30. Traditional typology • Four EU approaches distinguished: • Northern or Scandinavian • Southern or Mediterranean • Central or German • Western or Anglophone • A fifth needs to be added: • Eastern or former Soviet countries

31. Trends of trade union density (%) Source: ETUI, 2000.

32. Enterprise Sector National Country differences in bargaining structures UK – Malta Germany – Sweden – Slovenia Belgium - Ireland - Finland - Spain - Portugal - Italy - Austria Luxembourg - France

33. Competing approaches ‘The Anglo-Saxon and continental European models have competed for many years. It seems that today the Anglo-Saxon model is prevailing. European Union legislation has moved towards more deregulation and privatisation. The dawn of a new labour party in Britain, and the opening up of businesses in many former communist countries are just another example of this trend.’ (European Commission, 2002).

34. First tendency • Concertation or concerted regulation model • typified by Euro-zone countries • states that renewed the post-war Keynesian compromise • continuity of organised industrial relations • wage moderation for competitiveness rather than to counter inflation (as under corporatism) • multi-employer bargaining predominates

35. Second tendency • Deregulation or liberal market economies • typified by UK and FSU states • failure to renew or rejection of compromise • disorganised industrial relations, deregulation of support for collective bargaining • decline in TU membership and bargaining coverage • anti-union activities by employers or state or both • single employer bargaining predominates

36. Exploring and explaining diversity

37. UK and Malta • predominantly functional competence • social partner involvement contingent • low level of qualifications overall • focus on immediate employer needs • chronic skills mismatches • flexibility and adaptability in CVT • developing new workplace role for unions

38. France and Turkey • FR competence model best in theory • TU adopting UK functional approach • social partner involvement problematic • FR state sponsored, TU TÜRKIŞ favoured • high volume provision in both countries • FR high level of qualifications, TU not • inappropriate for labour market needs • employers seek independent solutions

39. Germany and Slovenia • competence model over specified • dual system is gold standard for IVT • high degree of social partner involvement • high level of qualifications • meets labour market needs for IVT • insufficiently flexible for CVT • developing new workplace solutions

40. Sweden and Latvia • SE diverse competence models • LV unclear, moving towards EQF • SE founded on social partnership • LV unions lack credibility • SE high volume, highly qualified • LV inadequate provision, unqualified • Baltic solutions need to be developed

41. Trade union role in competence development • legally prescribed instate regulated VET systems • strength of union organisation determines effectiveness at local level • unions add most value where VET system is work-based • DE, SE, SL sectoral, UK, MA workplace • FR state dependency (national and sectoral) • TU, LV state dominance (union exclusion)

42. Conclusions • EQF > French competence model • IVT > German dual system • CVT > flexibility of market systems • social dialogue assures relevance • Framework of Actions > more involvement • trade unions engaging with training • weaknesses of new MS may dilute