ReportCompetence Framework_DEF_19.06.2018

The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. [Project Number: 2017-1-SK01-KA204-035385] As already detailed above, the UKCES also found out that “the main reasons for not engaging in training were: - family commitments (for both men and women); - illness; - lack of suitable courses; - possible costs; - and lack of time.” An essential point to solve these according to UKCES is to ensure that trainings are valued by employers and that they are designed in partnership between employers and employees. They also found out that the main motivation to participate in training is pay rises much more than other job attributes such as “increased satisfaction, security or responsibility, are not strong influencers.” This statement excludes those aged 50 to 54 which are motivated by “security and feel the need to learn new skills.” The demographic study also shows that women are significantly less interested in training than men. The report also displays a set of data on trainings for low skilled in care and hotel sector, and on motivation for training. Other related information in: UKCES (2011) “The Role of Skills from Worklessness to Sustainable Employment with Progression” • Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2013) “Youth Unemployment: Review of training for young people with low qualification”. As a general appraisal, the research ranks different career guidance practices are more or less cost effective. To them, interventions can be ranked by their cost-effectiveness: - interventions that assist those out of work to apply for jobs are the most cost-effective and achieve positive results; - training programmes have mixed results; - direct job creation is generally ineffective. In general, “programmes targeting young people tend to be less successful than those for older people.” The research provides the following targeting recommendations. Targeting should be based on: a) Qualification level – specifically, those with qualifications below Level 2; b) Time spent out of work or learning – the research suggests avoiding arbitrary qualifying periods, but indicate a period of at least three to six months; c) Age – as benefits may be greater for those in their twenties than in their teens. This criterion is however still discussed.