towards-a-shared-understanding-of-skill-shortages-differing

Towards a shared understanding of skill shortages: Differing perceptions of trainingand development needs Denise Skinner, Mark NK Saunders, & Richard Beresford Oxford Brookes University

Towards a shared understanding of skill shortages: Differing perceptions of training

and development needs

Denise Skinner, Mark NK Saunders, & Richard Beresford Oxford Brookes University Business School

Wheatley Campus Wheatley Oxford OX33 1HX

Tel: 01865 485912 E-mail: denise.skinner@brookes.ac.uk

Abstract

For the last decade the question of how to develop human capabilities to meet the current and future needs of organizations has become an important issue at national, organisational and individual levels An essential ingredient would seem to be a shared understanding among all those involved of the skills and competences deemed necessary and/or desirable for current and future performance This understanding needs to encompass not only those currently working in a given industry or sector but also prospective employees and external training providers Current indications are, at least in the UK, that this shared understanding may not exist and that there is an incompatibility between provision, existing skills and future needs This paper reports on a research project undertaken in the UK automotive sector to explore the extent and nature of the differences in perception among stakeholders relating to the skills and development needs of current and future employees

Key words: skills gaps, life long learning, automotive, training needs, training provision

Whether developed through formal education, training or experience the skills and

competences of individuals have long been recognised as essential for economic growth and activity In the turbulent business environment of the last decade the question of how to develop human capabilities to meet the current and future needs of organizations has become

an important issue at national, organisational and individual levels Current exhortations within the management literature urge organisations towards the creation of a learning

environment as the key to competitive success (Altman and Iles, 1998, Senge 1990) and the available evidence suggests that training improves the commitment of workers, fosters a common culture within firms and helps to attract high quality workers (Coffield, 2002) However, Coffield (2002) also notes that the tendency has been for national policies on development to be focused on the individual, a view supported by Rainbird’s (2000)

observation that both European and national policy debates stress the need for all individuals

to take responsibility for their own learning Life long learning it is argued is beneficial to the individual because it will lead to increased employability and improve the potential to

maximise earnings In the context of work the focus tends to on the competencies or skills that individuals will need (Bryans and Smith (2000) to gain employment, in their current employment, and/or to ensure employment in the future Unsurprisingly then, training and development are frequently cited in the literature as the cornerstone of Human Resource Management (Heyes, 1998) and are portrayed as indisputable win-win scenarios

Organisations benefit from a more flexible, committed and motivated workforce while employees experience the psychological rewards of feeling valued by the organisation and are able to undertake more interesting and challenging work However, a necessary ingredient

to ensure that these truly are win-win scenarios would seem to be a shared understanding among all those involved of the skills and competences deemed necessary and/or desirable for current and future performance This understanding needs to encompass not only those currently working in a given industry or sector but also prospective employees and external training providers Current indications are, at least in the UK, that this shared understanding may not exist and that there is an incompatibility between provision, existing skills and future needs ( see for example (Coffield, 2002; Stevens 2002)

Purpose of the Research

This paper reports on a research project undertaken in the UK automotive sector to explore and capture differences in perception relating to the skills and development needs of

employees The research took place in the West Midlands region in Great Britain This region accounts for 40% of national employment in vehicle production, and 35% of national

employment in vehicle parts and accessories This equates to approximately 40,000 people working in vehicle production and 60,000 in parts and accessories, almost 5% of the region's jobs The automotive sector also accounts for almost 5% of the regional GDP However, the spread of globalisation brings to the sector both challenges and opportunities Most

companies have realised that competing on cost alone is impossible, leading a drive for comparative advantage in quality, niche production, diversification and customer services This process of change places greater pressure on the skills base of the current workforce, an area already considered to be a barrier to business Recent skills surveys show that there may often be a discrepancy between the perceptions of employees and the perceptions of

employers in relation to skills Many surveys show that employees largely seem to feel that they have the necessary skills, while surveys of employers suggest significant skills gaps (for example, Performance and Innovation Unit, 2001; Road Haulage and Distribution Training Council Report, 2001) This suggests employers are not necessarily communicating their skills needs to employees, nor are they working to ‘upskill’ where gaps exist Alternatively, it could equally be that employees are not attuned to the needs of the business, or that there is

complacency among employers and/or employees Either way, the need for dialogue between the two over the nature of skills required and how these needs are best met is important

The Research Method

As with all HRM strategies there is a need to give voice to all the players and an important aspect of this is the differences of perception which exist between the groups involved i.e those that initiate strategies and policies , those that implement them and those who are affected by them An area of difficulty is identifying a means to gather the different

perspectives in a way which allows comparison, discussion and ultimately the possibility of moving towards a shared understanding Within the context of this research project the data were collected and analysed using the Template Process (Saunders and Williams 2000) This process enabled respondents from each of the stakeholder groups to capture their expectations and perceptions as they related to the skills and development needs of employees in the automotive industry The constructs against which perceptions and expectations are measured are neither generic nor pre-specified but are created by each group as part of the process Samples were selected purposively to ensure that those in each sample could represent and explain the extent of the diversity and key dimensions of the knowledge, skills and

understanding required in the automotive sector

Template Generation and Validation

Separate meetings of between two and three hours were held with each of the groups identified Their purpose was twofold:

-To help each group independently to make explicit their ideas of the

knowledge, skills and understanding (characteristics) that a worker needs to do her or his job well

-To enable each characteristic needed and the gap (if any) between perceptions and expectations to be captured visually as a Template

The meetings with each group followed four stages:

1 Preparation The purpose and nature of the research and the Template process were

outlined (this process has its origins in focus groups)

2 Exploration of characteristics needed The knowledge, skills and understanding

(characteristics) that a person needs were elicited from the group members using a

brainstorming type process Clarification of meanings was sought to ensure all group

members had the same understanding Subsequently, the list of characteristics was refined with the group and their generation of positive and negative descriptors for the extremes of each characteristic facilitated Along with the characteristics, these descriptors were used to build a Template

3 Plotting requirements against identified characteristics The nature of knowledge, skills and understanding (characteristics) that a person needed were then mapped by recording the participants' expectations and perceptions for each characteristic relative to the descriptors on their Template (see fig 1) Ranges of performance indicated by group members were also recorded

4 Interpret and validate issues Each completed Template was then explored with the group that generated it This helped confirm the validity of the Template and that the group’s

perceptions and expectations of those characteristics that are important have been captured Finally, the group was asked to identify and weight those characteristics they considered most important by allocating 100 points between the characteristics

Fig 1: Annotated Extract of a Template for the generic skills required by a production worker

Knowledge, skills

and understanding

(characteristics)

identified by the

group

Positive extreme

or ‘ideal situation’

for each characteristic identified by the group

Negative extreme

or ‘worst situation’

for each characteristic identified by the group

Group’s

weighting of

the importance

of each

characteristic

(out of 100)

What could reasonably be

expected for each

characteristic.

N.B The shorter the bar, the less the variation in responses within the group

Gap between group’s perceptions and expectations for that characteristic

What the position

is perceived to be

for each characteristic.

N.B The shorter the bar, the less the variation in responses within the group

CHARACTERISTIC WT POSITIVE EXTREME 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 NEGATIVE EXTREME

Materials’ properties 40 understand basic differences e p use wrong fixings/torque

between metals/glass/plastics Plant maintenance –TPM (Total 30 minimum level 4 e p less than level 4, no

Use of IT 20 inputs data and understands e p can’t switch it on

output

Data were collected from a range of stakeholders involved in either the provision or the consumption of these attributes The sample included representatives from a large and medium sized organisation, the relevant professional body, Further and Higher Education providers This enabled data to be collected from and validated separately by coherent groups

of people such as training managers, production line workers, students and lecturers Within this process, gaps between perceptions and expectations for each group were represented pictorially as a separate Template Subsequent analysis of these Templates allowed those aspects of the knowledge skills and understanding required for the automotive industry to be explored using the participants’ own words, thereby capturing their perceptions

Findings

The Prospective Employee

Data was collected from both FE and HE as providers in these institutions are delivering training aimed at skill levels suitable for different entry points into the automotive industry In

FE the focus was on students attaining modern apprenticeships while the expectation in HE was that students would enter at a higher skill level for example as graduate trainees, junior managers, designers

Further Education

Both the lecturers and the students in an FE college were asked about their perceptions and expectations of the knowledge, skills and understanding (characteristics) that would be needed by someone entering the automotive industry as a modern apprentice (for the courses that both students and staff were engaged in a modern apprenticeship place was viewed as a successful outcome) As part of this process, both groups were asked to prioritise the

characteristics they considered most important and the results are presented in Table 1

The lecturers identified four characteristics as having primary importance for modern apprenticeship students; the ability to transfer skills, motivation and the ability to respond to instructions, spatial ability and shop floor safety: In the context of the ability to transfer skills,

the lecturers felt that the expectations of employers varied quite widely but did believe that their students’ abilities for this characteristic fell within what employers could reasonably expect They described the best students as being able to undertake “problem solving” and

“look as though they know what they are doing” In terms of motivation and the ability to respond to instructions lecturers believed that employers expected students to be able to

“implement instructions” and not to “resent doing it” However, in relation to this

characteristic they perceived that the capabilities of their students were far more varied Whilst part-time students in general were close to employers’ expectations (these students were combining work with study and therefore were likely to be working on a shop floor), full time students ranged from those matching employers’ expectations to a minority who did not want to be there and were “obstructive” In relation to spatial ability they felt that

employers expected reasonably good conceptual skills with regard to “form and symmetry” and perceived that their students had these skills at the expected level Lecturers also felt that employers expected a modern apprentice who would have “no accidents” and be “aware of environs” They perceived that their students either met or nearly met this requirement

The FE students’ identified two characteristics with equal ranking as the most

important characteristics needed by someone entering a modern apprenticeship In the minds

of the students CAD (Computer Aided Design) and Wiring were the key characteristics required In the context of CAD students felt employers’ expectations of reasonably “quick and accurate drawings” were matched by students’ abilities and wiring The level of skills expected by an employer in relation to wiring however, was felt to vary quite widely

dependent upon the precise apprenticeship, the ideal being a student whose wiring was “put together correctly” Whilst students felt there was some overlap between employers’

expectations and their perceptions of students abilities, they felt that in some cases they would be lower than expected Maths was ranked by students as the third most important characteristic They felt that employers usually expected a modern apprentice to be able to

“use a scientific calculator” but perceived that students did not meet this expectation, some students’ skills being described as close to “can’t count”

Table 1 Perceptions of FE Lecturers and Students

Characteristic Wt Positive extreme Negative extreme Characteristic Wt Positive Extreme Negative Extreme Motivation –responds

to instructions

10 Implements

instructions doesn’t resent doing it

Doesn’t want to be there obstructive

drawings

Can’t turn computer on, don’t understand programme Spatial ability 10 Form and symmetry –

take a 2D form and conceptualise as 3D

The earth is flat Wiring 17 Puts together correctly Blow everything up

Shop floor –safety 10 No accidents, aware

of environs First name terms with first aider Maths 12 Can use scientific calculator Can’t count Shop floor –processes 7 Logical thought

processes and understands how things fit together

Badly planned, disorientated Understands materials strengths

Understands materials types

9 9

Always specify right material

Know what everything is

Don’t know what material is Don’t know what material is Adaptability 7 Willing to do different

jobs, flexible Reluctant to do anything other than

main job

Understands materials properties 9 Tell the difference –magnetic properties etc Don’t know what material is

Interest in engineering 7 Involved, even in

leisure time No enthusiasm Dealing with

people-interpersonal skills 7 Friendly and open Introspective and self centred

Integration into

workforce 7 Gets on readily with people Doesn’t fit in

An understanding of materials’ strengths, types and properties was ranked by students as the fourth most important characteristic Students felt that employers expected a modern

apprentice to be able to “specify the right material”, “know what everything is” and “tell the difference” between materials properties For each aspect of materials, they perceived that students did not quite meet employers’ expectations

Comparison of all the characteristics identified by the two groups shows a marked difference in perception between provider and prospective employee While lecturers placed greatest emphasis on the ability to transfer skills and possession of general skills such as spatial ability, these were not highlighted by the students Students accorded greater

importance to specific job related knowledge and skills than the lecturers did (although many

of these did appear on the lecturers’ template including numeracy, IT skills (such as CAD), and use of materials) In addition, both lecturers and students included the need for oral communication skills in their Templates Lecturers did not, however, specifically highlight written communication skills whereas the students did The lecturers included a number of attitudinal characteristics which did not appear on the students template Adaptability for example was something that lecturers felt that employers expected, a modern apprentice should be “willing to do different jobs” and be “flexible”, requirements which they perceived that their students generally met Interpersonal skills and integration into the workforce were also perceived to be important, with lecturers believing that employers expected all modern apprentices to be “friendly and open” and to “get on readily with people” While believing that their students would mix readily with other employees they felt that some might find being friendly and open more challenging Students did identify motivation as a characteristic

in terms of having a good attitude to work, but it was not ranked by them as being important This difference in focus between lecturers’ and students’ templates is emphasised further by the characteristic ‘an interest in engineering’ appearing on the lecturers’ template with no equivalent on the students Lecturers felt that employers expected an interest in engineering such that nearly all modern apprentices would be “involved, even in leisure time” However, their perceptions of the students were lower and far more varied At worst, they felt that some students would be close to having “no enthusiasm” This may reflect the full-time students’ limited experience of the real world of work

Higher Education

Similarly in Higher Education data were collected from a group of tutors involved in

engineering degree courses preparing students for work in the automotive sector and a group

of final year undergraduate students enrolled on relevant courses As with the FE groups the

HE respondents were asked about their perceptions and expectations of the knowledge skills and understanding (characteristics) which would be needed but in this case the focus was a graduate entering their first job They were also asked to put the characteristics identified in order of importance (See Table 2)

Table 2 Perceptions of HE Lecturers and Students

Extreme NegativeExtreme

Creation of

engineering concepts

40 Imaginative Conventional Manufacturing

methods -practical knowledge

17 Designs something which can

be made, has done it

No concept of limitations

of method

To specific criteria 20 Functional Doesn’t meet

criteria/work

-theoretical knowledge

Complete, including costings Has no clue how to do it,

considers only process Synthesis 15 Integrative -considers

all should, balanced – correct weightings comprehensive

Fragmented and disjointed, biased, simplistic

Vehicle dynamics 14 Analyses any part of vehicle

to determine its behaviour, impact and interaction elsewhere, knows intuitively right

Doesn’t understand analysis or outcomes no concept of vehicle realities

Drawing 3

dimensionally 10 Communicates precisely using

common language/

standards

Inaccurate representation -sloppy, deviates from standard

Generation of ideas and concept design 9 Brainstorming + other techniques, creative flair Narrow minded and inflexible

Misrepresents the essence

CAD systems (solid modelling)

9 CAD literate, efficient, good

spatial understanding

Drawing can’t be understood, takes all week

to do drawing

From the lecturers perspective the creation of engineering concepts to specific criteria clearly emerged as the most important characteristic, followed by life skills and synthesis Creation of Engineering Concepts to Specific captured the lecturers belief that employers had quite high expectations in relation to the graduates abilities to create concepts which were both imaginative and functional, however, they also believed that these were not currently being met as student skills lay more towards creating the ‘conventional’ Life skills were described in terms of self management and personal development Lecturers believed that the best students demonstrated self control and

a willingness to learn and there was an overlap between what they perceived employers wanted and the reality of student achievement Synthesis related to the ability to integrate, taking a comprehensive view rather than one which was biased and simplistic Lecturers believed that employers had quite high expectations in this area whereas they perceived that the reality of students’ abilities would lie in the mid ranking

From the students perspective the key characteristics were, in priority order, a theoretical and practical knowledge of manufacturing methods, vehicle dynamics, generation of ideas and concept design and CAD systems (solid modelling) Students placed theoretical and practical knowledge of manufacturing methods as the top ranked characteristic for a graduate entering their first job feeling that employers expected graduates to be able to “design something which can be made” and to have experience of doing this However, with regard to the ability to design something that could be made they also perceived that graduates’ skills were not as good as employers expected They felt that employers expected theoretical knowledge

to be reasonably complete and include costings, but perceived that not all graduates met these expectations Vehicle dynamics was ranked second by students and consisted of two

components The first of these related to the understanding and analysis of “any part of the vehicle to determine its behaviour, impact and interaction elsewhere” Students felt

employers expected a good level of knowledge here and perceived that this would be met by some graduates The second component related to the ability to know that something was

“intuitively right” Here it was perceived that graduates were just below what employers expected In relation to the generation of ideas and concept design students felt that, in general, employers expected graduates to have “creative flair” and to make use of

“brainstorming and other techniques” For both aspects, despite feeling that employers’ expectations were in some instances greater than their perceptions of graduate skills, they believed that the employers’ expectations were met in most cases CAD systems (solid modelling) was ranked equally with generation of ideas For this characteristic, students felt that employers expected graduates to be “CAD literate” and “efficient” However their perceptions of graduates’ ability were wide ranging, at worst meaning that their “drawing can’t be understood” and it “takes all week to do a drawing”

As in the findings from the FE sector there was a difference in emphasis between the students and lecturers The students emphasised the specialist technical skills while the lecturers saw the importance of ‘softer’ skills Although both lecturers and students identified

‘self management’ and ‘personal development’ as characteristics, the students did not rank these very highly while lecturers combined them within the characteristic that they deemed the second most important characteristic Both groups produced similar ranges for graduate skills and shared a similar perception of the limited extent to which this met employer

expectations A comparison of the HE lecturer and student templates shows that elements of those characteristics ranked highly by students do appear in the lecturers’ template, for example, students emphasised the importance of ‘manufacturing methods’ and ‘vehicle dynamics’, which were incorporated in the lecturers’ characteristics of ‘industry and product

knowledge’ and ‘commercial awareness’ However, the lecturers did not place a similar level

of importance against them giving industry and product knowledge a low weighting and with commercial awareness not attracting any weighting at all Lecturers identified the

characteristic "creation of engineering concepts to specific criteria" as the most important This equates to the characteristic "generation of ideas and concept design" which was ranked highly (third) by students who felt that in general graduates met employers’ expectations The lecturers, however, felt that students did not meet employers’ expectations being neither sufficiently functional nor, to a lesser extent, imaginative Employers’ expectations of

"mathematical skills" are, according to the lecturers, far higher than the lecturers’ perceptions

of graduates’ skills, a distinct gap being evident This contrasts with the students’

characteristic of numeracy under “simple stress calculations” where their perceptions of graduate skills are closer to their understanding of what employers expect Information technology skills appear as a characteristic in both templates Within this, students ranked CAD systems most highly, separating it from general IT presentation skills In contrast, the lecturers combined them under one heading “cyber skills (ICT)” which they did not rate as highly important

The Employee – Perspectives from an Organisation

Data were collected from the training managers of a large manufacturing organisation in respect to the knowledge, skills and understanding (characteristics) that a generic production worker needs to do her/his job well The trainers highlighted three key characteristics,

materials properties, plant maintenance and use of IT Materials properties was felt by trainers

to be the top ranked characteristic for a production worker In particular trainers expected production workers to be reasonably clear in their “understand[ing of] the basic differences between metal/glass/plastics” and the impact that this has on the use of fixings and torque However, they perceived a gap between this and production workers knowledge, skills and understanding for this characteristic Plant Maintenance –Total Productive Maintenance was ranked second most important characteristic by the trainers They expected that the

production workers should be close to what their company termed “level four” with regard to this However, they perceived, at present, a gap between this and their production workers understanding Use of IT was the final characteristic given a high ranking by trainers as being important for production workers For this characteristic, although there was a gap between expectations and perceptions of production workers current knowledge, skills and

understanding, it was smaller than for the higher ranked characteristics Trainers expected that production workers to be reasonably proficient at inputting data and understanding the output In addition, there was some variation in their perceptions of production workers actual abilities, all of which were lower that their expectations

Although all remaining characteristics were given the same ranking, it is worth considering some of those where there were gaps between the trainers’ expectations and what they perceived to be the case In particular, there was a gap for the characteristic safety Here trainers expected production workers to “follow agreed procedures” whereas their perception was that they were not always doing this, resulting in harm to themselves and to others Similarly the perceived drawing abilities of production workers were less than those expected

as was their ability for logical thinking Trainers also commented upon the generic

knowledge, skills and understanding required for team leaders These were, in general slightly higher than those required for production workers equating to role model behaviour

In addition they were also expected to have budgeting and problem solving skills