|
Market reforms since the 1990s have created a new environment for vocational
education and
training (VET) providers, presenting opportunities and challenges, both
of which arise from
greater competition for funds, new clients and training demands.
This project aims to contribute to knowledge of the experiences and
practices of VET providers
in this new environment by exploring and highlighting some of the
factors influencing provision.
Three specific areas where knowledge is limited were chosen for study;
they were also chosen
because of their relevance to the current reform environment:
- income sources and mixes
- thin markets for VET
- research and development.
Investigations for this project centred on provider experiences
and initiatives in the selected areas
and important contextual factors such as policy settings.
We held discussions with 14 public and
private providers across five states, with state and territory
training agencies and with a number
of industry skills councils and employer organisations. The
project also drew on published
findings of previous studies. It should be noted that these
investigations revealed that the
diversity in the activities through which VET providers earn
income is poorly represented in
current VET data collections.
Income sources and mixes
Data on funding for public VET providers show a decreasing
reliance on government support
and a growth in fee-for-service income, with especially
strong growth in recent years in income
from international students. The proportion of fee-for-service
income varies across the states and
territories. Surveys of private providers show a stronger
reliance on non-government funding;
however, some rely indirectly on government funding through incentive
payments to employers
and for other initiatives, such as the previous government's skills
vouchers for individuals.
Both public and private VET providers obtain income from governments,
enterprises and
individuals. All are striving to diversify their funding
sources and to reduce their reliance on any
one source, especially government funding.
To be successful in a competitive funding environment, providers
engage in ongoing market
scanning and maintain close relationships with industry
associations and individual enterprises to
identify specialist or emerging training needs or other
unmet demand. Timing is critical - it is
essential to be 'ahead of the pack' in identifying opportunities.
This work requires investments in
staff development, resources and facilities, in marketing
and in nurturing relationships with
potential partners and clients. However, some providers
express concern about the adequacy of
their internal resources for supporting this work.
There is increasing collaboration between providers, including
between public and private
providers and between providers and other organisations,
including with enterprises and industry
associations. Such collaborations increase the capacity
of providers to respond to opportunities that arise in the competitive
training market and enable access to facilities and expertise to meet
client needs and allow for the sharing of costs (such as
for marketing) and risks.
Using public funds as a means to increase their private
income - leveraging - is an evolving area
for both public and private providers. Governments see
leveraging as
a way to increase training
delivery and to encourage private sector contributions.
However, among providers and
stakeholders there is uncertainty about how leveraging is
best used, with the following
suggestions being made.
- Leveraging should be restricted to specialist training.
- Leveraging may be particularly appropriate for labour
market and similar programs in skills
shortage areas.
- Tax reform might encourage industry to support leveraging
arrangements.
Providers identify some formal restrictions on
their activities
and restrictive practices that
discourage their participation in some markets,
including government requirements for minimum
class sizes and different requirements between states
and territories vis-a-vis national provision.
Among the providers who participated in the study,
cross-subsidisation of activities was indicated
only in the use of private funds for public benefit,
such as for staff development to improve the
quality of training. Providers indicated that
this practice had increased as government funding for
VET had tightened.
Thin markets
Thin markets in VET are those in which the actual
and potential number of learners may be too
small to attract training providers. They are
recognised as occurring in occupational, industry and
geographic areas, alone or in combination. Industry
skills councils consulted for the study noted
that the existence of thin markets in their industries
reflects factors such as industry structure, its
geographical spread, traditional forms of training
and low rates of labour turnover. Some industry
stakeholders believe that, where there is considerable
demand for training, but not for the type
delivered by the formal VET system, thin markets may be
'overstated' or 'artificial'.
Artificial thin
markets also arise out of a 'silo mentality' that fails
to recognise synergies between training needs
across industries or occupations. The atomisation of training
as demand grows for smaller and
more specific skill sets also contributes to thin markets.
Industry skills councils point to a need
for more accurate measures of demand for training before
thin markets become recognised as
such.
In their user choice arrangements for apprentices and
trainees, most states and territories identify
thin markets as mainly geographical and occupational.
They manage the training market in these
areas using two principal strategies: restricting
the numbers and types of providers in the market;
and looking at each case individually, taking
state priorities into account in deciding whether or
not to intervene. A third strategy - identified
in two states - is to allow the market to sort out any
issues. The first strategy is less likely to continue
as markets mature, demand for skills increases,
and more and more training takes place on the
job.
VET providers have two main concerns about thin markets:
costs and restrictions on provider
activity. Both public and private providers argue
for a higher price to be paid for training in thin
markets and for all states to apply loadings for
the higher cost of delivery in regional and remote
areas. Where the price is too low, some providers
choose not to enter the market, thus reducing the options available
to learners. Others enter it reluctantly - some public providers feel
an
obligation to deliver in thin markets, despite
cost pressures and a limited ability to cross-subsidise.
Restrictions, such as limits on the provision
of apprenticeship training in some jurisdictions, are
of concern to private providers, who argue that
state regulations are not keeping pace with the
trends in the shift to workplace training and
the use
of new technologies. Employer and industry
groups in the study stated that lifting such restrictions
would result in an increased response to
industry needs in thin markets.
Providers are considering and developing strategies
to reduce costs in thin market areas, including
delivering the first year of an apprenticeship
as a traineeship,
which enables more on-the-job
assessment. As measures to ensure that delivery
of training meets demand in thin markets,
industry skills councils suggest flexible delivery,
networks and partnerships, and a national focus.
Research and development
Engagement in research and development, defined
as systematic
work to increase the stock of
knowledge and the use of this knowledge to devise
new applications, is not traditionally expected
of, nor undertaken by, VET providers. In recent
years
there has been a growing recognition of
the potential role of VET in the national innovation
system as the link between new knowledge
and end users. This role has been recognised
in some policy changes and initiatives at state and
territory levels, many of which emphasise networks
and
partnerships between the VET sector
and industry.
While the number of VET providers engaged in
research and development is still very small and
primarily confined to public providers, many
more do undertake market research and innovations
in teaching and learning, recognising these
as vital to success in a competitive market. Those
providers who are engaged in research and
development do so to solve a problem or to increase
their capability. They gain benefits in income,
in staff development and in adding value to
training.
Conclusions
VET providers are responding to changes in
the competitive training market and they expect
further change, including in funding sources.
A primary concern in this environment is
financial security. Providers are therefore seeking
alternative sources of income to ensure long-term
economic viability. They are also concerned
about how
best to meet the needs of learners,
communities and client groups, recognising
this as critical to their economic wellbeing.
Consequently, providers are developing the
following range of strategies to ease the pressures
they are confronting.
- To overcome barriers to participation
and success in some markets, such as formal
restrictions, restrictive practices
and limits to
their capabilities, they are forming
partnerships and alliances and targeting
alternative market segments.
- To stretch their resources
to cover activities
such as market
scanning and research,
innovation and professional development,
they are reducing costs and seeking additional
income sources.
- To distinguish themselves
from their competitors, they are offering innovative and
distinctive products and services
and co-branding with respected partners.
- To strengthen
their capabilities,
they are
developing their own staff
or forming alliances
which give them access to additional
capabilities.
- To
market themselves effectively, they are forming alliances with partners
able to provide
assistance with marketing, seeking
referrals from existing clients and maintaining close
relationships with potential clients.
Overall,
the work of VET providers who
are successful in a changing
competitive
environment
is
characterised by application,
adaptability and creativity.
|