Building a learning and training culture: The experience of five OECD countries

This study of the policies, strategies and practices in five Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries to build a learning and training culture was commissioned by the National Centre for Vocational Education and Research (NCVER), and was undertaken by Global Learning Services during 1999?2000. The countries selected for the study were Britain, United States of America, Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands.

The team found that the idea of culture is 'notoriously slippery and difficult to pin down' and decided to follow the pragmatic approach adopted by a recent British national advisory group which interpreted culture as:

That bundle of signs, symbols, beliefs, traditions, myths, way of thinking, speaking and doing which characterise the ways of life or behaviour of a given group of people. ¹

Culture is pervasive in its influence, and is of growing significance in the knowledge-based new economy where values have a profound influence on the generation of new knowledge and the capability of firms for enterprise and innovation, and adapting to change. A key aspect of the study is a focus on the relationships of culture, the accumulation of social and human capital, enterprise, and innovation in a knowledge-based economy.

Overall, the study found that key contextual influences were driving policy towards strategies for lifelong learning and building a learning culture. While these included the impact of globalisation, new technologies, and changes in the workplace, a particular influence has been the exponential pace of change which is producing concern relating to skill shortages in the more dynamic industries in the United States, Britain and elsewhere.

This is leading to a growing interest in forging closer relationships between learning and skill formation and maintenance, and the development of innovative strategies to create symbiotic relationships. Strategies to build partnerships between stakeholders for ongoing learning were central to the innovative responses we found across all countries.

The impact of these forces is tending to redefine roles and relationships, and to lead to new forms of public?private partnerships. The current reforms in Britain, which are summarised in appendix 1, illustrate these developments.

However, policies for building a learning culture are not only focussed on economic objectives, but are also directed at key social, civic, cultural, and educational objectives. A key feature we observed were attempts to create stronger linkages between social, educational, and economic policy with more integrated, whole-of-government strategies a target of policy.

These broader social and civic policies were directed towards combating social division and polarisation ('the two-thirds society'), towards community regeneration, combating exclusion and mobilising civil society for these purposes. The goal of lifelong learning in the socio-economic context of the new economy is central to all of these objectives.

For these reasons, we observed a particular focus on policies designed to build partnerships between stakeholders at the local level in order to address these objectives. Infrastructure, incentives, information and marketing, and technology policies were being used to this end.

While Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands have developed local infrastructures for these objectives over a considerable period of time, there have been significant policy initiatives in both Britain and the United States over the past decade to develop local infrastructures to build collaboration and partnership. Chapter 4 of the report discusses these developments.

The interaction between culture, policy, and social and economic outcomes is illustrated by these developments. Sweden, the Netherlands, and Germany have developed a consensual policy culture with the active involvement of the social partners in the development of policy, and, for much of the recent past, consensus-based decision-making.

On the other hand, the policy culture and industrial relations of the Anglo-Saxon countries, Britain and the United States (and Australia) are substantially different so that recent efforts to use a range of policy instruments to build collaboration and partnership are particularly significant. The report discusses the range of innovative partnership models emerging in the United States and Britain: in Britain largely government-led and in the United States largely, but not exclusively, private initiatives. These differences reflect cultural and political differences between these countries.

In this context of change and transition, the report points to alternative models for building a learning and training culture:

• the Nordic model which is exemplified by Sweden, but also found in countries like Denmark and Finland, where development of a learning culture through evolutionary stages is deeply embedded in the wider social, economic, cultural and political history of the country. (Appendix 2 gives an overview of the Swedish approach)
• the British model where a revolutionary attempt is being made to change the culture and build a learning society through a comprehensive set of 'joined-up' policies and strategies. (Appendix 1 gives an overview of the British approach)
• the American model which is more market-driven and free-wheeling, characterised by substantial diversity in policy, strategies and outcomes, but with efforts to strengthen partnership development through infrastructure, information, marketing, incentive and other policies. The American approach shows the complex interaction of the individualistic, entrepreneurial, and community-oriented traditions in American culture

While both Germany and the Netherlands are unique in their approach, they are closer to the Nordic approach than the Anglo-Saxon countries so that the three continental European countries may be considered as a group.

The report comments on significant recent policy developments in the countries studied. These developments include:

• the establishment of networks of Lifelong Learning Partnerships and Learning and Skills Councils in Britain
• the establishment of Workforce Investment Boards in the United States and the role of the School-to-work act in fostering partnership development
• the Adult Education Initiative in Sweden which is redefining the concept and role of adult education
• the Dutch 'knowledge debate' and development of a national policy for lifelong learning
• innovative uses of modern technologies including new forms of public?private partnership

The report considers the implications for Australia of the developments reviewed. A list of nine key implications is given at the start of chapter 12. A key issue identified is the absence of a local infrastructure to foster collaboration and partnership among stakeholders such as exists in each of the OECD countries studied, a lack which will impede Australia adapting to the skill and enterprise requirements of the new economy and forging the necessary links between learning, skill formation, enterprise and innovation. Building a local infrastructure for collaboration and partnership would also assist in mobilising civil society to address community regeneration needs and the broader spectrum of social, cultural, and educational issues resulting from the conditions of the new economy and new society.

Other issues identified include addressing exclusion and employability issues, and the role of school reform in ensuring foundations for lifelong learning. A core action agenda is proposed.

The major implications of the study for Australia relate mainly to gaps in the policy framework rather than to current policies. This reflects the situation that demand-side policies are not sufficiently developed and there is no shared national vision of Australia as a learning society which could provide a national framework for concerted partnership action involving all stakeholders.

The following points highlight these major implications as identified in this report.

• Australia lacks infrastructure and related policies to build partnerships between stakeholders, in particular at a local level. There is a need for policies to mobilise civil society through partnership action.
• Because of this, connections between vocational education and training (VET) and economic and social policy are not sufficiently developed at a local level to foster national objectives such as building an innovation culture, regenerating country areas, and adapting to change. Britain and Sweden provide models of a different approach.
• Skill formation and learning strategies need to be integrated in response to the pace of change, the imperatives for lifelong learning, and the need to upgrade and maintain the skills of the existing workforce.
• There is an insufficient range of incentives to induce stakeholders (employers, individuals, communities) to invest in learning on a whole-of-life basis.
• These gaps in policy and vision impede adult education playing a more strategic role in opening pathways for lifelong learning and supporting the building of a learning culture.
• The role of intermediary bodies (industry associations, unions, group training companies etc.) needs to be strengthened in brokering partnerships and marketing learning. Few of these bodies are ambassadors for learning.
• Technology needs to be linked more closely to innovative learning strategies.
• There is an absence of a national framework, linked to economic and social policy, for the fight against exclusion.
• A whole-of-government approach is necessary to integrate all the strands required for building a just and competitive learning culture. A useful start can be made at the local level.

The gaps in the Australian policy framework for building a learning culture are made more significant by the absence of a shared national vision of Australia as a learning society such as is being promoted in Britain and other European Union countries.

Note
¹ NAGCELL 1997, p.8.