Careers for the future

The reform of the metal and electrical industry occupations is one of the milestones in the recent history of vocational education and training. It is an excellent example to illustrate why the dual system is a "learning system": The interaction between research, policy and practice in reform projects was and is the best precondition for translating the tremendous complexity that accompanies the development of challenging occupations for training-intensive sectors of the economy into practice-oriented solutions. The reform of the metal and electrical industry occupations still counts among the reference examples of innovative regulatory activity. The vocational teaching objectives targeted, and in particular the promotion of vocational proficiency, are being updated in the current approaches to skills-oriented vocational education and training. A great many lessons for solving challenges in the regulatory work can be drawn from the review in which the pioneers and designers look back once again on significant aspects of this project.

Esser: The industrial metal and electrical occupations are regarded as high-quality recognised training occupations with a history that goes back to the training workshops of major Berlin companies such as Siemens, AEG and Borsig at the end of the 19th century. What was the training situation in these occupations at the beginning of the 1970s?

Cramer: The reform of the industrial metal and electrical occupations was given a head start by a graduated training scheme for the electrical trades adopted in 1972. The consultations for this purpose were begun in 1965 by the Vocational Education Committee of the German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association (ZVEI) and accelerated in 1966 in collaboration with the Office for In-company Vocational Training (ABB). After the Vocational Training Act came into force in 1969 and parallel to the regulatory work in the electrical industry, discussions were begun in the Vocational Training Committee of the Gesamtmetall employers' association as well on a reform of the metal trades. The training regulations valid until then had been adopted in the 1930s and no longer met the requirements in structure and training content. Although training practice had adapted to the changing needs, new modern training regulations urgently needed to be worked out. It became clear at the time that when vocational education and training in the metal and electrical industry was further modernised an effort should be made to harmonise the occupational structures. For that purpose, Gesamtmetall and the Metal Workers Industrial Union worked out key data on reforming the metal industry trades and adopted them in 1978. In 1981 the electrical trades were included as well with the same objective. The "key data" were thus the guideline for the regulatory work of the expert bodies consisting of representatives of all stakeholders.

Esser: What did the prehistory of this reform look like from the perspective of the BIBB? Was the BIBB and vocational education research already playing a role in it?

Schmidt: The metal and electrical industry occupations were always considered the core occupations in the dual system. When the Bonn-based Office for In-company Vocational Training was integrated in 1970, the BIBB absorbed expert and experienced staff, so it was immediately accepted as a partner in the reform.

At the beginning of the 1970s, however, there were new considerations. The development of the microprocessor ushered in the era of modern information technology. The consequences were manifested relatively rapidly in the automotive industry, the key area of deployment of the metal and electrical trades. In 1971, the Federal Ministry of Education began supporting in-company innovations in initial vocational education and training in this area. These included the pilot projects for basic vocational education and training at Daimler in Gaggenau ("building a steam engine") and at Volkswagen in Wolfsburg ("comparison of school and collaborative basic education"), both scientifically monitored by the BIBB. In those pilot projects the paradigm shift in the training objectives announced by Gesamtmetall and IG Metall in 1978 was already manifest: from work per individual directives given by engineers to work processes that are independently planned, executed and monitored by the skilled workers themselves. It is thanks to the vocational education professionals at Gesamtmetall, Dr. Rudolf Geer, Dr. Günter Cramer and Gerhard Bartel as well as Hans Preiss and Ulrich Mignon from IG Metall that this development was formulated and shaped at an early stage in a forward-looking education and employment policy paper with clear objectives as the key data of a reform.

Esser: What was the hallmark of this new image of the "skilled worker" at the time?

Heimann: For IG Metall, skilled labour in the metal and electrical industry was characterised by four requirements: The training should lead to the longest possible period of utility of the acquired qualifications in the labour market. So the focus for the qualifications described was not the job or the company, but was significantly higher. A wide range of basic skills had to be imparted favouring entry into further education and training and the ability to deal with the occupational risks that would inevitably arise from technological change. The topic of "actively co-determining and shaping training and work" was always in the focus of IG Metall. The occupational biography aspect had to be considered so that individual preferences and abilities would be considered in the training process. These four dimensions re-emerged in the key data for reform of the industrial metal and electrical occupations endorsed by the social partners in 1978 (metal) and 1981 (electrical). They formed the basis for the work of the experts.

Dr. Klaus Heimann
"IG Metall was enthusiastic about the pedagogical concept of the exercise as a whole and the associated mission-related guiding texts."

Based on the many in-company pilot projects - which were guided by the BIBB, as already mentioned by Hermann Schmidt - IG Metall was enthusiastic about the pedagogical concept of the exercise as a whole and the associated mission-related guiding texts. Finally, a way had been found to disengage from the mindless and schematic courses of the Office for In-company Vocational Training (ABB). But how could this experience be embedded in training regulations that know no didactic guidelines? It was the experts from the trade unions who kept pressing for abandonment of the inadequate goal description of the skilled worker qualification skills and knowledge in the regulations. The aim of vocational education and training should be to impart an individual proficiency, directed at the independent planning, performing, and monitoring of work processes. It was very difficult to write this emancipatory concept of qualification into a training regulation. It took a top-level meeting in the Ministry of Economic Affairs to sever the Gordian knot.

Esser: Were these ideas supported by the small and medium-sized enterprises as well?

Heimann: The formal answer to that question can be found in the decision-making processes at Gesamtmetall and IG Metall: Gesamtmetall represents enterprises of all sizes, and works councils of small and medium-sized enterprises are integrated into IG Metall as well. However, the large enterprises are firmly in control when it comes to practical work regarding occupations. That was the case back in the day and little has changed since then. Ultimately, however, the small and medium-sized enterprises have also supported the new occupation concepts. That was reflected in the unused transitional period: Ninety per cent of the enterprises already made the switch in the first year after the new occupations were launched.

Schmidt: What politicians and the public completely underestimated at the time was the question of the acceptance by those directly concerned: the workers and enterprises. Here Gesamtmetall, ZVEI and IG Metall had a great deal of persuading to do in numerous meetings over the years.

Esser: The reform took about ten years, something that can hardly be imagined from today's perspective. What highs and lows do you remember, and how was it possible to ensure that everyone stayed "on board" during all that time?

Cramer: The size and pretensions of the "Reform of the metal and electrical occupations" project were unique in vocational education and training projects at the time and demanded a high degree of expertise and commitment on the part of the experts. As expected, a common understanding of the work had to develop first, from which a motivation emerged that led to expectations of successful work. A paradigm shift was intended, i.e. a new qualification profile for future-oriented initial vocational education and training. It was an incentive and commitment for everyone involved in the regulatory work to be engaged in this project with their experience from training practice and to be able to help shape the result directly, so no failures occurred.

Dr. Günter Cramer
"The size and pretensions of the reform were unique in vocational education and training projects at the time and demanded a high degree of expertise and commitment on the part of the experts."

Esser: With what expectations did the experts and negotiators enter the process at that time? What was expected of the BIBB?

Heimann: The expectations were huge. The metal industry had become unaccustomed to reforms. For the electrical industry, although graduated training had been introduced in 1972, IG Metall had very quickly abandoned that concept. The regulatory instruments of some metal trades had remained unchanged for 40 years, and indeed those of the machinist trade for almost 50 years. At the start of the reform work in the BIBB, 52 metal trades in which more than 200,000 apprentices were being trained at the time were affected simultaneously. That was two-thirds of all apprenticeships in the trade sector. A research and development phase was launched in the BIBB in 1979. The first thing done at that time was to examine the practice of training closely. The actual reform procedure then began in 1983 with 250 experts. For the stakeholders, it was clear that it would be difficult, but they all wanted to create something that did not yet exist in the occupation landscape. And they succeeded.

Esser: The BIBB Board decided in 1979 to carry out a research project to determine the current job profiles of the occupations and to develop a concept for reform. How was this handled and how were the results taken into account in the subsequent proceedings?

Schmidt: This 1979-82 research project and the subsequent 1983-86 restructuring were the most important projects of my twenty-year term of office: First, because the BIBB gained stature as a research institute and was perceived by the social partners and politicians as a key partner and second, due to the importance for education policy of this research and development project, which has changed the dual system of vocational education and training and made it viable. In the research project, over 500,000 individual data items were collected on the activities in the occupations in the companies directly. Project manager Dr. Hermann Benner and ten researchers from the Institute had project staff in companies, chambers, associations and works councils who provided material and proposed their ideas about the reform. As director of the Institute I have had numerous project discussions with the interested parties, and often the problems that arose could only be resolved through discussions with the boards of the social partners and in the ministries.

Following analysis of the data, the activities were assigned to six occupations defined according to technical fields (for example, industrial mechanic, construction mechanic), which were subdivided into sixteen occupational profiles (for example, manufacturing engineering, metal engineering). To do this, a cluster analysis procedure was chosen, and that made it much easier to agree on six occupations. In the end, electrical engineering had four occupations and twelve occupational profiles. The concept of graduated training was abandoned there.

Esser: To what extent did the research project influence the remaining research and development work of the BIBB?

Schmidt: Because of its innovative nature the research and development project influenced all the work of the Institute and in particular its international reputation. The worldwide interest in the project was enormous. Christopher Hayes of the Prospect Centre in London found inspiration in the project for the development of "occupational families" and qualification considerations that strongly influenced the development of the National Vocational Qualifications in the United Kingdom. Bob Norton from the Center for Vocational Education Research in Columbus, Ohio, studied the project work for several weeks at the BIBB and was motivated to develop his DACUM (Develop a Curriculum) method, which has since been applied globally. Colleagues from the EU and Australian and Philippine experts visited the BIBB several times over the years to study the progress of the project. At the beginning of the 1990s the National Center on Education and the Economy in Washington, D.C. took the reform and its implementation as an occasion for recommendations to the Clinton administration on "Standard Development", i.e. the development of occupational standards. This resulted in close cooperation, in the course of which I was appointed a member of the advisory board, the Board of Trustees (1995 to 2008) of the NCEE.

Esser: The international reach is truly remarkable! But let us look once again at the German regulatory work: To what extent can the process be regarded from today's perspective as paradigmatic for reform work in general?

Schmidt: The reform process put the principles of the Vocational Training Act into effect on a large scale for the first time. Research and development integrating those involved, a clear description of the targets by the social partners and ministries, development of training regulations in cooperation with vocational schools, hence with the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs. It must be mentioned here that the reform called for significant investment in vocational schools by the Länder. The most significant innovation was the above-mentioned new training objective of independently acting skilled workers, which has now gradually been adopted as well by the regulations for other occupations, including the commercial and craft occupations. The goal of "vocational proficiency", which was included in the Vocational Training Act in 2005, and the "outcome orientation" of the European Qualifications Framework were already contained in the key data of 1978. As a result, the dual system of vocational education and training attained the rank that secured it the long-recommended equality with general education in the German Qualifications Framework.

Esser: In the future the viability of the dual model will be measured by the extent to which occupational profiles corresponding to skills requirements can be created that both open up career options for young high-achievers and make entry into the labour market possible for the less proficient. What requirements will the regulatory business have to meet to make occupational profiles attractive in this tension-filled area?

Heimann: This tension-filled area always exists. The dual training occupations do not insulate themselves by prescribing formal entry-level education requirements. Specifically, this means that young people train in the 350 occupations who have no school leaving certificate just as do those who have university entrance qualifications. It is of course the companies who decide which young people they want to train. Their education background is one consideration, but one that is becoming less important. The occupation-makers have to make sure that the content of training meets current and future requirements in the industry sector. In that respect there can be no compromise. In any case, reducing the content of occupations so as to make it easier to learn them is not the right way. There are a number of instruments in vocational education and training for catering to the strengths and weaknesses of the trainees. I need mention only the in-company vocational preparation, the prolongation of training, assistance during training for young people with special needs, supplementary qualifications, stays abroad, shortening of the period of training etc. The development of good occupations is the hallmark of the dual system. If the dual system offers occupations that are rated "not recommended" - that sort of thing has happened quite a few times - then in-company vocational education and training loses much of its appeal. The stakeholders should spare themselves such home-grown problems.

Esser: The enterprises are an important partner in the dual system. Currently, we are seeing a decline in the participation of enterprises in training. What do you think are the reasons, and what arguments in favour of dual education and training could be used to counter this trend?

Cramer: Predictably the situation on the training market has fundamentally changed, and not all companies adjusted to this in time. The decline in the number of school leavers means that companies providing training have to step up their marketing of training so as to show how attractive initial vocational education and training in the dual system is. The hiring criteria must also be reconsidered and adapted to a justifiable extent.

Esser: One final question to all of you, and I would like to ask you to keep your replies short: When differing interests are in conflict, reforming recognised occupations sometimes entails a tough struggle before joint solutions can be found. Why is it important from your point of view to adhere to this principle of consensus, and what recommendations would you make in the light of your experience to the stakeholders involved in regulatory procedures?

Cramer: Vocational education and training requires continuity and a social consensus. The development and adaptation of training regulations is the task of the social partners in cooperation with the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training. The successful 1987 reform convincingly demonstrated that, and it received widespread recognition, so up to now there has been no need for change.

Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Hermann Schmidt
"Our procedure is difficult, expensive, vulnerable to blockades, often almost painfully tedious and the details constantly need improving, but it is the only one that brings good results. There is nothing better!"

Heimann: Occupations do not come about in a vacuum, they are always the result of changes in the world of work and in society. The stakeholders in vocational education and training do not always interpret these changes in the same way. This results in debates about how to design good occupations and good work. This is a very fruitful debate, and a critically necessary one. The counter-model would be this: Education bureaucrats prescribe new occupations. This is clearly the worse way. The consensus principle means that opinions have to be fought for. No one should be so presumptuous as to simply dismiss someone else's opinion out of hand. That would make things move faster, but the social acceptance of occupations would suffer. In-company vocational education and training, however, needs the employers and the employees equally. If they are not taken on board, this system has no future.

Schmidt: More than 60 occupations were reformed in this research and development procedure. Just one team performed a considerable feat in dealing with six occupations per year. It is a completely misguided idea that research institutes and ministries, with training regulations formulated solely in their own house, would have had obtained anything like the acceptance for the new occupations among several hundreds of thousands of enterprises and several million employees that Gesamtmetall and IG Metall obtained. You can observe this in many countries that are desperately trying to introduce "dual systems" without the participation of the persons concerned on an equal footing. It cannot be done that way. Our procedure is difficult, expensive, vulnerable to blockades, often almost painfully tedious and the details constantly need improving, but it is the only one that brings good results. There is nothing better!

 

FRIEDRICH HUBERT ESSER,
 Professor Dr., President of the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB)

Translation from the German original (published in BWP 3/2013): Martin Stuart Kelsey, Global Sprachteam Berlin