document resume ed 354 337 ce 063 046 author … · 2014. 5. 5. · document resume. ed 354 337 ce...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 354 337 CE 063 046

AUTHOR Herschbach, Dennis R.; And OthersTITLE Vocational Education and Training. Review of

Experience. Latin America and the Caribbean.INSTITUTION Academy for Educational Development, Inc.,

Washington, D.C.; Juarez and Associates, Inc., LosAngeles, Calif.; Research Triangle Inst., ResearchTriangle Park, N.C.

SPONS AGENCY Agency for International Development (IDCA),Washington, DC. Bureau for Latin America and theCaribbean.

PUB DATE 92CONTRACT LAC-0032-C-00-9036-00NOTE 104p.; Management Systems International also assisted

in this project.PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Developing Nations; *Educational Finance;

*Educational Improvement; Educational Policy;Educational Quality; Federal Aid; Foreign Countries;Government Role; Investment; Job Training; NonformalEducation; Program Design; Program Development;*Program Effectiveness; *Program Implementation;Program Improvement; Technical Assistance;*Vocational Education

IDENTIFIERS Caribbean; Latin America

ABSTRACT

This report examines the problem of implementing andsustaining vocational education and training (VET) programs indeveloping countries. :rt is intended to provide U.S. Agency forInternational Development (USAID) officers with operationalguidelines for the development of future projects. In conducting thestudy, over 50 projects conducted by USAID from 1973 to 1989 werereviewed. Twenty-four of these were selected for intensive review,and two as case studies. Chapter I is an introduction which explainsthe purpose of the study, sources of information, definitions and theorganization of the report. Chapter II outlines the issuessurrounding investment decisions in VET and presents a framework forformulating vocational training policy based on consideration of twocritical factors--implementing context and project complexity.Chapter III examines formal and nonformal training alternatives,focusing on benefits and implementing requirements. Chapter IVdiscusses how to improve training quality. It focuses on the keyelements of training at the operational level--managementdevelopment, instructional staff, and instructional resources. Next,it examines requirements of the overall training system in whichindividual programs operate. Chapter V analyzes benefits andconstraints of each type of available funding: general publicrevenues, payroll taxes, user fees, and student loans. Chapter VIsummarizes findings and conclusions. It offers recommendations forinvestment choices, with particular emphasis on the Latin Americanand Caribbean region, and provides guidelines for strengtheningproject design, with emphasis on improving quality andsustainability. Appendixes contain 127 references, a cursory reviewof 24 projects in VET, and 2 indepth case studies of projects inHonduras and Jamaica. (YLB)

EN,

Ct4Z Education andCZ lirl Human Resources4:14

in 1116111 DevelopmentCeZ

C=1

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

Vocational Education and TrainingReview of Experience

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL L RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

his document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it

CI Minor changes have been made 10 improvereproduction duality

Points of view or opinions stated in this docu.meat do nol necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy

re 1-3'" 74

Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean Office of Development Resources Education and Human Resources Division

U. S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Vocational Education and TrainingReview of Experience

Dennis R. Herschbach, Frances B. Hays, and David P. Evans

This is a publication of the LAC Education and Human Resources Technical Services Projectconducted by the Academy for Educational Developmentwith subcontractors Juarez and Associates, Inc., Management Systems International,and Research Triangle Institute

Conducted for the U.S. Agency for International DevelopmentBureau for Latin America and the CaribbeanOffice of Development ResourcesEducation and Human Resources DivisionContract No. LAC-0032-C-00-9036-00

1992

In 1989, the Education and Human Resources (EHR) Division of A.I.D.'s Bureau for LatinAmerica and the Caribbean (LAC) commissioned a series of three evaluations in educationand human resource development: basic education, vocational education and training, andparticipant training. A fourth study of management education and training is planned.

These studies present lessons learned about the design, implementation, and evaluation ofdonor-assisted projects. Each study examines the relevant literature as well as actual sitevisits of programs or projects in the LAC region. The studies focus on the experience of theU.S. Agency for International Development over the past fifteen years. In addition, the workof other donor organizations is considered.

The studies are research and reference documents that lead to practical applications inproject design, implementation, and evaluation. Part I of this series presents the Reviews ofExperience and Part II the Practical Applications for each subsector.

The studies were carried out by the Academy for Educational Development (AED) throughthe LAC Bureau's Education and Human Resources Technical Services Project. The teamfor the studies included the following representatives of the EHR Division, AED, and itssubcontractors.

Joseph Carney, chief, EHR Division, LAC BureauU.S. Agency for International Development

Leopoldo Garza, deputy chief, EHR Division, LAC BureauU.S. Agency for International Development

Frances Hays, senior editorAcademy for Educational Development

Ray Chesterfield, basic education specialistJuarez and Associates, Inc.

John Gillies, participant training specialistConsultant, Academy for Educational Development

Dennis Herschbach, vocational education and training specialistUniversity of Maryland

Beverly Jones, director, EHR Technical Services ProjectAcademy for Educational Development

The findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in these studies are the authors'and do not reflect the official viewpoint of the U.S. Agency for International Development.Material may be reproduced if full credit is given.

For further information, contact:

Chief, EHR Division, LAC Bureau Room 2239 NS U.S. Agency for International DevelopmentDepartment of State Washington. D.C. 20523 (202) 647-7921

-.t

Acknowledgments vii

Executive Summary ix

L Introduction 1

Purpose of Study 1Sources of Information 1Definitions 2Organization of the Report 3

IL The Policy Framework: Making Investment Decisions 5

Traditional Approaches to Investment Decisions 5Assessing Manpower Requirements 5Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Training 6Differentiating between Problems in Training Design and Implementation 6

Implementing Context 7Contextual Elements 7Policy Environment 8Economic Context 9

Project Complexity 9

Relationship between Context and Complexity 11Low Support/Low Complexity 11Low Support/High Complexity 12High Support/Low Complexity 12High Support/High Complexity 13Policy Makers Must Broaden Range of Analysis 14

DI Training Alternatives: Selecting the Appropriate Program 15

Formal Training Programs 17Implementing Conditions 17General versus Specific 'Training 18Links to Employers 19

Contents - ill

ti

Nonforrnal Training Programs 20Institution-Based Programs 20Employer-Based Programs 23Specialized Programs 24

Responding to the Needs of Employers 26

IV. Internal Efficiency: Improving the Quality of 'Training 29

Key Elements at the Operational Level 29Management Development 29Instructional Staff 31Instructional Resources 33

Development of Sustainable Training Systems 36Total System Requirements 36Organizational Structure 38Recurrent Funding Obligations 39

V. Sources of Funding: Diversifying the Finance of 'Training 41

General Public Revenues 41Justification for Public Investment 42Forms of Public Investment 43Outcomes of Public Funding 43

Payroll Taxes 44Forms of Use 44Low-Income Countries 45Middle-Income Countries 46

User Fees 47Types and Uses of Fees 47Government Subsidies 48

Student Loan Programs 49

Diversifying Resources: Policy Concerns 50

VL Study Findings: Implications for Policy 53

Program Mode 53Formal Training Programs 53Nonformal Training Programs 54

National Income Level 56Low-Income Countries 56Middle-Income Countries 58

Contents - iv 3

Improving Program Quality and Sustainability 58Implementing Context and Project Complexity 58System and Organizational Requirements 58

Diversifying the Finance of Training 60

Conclusion: Vocational Education and Training in the 1990s 61

References 63

Appendix A: Project Review 69

Select Projects in Vocational Education and Training 69Project Summaries 73

Appendix B: Case Studies 81

Advisory Council for Human Resource Development, Honduras 81Basic Skills Training Project, Jamaica 87

Contents - v

rM

Exhibits

Boxes

II-1 Assessing the Strength of the Implementing Context 10II-2 Low Support/Low Complexity 11II-3 Low Support/High Complexity 12II-4 High Support/Low Complexity 13II-5 High Support/High Complexity 13

III -1 Key Elements of Vocational Training Policy 16III-2 Value of Formal Programs: Laying the Foundation for Successful Workers 18ELI-3 Colombia's National Training System: An Exemplary Program 20III-4 Rates of Return on Nonformal Training 21III-5 National Training Agencies in Central America and the Caribbean 22I1I-6 Role of Employers and Workers on Governing Boards 22III-7 Determining the Optimal Training Site 24III-8 Specialized Program for Income Generation 25III-9 Responding to the Needs of Employers 28IV-1 Guidelines: Management Development 31IV-2 Guidelines: Instructional Staff 33IV-3 Guidelines: Instructional Resources 36IV-4 Value of Incremental Development 37IV-5 Reducing Project Complexity 38IV-6 Lack of Recurrent Support Jeopardizes Successful Project 40IV-7 Maximizing Capital Investments and Lowering the Unit Costs of Training 40V-1 Need for Government Financing in Low-Income Countries 42V-2 Balanced Representation Critical to Success of National Training Agency 45V-3 National Training Agencies Fail to Implement Enterprise-Based Training 46V-4 Influence of Fee Levels on Enrollment 47V-5 Proprietary Schools 48V-6 Influence of Fee Structure on Kinds of Training Offered 49

VI-1 Guidelines for Project Implementation in Low-Income Countries 57VI-2 Guidelines for Project Implementation in Middle-Income Countries 58

Figure

II-1 Project Outcome as a Function of Support and Design 11

Contents vi

Acknowledgments

This report benefited from the guidance andvision provided by Joseph Carney and LeopoldoGarza, chief and deputy chief respectively of theEducation and Human Resources (EHR) Divisionof the Bureau for Latin America and theCaribbean. David Evans designed the originalstudy, when he served as human resourcesdevelopment officer in the EHR Division. DennisHerschbach of the University of Maryland carriedout the literature review and a series of cas".studies. Donald Dunk le of the Department ofLabor and Robert Ewigleben, an independentconsultant, assisted in the initial study. GaryRussell, human resources development officer inthe EHR Division, provided valuable support,especially in the writing of Chapter V.

USAID mission staff were extremely helpful insharing the information and experiences thatform the foundation of this study. Ned vanSteenwyk of USAID/Honduras and WilliamCharleson of USAID/Jamaica were especiallygenerous. The projects that they monitoredappear in the two case studies included asappendices to this report.

Representatives of host country institutions wereequally responsive, and thanks are due to themfor their patience and openness in sharing theirperceptions. In addition, the study teamconsulted with representatives of other donororganizations active in vocational education. Allthese groups were forthcoming with documentsand information.

Under the guidance of Beverly Jones, director ofthe Education and Human Resources TechnicalServices Project, the Academy for EducationalDevelopment carried out editing and productionof this study. Frances Hays worked closely withDennis Herschbach on the final writing of thedocument. Marjorie Webster and Sheila Watkinsably handled all the tasks involved withproduction from word processing through layout.

Acknowledgments - vii

This study examines the problem of implement-ing and sustaining vocational education andtraining programs in developing countries. Inrecent years, increasingly constrained budgetson the part of governments and donor organi-za4-ions have raised concerns about maximizingthe efficiency of investment in all subsectors ofeducation, including vocational education andtraining. The purpose of this study is to identifylessons learned from the experience of donororganizations and developing countries, so thatthese lessons may shape future investments. Tothis end, operational guidelines for the devel-opment of future vocational education andtraining projects are provided.

In conducting the study, the authors reviewedthe literature on vocational education and train-ing and examined over 50 projects conducted bythe U.S. Agency for International Development(A.I.D.) from 1973 to 1989. Twenty-four of theseprojects were selected for intensive review, andtwo representative A.I.D. projects (the AdvisoryCouncil for Human Resource Development inHonduras and the Basic Skills Training Projectin Jamaica) were selected as case studies.

Two principal questions guided the study:

What kinds of investments should A.I.D. makein vocational education and training?

How can program quality and sustainability bestrengthened?

Vocational education and training is an enter-prise characterized by diversity. Training modesvary from short-term, specialized programs,apprenticeships, and in-plant training to formaland nonformal training institutions. This studyconcludes that all modes of vocational educationcan yield acceptably high rates of return andthat all modes can be implemented undersupportive conditions. The challenge that A.I.D.

faces is to invest in training activities that can besuccessfully implemented and sustained.

Traditionally, planners have used manpowerforecasting to make most decisions aboutresource allocation for vocational education andtraining. Cost-benefit and rate-of-return studieshave also been used to gauge the comparativeyield of one training investment over another.This study, however, suggests that the mosturgent consideration is an assessment of currentconditions in the implementing context.

Implementing conditions include macro-levelconditions, such as the political and economicclimate, social and cultural values, and legal andbureaucratic structures, as well as micro-levelconditions that relate specifically to trainingsystems. Planning and decision making must bebased on an understanding of the implementingcontext and on an assessment of the likelihoodthat a particular intervention can be successfullyimplemented given the current conditions.Failure to identify and accommodate criticalcontextual conditions can seriously weaken atraining project and impair its sustainability.

The relationship between the implementingcontext and project complexity is of considerableimportance. As project design becomes morecomplex, understanding and accommodatingthis relationship become even more crucial. Theprojects most likely to succeed are those with ahigh level of implementing support and a lowlevel of complexity. Under conditions of lowsupport and low complexity, only the "permanentpilot" should be implemented.

Complex projects should not be designed underconditions of low support because of the highprobability of failure. Many A.I.D. projects,however, fall into this category. Because of theperceived need, large and complex projects areoften designed for countries with low imple-

Executive Summary - ix

10

menting capacity. Project design should bebased on implementing potential, not need,because need will always exceed capacity.

A.I.D. should approach investments in formalvocational education and training (programssponsored by ministries of education) withcaution because of the difficulty of successfullyimplementing and sustaining programs. Theneeds of formal systems are so great that donorfunds usually have little impact. To be success-ful, donor interventions must address all systemcomponents and provide sustained assistancsover a long period of time. In the case of poorlyfunctioning formal systems, the best policyoption is to provide comprehensive, sustainedassistance or no assistance at all. Another policyoption is to restrict support to a single institu-tion, providing comprehensive support andfocusing on a range of critical skill areas.

Nonformal vocational education and trainingprograms (sponsored by labor or other ministriesor by private organizations) often experiencemany of the same problems associated withformal programs, particularly when similarinstitutional forms are used. In low-incomecountries it is especially difficult to implementprograms successfully because administrative,management, and financial support is weak.Enterprise capacity, moreover, is oftenunderdeveloped and employment demand isusually unreliable. The institution-basednonformal training systems of the middle-incomecountries of Latin America such as thoseadministered through SENAI in Brazil and SENAin Colombia offer appealing models, but thesemodels are generally not appropriate for the low-income countries of Central America and theCaribbean.

Investments in nonformal training in low-incomecountries should be targeted to activities thathave a reasonable probability of success. Inaddition, investments should be sustained for anextended time and have a major impact on thetraining system. One option is to single out aprogram, or a manageable group of programs,and provide long-term comprehensive support.In general, it is better to invest in trainingtechnicians and first-line managers than intraining skilled and semi-skilled workers.Upgrading and retraining for existing workers arebetter options than pre-employment training fornew workers.

Executive Summary - x

11-

Employsr-based training programs appear to beat: attractive option to government-sponsoredprograms. Generally, small firms have thegreatest training needs. Over the next decade, amajor thrust in vocational training should bedirected at responding to the needs of small- andmedium-sized firms. However, there are no goodmethods of coordinating training services forthese employers. Developing such methodsshould be a priority of A.I.D. One potentiallyeffective way is to work through intermediaryorganizations, such as service centers, employergroups, and trade associations.

Specialized, nonformal training projects areattractive to donors for several reasons. Forinstance, these projects allow donors to targetspecific development problems such as literacy,income generation, or women's employment.Such projects tend to be short-term, and theiractivities are relatively self-contained. In thesmall countries of Central America and theCaribbean, specialized nonformal programs maybe the best policy option.

All training modes face the challenge of enhanc-ing quality and sustainability. One key concernis to strengthen the organizational and manage-ment structure of the implementing institutions.Among the A.I.D. projects reviewed for thisstudy, management constituted the single mostimportant factor in determining project success.In low-income countries with weak infrastruc-tures, a strong management system becomeseven more crucial. Successful vocational educa-tion and training projects place a high priority onstrengthening management capability. Inaddition, successful projects address the needfor trained instructional staff and appropriateinstructional resources.

Project design should always be focused ondeveloping sustainable training systems. Theinterdependent relationship of all system compo-nents must be considered. The more dynamicsystem elements, such as management and staffquality, are particularly important. Someexperimentation will prove necessary beforesuccessful implementation of an entire projectcan be accomplished. System overload shouldbe avoided. Overload occurs when a project istoo large for the existing management andresource capabilities. A.I.D. should avoid large,underfunded, and poorly staffed projects withshort time frames. One strategy is to design less

complex projects, reducing project scale anddeemphasizin,g broad national objectives in favorof limited objectives with a reasonable probabilityof being achieved. Another strategy is to divideimplementation into phases, following a plan ofincremental development that allows for consid-erable experimentatirdn, feedback, and modiflca-tion.

In the 1990s A.I.D. faces a significant challenge,and an equally significant opportunity, in provid-ing support for vocational education and train-ing. In Latin America and the Caribbean, policymakers will continue to grapple with the problemof providing more and better quality training.Spiraling population growth, rapidly expandingcities, lagging formal economies, and the bur-geoning need for employment all of thesefactors combine to increase the demand forvocational education and training, even in theface of increasing financial constraints.

Vocational education and training projects,however, have been difficult to establish andsustain, particularly in the low-income countriesin which A.I.D. works. Clearly the challenge is todo better with fewer resources. One priority forA.I.D. is to explore alternatives to the publicfinancing of vocational education and training.In most developing countries, the financial baseneeds to be broadened. Public financing willremain important, particularly in low-incomecountries, but other sources are needed. Theresource levels required to sustain programquality and maintain instructional capacitycannot be achieved through public revenuesalone.

A.I.D. has the opportunity to build on its consid-erable experience by broadening its focus. Policymakers, donors, and planners need to give muchgreater attention to understanding the imple-menting context, appraising project complexity,fitting projects to local contexts, assessing thesystem requirements of training programs, anddiversifying the sources of funding. Introducingchange into contexts that are poorly understoodis difficult; sustaining projects that haveoverextended the existing implementing capacityis impossible; and providing effective training isunlikely if system components do not work welltogether.

Issues of program quality, sustainability, andeffectiveness must continue to occupy the

forefront of policy deliberations among donororganizations and developing countries.Successfully addressing these issues requires abroad planning focus. Only with such a focuswill countries be able to implement vocationaleducation and training programs that contributeto sustainable economic growth.

Executive Summary - xi

Tintroduction

Purpose of StudyFor over two decades, developing countries anddonor organizations have made substantialinvestments in vocational education and train-ing. The commitment to vocational and technicaleducation and training is well establishedthroughout the Latin American and Caribbeanregion. National systems such as SENA(National Apprenticeship Service) in Colombiaand SENAI (National Industrial ApprenticeshipService) in Brazil are major providers of trainingservices, benefiting from strong government andprivate sector support. Other investments havedeveloped a wide range of institutional deliverymodes for training workers; these forms includesecondary vocational schools, apprenticeships,nonformal skill training centers, post-secondarytechnical schools and polytechnics, and on-the-job training.

This unprecedented expansion of vocationaleducation and training programs in the LatinAmerican and Caribbean region has placedheavy demands not only on national budgets,but also on the administrative and managerialcapabilities of these countries. While somecountries have coped successfully with thesedemands, in others the capacity to effectivelyimplement change has lagged behind the estab-lishment and growth of training programs,resulting in training of low quality and consider-able institutional deterioration.

In recent years, increasingly constrained budgetson the part of host country governments anddonor organizations have raised concerns aboutmaximizing the efficiency of investment in allsubsectors of education, including vocationaleducation and training. As the U.S. Agency forInternational Development (A.I.D.) prepares toassist the developing world in the 1990s, it isevaluating its investment record and conductingbroad policy analysis in various subsectors of

education, including basic education, manage-ment education and training, participant train-ing (scholarship assistance), and vocationaleducation and training. This study was under-taken as part of this policy analysis.

This study examines the problem of implement-ing and sustaining vocational education andtraining programs in developing countries. Itspurpose is to identify lessons learned from theexperience of A.I.D., other donors, and develop-ing countries in the area of vocational educationand training, so that these lessons may shapefuture investment. This study will provide A.I.D.officers with operational guidelines for thedevelopment of future vocational education andtraining projects.

Given the limited resources available for thestudy, the attempt has not been to conductoriginal research but rather to synthesize theconclusions of research from the academiccommunity, A.I.D., other donors, and the devel-oping world. While this review is intended to beuseful to individuals and institutions worldwidethat are concerned with vocational educationand training, its main audience is A.I.D. officials.

The world of vocational education and training isvast, and the issues in the field are complex andinterrelated. In an effort to focus the study, twoprincipal questions guided this review:

What kinds of investments should be made invocational education and training?

How can program quality and sustainabilitybe strengthened?

Sources of InformationThis study has not been limited to A.I.D.'sexperience, because A.I.D. supports only a smallportion of the total annual investment in voca-

Introduction - 1

tional training and because A.I.D.'s experience isnot necessarily representative of all investment.The study does, however, attempt to drawconclusions that are relevant to the Latin Ameri-can and Caribbean region. The retrospectivenature of the review focuses attention largely onpast investments and to a lesser extent oncurrent investments. Some issues, therefore,may fall outside of recent experience, eventhough they may be important for the future.

Two sources of information were used to developthe conclusions in this study: (1) a review of theliterature on vocational education and training,and (2) a review of A.I.D.-funded projects,including case studies of two A.I.D.-supportedvocational education and training projects. First,a rtview of the literature on vocational educationand training was conducted, covering bothprimary and secondary sources of information.The literature review, which revealed a rich bodyof material on vocational training in developingcountries, provided the broader context withinwhich to interpret A.I.D. and other donor experi-ence.

The second source of information was theexperience A.I.D. has built up in the design andimplementation of assistance projects in voca-tional education and training. Over 50 A.I.D.projects in vocational education and trainingfrom 1973 to 1989 were examined, and 24 wereselected for more intensive review. The projectsvaried greatly in terms of objectives, scope,design, and target population; the evaluationreports that were reviewed varied greatly in formand substance. In most cases, uniform catego-ries of information could not be developed. Forthese reasons, it was difficult to analyze thereports and make meaningful overall compari-sons. Individually, however, the reports provideda wealth of information that complemented theconclusions of the literature review. Finally, casestudies were conducted of two representativeprojects the Advisory Council for HumanResource Development in Honduras and theBasic Skills Training Project in Jamaica.

DefinitionsThe field of vocational education and traininghas been hampered by definitional confusion.Multiple skill levels and markets for skills,different training modes and outcomes, widelyvarying institutional arrangements in both the

private and public sectors all these have madefor a vast and complex field with a myriad ofpolicy options.

In the broadest sense, all education contributesto the skill' needed for productive employmentand is, therefore, vocational. One could imagine,for example, an education tree with broadeducational preparation at the base and variousbranches leading to general or occupation-specific university programs at the top. Alongthe trunk of the tree, individuals progressthrough primary and general secondary educa-tion; along the branches, they receiveoccupation-specific training as economists orengineers.

This report focuses strictly on the purely voca-tional branches of the tree. Craftsmen, semi-skilled and skilled workers, and technicians(each a differing skill level) are trained alongdifferent branches of the tree using differenttraining modes, including apprenticeships,secondary and post-secondary institutions, skilltraining centers, and on-the-job or in-planttraining within the private sector.

In much of the world, vocational education andtraining is synonymous with secondary vocation-al schooling. For the purposes of this study,however, the whole breadth of the field is exam-ined not just secondary vocational schools.The aim, then, is to review this vast and complexfield, so that a complete set of policy options maybe outlined.

The term formal education refers to those pro-grams that are publicly financed and adminis-tered through ministries of education. Diplomasare granted to program completers, and gradu-ates can often matriculate to higher levels ofeducation. While training centers are mostcommonly associated with formal programs,there is a wide range of program types, includingdiversified schools, pre-vocational training, andshort-term training. Instruction can range fromthe broadly generic to the highly specific.

Nonfonnal training includes "any organizationaleducational activity outside the establishedformal system whether operating separately oras an important feature for some broader activity

that is intended to serve identifiable learningclientele and learning objectives" (Coombs,Prosser, and Ahmed 1975, 29). Training centers

Introduction - 2

are a primary institutional form, often as part ofnational training systems such as those found inmany Latin American countries. In-planttraining workshops, short-term programs, andapprenticeships are among the kinds of trainingthat may be offered in conjunction with centersor independently. In Latin America, training atcenters accounts for less than half of the enroll-ment in nonformal training institutions. Whilemany nonformal programs are offered throughgovernment agencies such as ministries of labor,others are financed by employers or other groupsand administered through independent agencies.

The term Warml training is used to distinguishlearning that is acquired casually on the job or athome; it is basically unorganized. Informaltraining is the primary way in which skillrequirements of the urban informal economicsector are addressed. In many areas, informaltraining has been the primary means throughwhich individuals k.am work skills. Onlyrecently have planners turned their attention tothe potential of informal training (Fluitman1989).

The terms "internal" and "external" efficiency canbe used in different ways. In this study internalefficiency refers to the training process theinternal program operations. Internal efficiencyis linked to program design, and hence toprogram quality, and is an outcome of efficientmanagement, skilled instruction, and sufficientand appropriate resources.

A program can have high internal efficiency, butnot teach content which is appropriate to theneeds of the labor market. In this case, theprogram will have low external efficiency.Edemal efficiency refers to the extent to whichtraining is appropriate to the identified need.Measures of external efficiency include bothcosts and outcomes (Metcalf 1985).

Organization of the ReportChapter II outlines the issues surroundinginvestment decisions in vocational education andtraining. The use of measures of externalefficiency is discussed, and the crucial impor-tance of the implementing context is explored,followed by an examination of programcomplexity.

Chapter M examines training alternatives,focusing on the benefits of each as well as on theimplementing requirements. Different formaland nonformal training alternatives are dis-cussed, and the training requirements of small-and medium-sized employers are examined.

Chapter IV looks at the organizational andsystem requirements of training projects. Itfocuses on the key elem( -Its of training at theoperational level man' ,ement development,instructional staff, and instructional resources.Next, it examines the requirements of the overalltraining system in which individual programsoperate.

Chapter V describes the range of fundingsources available for vocational education andtraining. In the past, training systems relied onsupport from general government revenues orfrom the payroll tax. Now donor organizationsare encouraging training systems to consider avariety of sources in order to diversify thefunding base. The chapter analyzes benefits andconstraints of each type of funding: generalpublic revenues, payroll taxes, user fees, andstudent loans.

Chapter VI summarizes the findings and conclu-sions of the study. The first section offersrecommendations for investment choices, withparticular emphasis on the Latin American andCaribbean region. The second provides guide-lines for strengthening project design, withemphasis on improving quality andsustainability.

Finally, to give readers a closer look at A.I.D.experience, the appendices contain a cursoryreview of 24 projects in vocational education andtraining and two in-depth case studies of proj-ects in Honduras and Jamaica.

Introduction - 3

irThe Policy Framework:

Making Investment

Decisions

This chapter outlines the issues surroundinginvestment decisions in vocational education andtraining. It presents a framework for formulatingvocational training policy based on considerationof two critical factors the implementing con-text and project complexity. Faced with limitedresources, both donor agencies and the govern-ments of developing nations are struggling toestablish investment priorities that will effectivelyfurther economic growth and development.Traditionally, such decisions have been madebased on manpower forecasting and rates ofreturn studies. These decisions, however, havefailed to consider the implementing environmentof a particular country and its ability to under-take new projects.

Policy makers, donors, and planners need tobroaden their perspectives to fully appreciate theimplementing context. This includes the currentlevel of economic development of the country aswell as its established training institutions andtheir ability to conduct new training programs.Making investment choices involves issues ofcost-effectiveness, national development policy,training capacity, and social and institutionalpreference. To succeed, investment choicesmust fit the implementing context.

Traditional Approaches to InvestmentDecisionsVocational education and training is a controver-sial subject, despite its essential role in economicdevelopment. This section examines the wayseconomists have assessed the need for trainingprograms and evaluated their costs and benefits.It is necessary to put these methods into per-spective by noting the value of the informationthey reveal and their limitations in guidinginvestment choices.

In recent years, no other discussion has domi-nated the literature as much as the question of

public investment in vocational training. Onegroup of critics, composed mainly of economistsand manpower specialists, has raised seriousquestions about the efficiency of national train-ing systems. Their arguments are based onrates of return and cost-effectiveness studies,which show low rates of return on government-financed programs. Some economists, such asPsacharopoulos (1987), suggest that govern-ments should not invest in vocational trainingbut rather should rely on the private sector todeliver training.

Other critics, mostly vocational educators andtechnical specialists, place less credence on coststudies and stress more qualitative factors suchas placement rates, training quality, and skillattainment. As Dougherty (1989, 1-2) observes,"There is so little overlap between their spheresof expertise that a communications gap appearsto be the rule rather than the exception. . . .Much of the controversy in the literature appearsto be attributable to antagonists unwittinglyfocusing on two different points on what is ineffect a continuous spectrum and then arguingat cross purposes."

Assessing Manpower RequirementsTraditionally, most decisions about resourceallocation for vocational training have beenbased on manpower forecasting. Projected needsfor trained workers are identified throughvarious survey procedures. Data are aggregatedat the national level by occupation or industry;seldom are data disaggregated to the local level.This information is used to identify shifts in thetotal rates of employment within industries,along with the rates of participation, unemploy-ment, and underemployment. Data on the agestructure of the labor force allow replacementrates to be calculated, but migration rates aremore difficult to project. Manpower and employ-ment data are linked to educational planning by

Policy Framework - 5

matching the various occupational categorieswith levels and kinds of educational attainment.

Despite its wide and continued use, this ap-proach to resource allocation is largely discredit-ed. Data are too aggregated to be useful, andprojections are too erratic to be reliable fordecision making (Dougherty 1989). Experienceshows that most projections are widely off themark. In addition, inappropriate data are oftencollected. National planning data tend to focuson the modem industrial sector, while consider-able local job expansion occurs in the informalsector. The planning model used in the modemsector, as well as the occupational structure andstaffing patterns of the more highly organizedindustries, is inapplicable as a model for small-and medium-sized enterprises (Davis 1980,1988). When planning is based on assumptionsthat are mainly relevant to the modern sector,the likelihood is increased that many traineeswill not be able to get jobs regardless of thequality of training because such jobs are notavailable. The low placement rates of manyvocational training programs can be attributed inpart to the fact that training is aimed at formalsector jobs that do not exist.

Although the placement rates of program com-pleters may be low, this does not mean thatinvestments in training are inappropriate, assome critics suggest. What it does mean is thatbetter ways of identifying training needs arerequired and that greater attention needs to begiven to linking training and employment (Castro1987). Recent M.D. experience ". . . generallysuggests that the single most important factor inthe negative assessment of vocational educationprojects has been the absence of a clear linkagebetween the project and employment opportuni-ties" (Bowels 1988, 33).

Current thinking shifts the emphasis of planningaway from forecasting the number of trainedworkers needed toward determining the kind andflow of information required, as well as improvingaccess to that Information. The needs of localemployers will be better anticipated and articu-lated if information is effectively channeled.Determining market changes and speeding upthe flow of information between training provid-ers and employers is essential (Hollister 1983;Richter 1984, 1986; Kelly et al. 1985; Dougherty1988, 1989). This approach is in markedcontrast to approaches which emphasize the

formulation of specific training targets (Bowels1988). It is process-oriented and results in ". . .the gradual molding of the labor force in adirection which is consistent with the generaldirection of development and which takes dueaccount of the relative costs of different types ofskill development" (Dougherty 1989, 5).

Assessing the Costs and Benefits at TrainingVarious research techniques are used to assessthe relative benefits of different forms of trainingand the comparative effectiveness of investmentsin vocational and basic education. This enablesplanners to gauge the comparative yield of onetraining investment versus another.

It is extremely difficult, however, to make mean-ingful evaluations of the value of training basedon cost-effectiveness studies. Every methodologyemployed has shortcomings (Levin 1988;Dougherty 1989), so that while the findings areuseful, they should not be applied dogmatically.Important differences in training modes may beoverlooked, resulting in a tendency to overgener-alize, and external influences may not be fullyconsidered. Maurice (1989, 4) observes, forexample, that ". . . cost effectiveness analysis invocational education never tells the whole story;and sometimes it tells so very little that itinadequately informs policy makers. . . ."

Evaluation of external efficiency of training doesyield some useful information. It provides ananalytical framework for decision making;comparisons between goals can be made, andrelative costs and benefits can be measured overtime. "Cost benefit analysis is an aid to judg-ment, however, and not a substitute for it, sincefuture costs and benefits can never be predictedwith certainty, and measurement, particularlywith respect to the likely benefits of a project,can never be completely precise" (Psacharopoulosand Woodhall 1985, 29).

Differentiating between Problems in TrainingDesign and Impl .mentationPerhaps the greatest shortcoming of theseapproaches to planning is that they fail todiscriminate between problems in the design oftraining and problems in the implementation oftraining. Program completers may not obtainemployment for various reasons perhaps thetraining was inappropriate to the needs of thelabor market or perhaps the training was poor in


quality. Manpower forecasting and cost-effec-tiveness studies tend to assume that the firstreason is the primary cause of low placementrates, although there is mounting evidence thatthe second is the real cause (Kelly et al. 1985;World Bank 1988; Educational DevelopmentCenter 1989; Herschbach 1989).

Whenever there is a failure to discriminatebetween the effectiveness of program design andof program implementation, considerable confu-sion in policy results. On the one hand, lessinvestment in training may be needed; on theother, greater emphasis on program improve-ment may be needed. The planner cannot easilydetermine which is the case. The inability ofthese methods to yield insight into the need forprogram improvement may be their greatestdrawback.

Implementing ContextIf assessments of the external efficiency ofvocational training yield incomplete data withwhich to make investment decisions, on whatbasis can policy makers and donors makedecisions? Policy makers are confronted with thetask of determining whether or not to invest intraining and, if so, to what degree and at whatlevel. Available financing plays a large part inthe decision. But policy makers and donors areincreasingly focusing their attention on theimplementing context in which training takesplace.

Contextual ElementsImplementing conditions relate both to macro-level conditions such as the political and eco-nomic climate, the social and cultural values,and the legal and bureaucratic structures, and tomicro-level conditions that relate specifically totraining systems. These include the availabilityof financial resources, the supply of trainedpersonnel, the existing institutional infrastruc-ture for training, and other human and materialresources that affect the long-term implementa-tion of training. The particular developmentpolicy of a country is as important a contextualelement as the current state of the economy.

Implementing conditions are uneven and chang-ing. Strong political support, for example, maybe combined with weak organizational capacity.Over time, what were adequate financial re-sources may be severely reduced. The impact of

environmental conditions, moreover, may not beconstant at all organizational levels. Line agencysupport, for example, may be strong, but policyguidance weak.

Middleton and Demsky (1988, 1) suggest that". . . the level of economic develvment, and theconsequent size and dynamism of industrialemployment, exerts powerful influence on thesuccess of investment in vocational educationand training." Nadler and Tushman (1983, 115)identify as important considerations ". . .institutions, groups, individuals, and eventsoutside of the boundaries of the organizationbeing analyzed, but having a potential impact onthe organization. . . ." Rondinelli, Middleton,and Verspoor (1989) identify political-administrative, economic, and organizationalfactors in the environment which must beaddressed in program planning. Verspoor (1989)identifies a stable and sufficient source offunding as an important contextual element, andBowels (1988) emphasizes the importance ofeconomic factors to the success of training.

Within a given country, an interrelated set ofpolitical, social, institutional, and economicfactors the implementing context deter-mines whether or not a particular trainingintervention can be implemented successfully.Any type of training intervention can be imple-mented cost-effectively if the implementingcontext is supportive. Planning and decisionmaking must be based on an understanding ofthe context and on an assessment of the likeli-hood that a particular intervention can besuccessfully implemented. The failure to ade-quately identify and accommodate criticalcontextual conditions can seriously weaken atraining project and impair its sustainability(Nadler and Tushman 1983; Cohen, Grindle, andWalker 1985; Middleton, Woldemariam, andMayo-Brown 1986). As Verspoor (1989, 131)contends, -There is usually a combination ofdesign, implementation and environmentalfactors that reinforce each other."

It is particularly important, therefore, to assessconditions in the implementing context beforeselecting training interventions. Just because acertain training alternative appears to be cost-effective does not mean that it can be successful-ly implemented in a particular country, or,indeed, that it will address a specific develop-ment need (Zymelman 1976; Castro 1979;


Corvalan 1979; Herschbach et al. 1985;Middleton and Demsky 1988; Dougherty 1989).If the implementing context is not supportive, anindustry-based program can fail just as readilyas a school-based program.

By focusing on the implementing context, thepolicy maker can examine both the internal andexternal efficiency of training. The artificialbarrier between design-effectiveness and imple-mentation-effectiveness that characterizesexternal efficiency studies is breached. It ispossible to identify the factors that affect pro-gram implementation and sustainability. At thesame time, a clearer picture emerges concerningthe kinds of training modes that can be imple-mented in a given context. This assists decisionmakers in program choice. Of particular impor-tance is an assessment of the policy environmentand the economic context.

Policy EnvironmentThe single most important environmental condi-tion that affects the effectiveness of traininginterventions is the policy environment (Bowels1988). Unless the policy environment is sup-portive, quality training cannot be initiated andsustained. The outcome of training is inextrica-bly linked to the policy environment.

There are two important ways in which the policyenvironment impacts on training. First, publicpolicy must establish the macro-economicconditions that make it possible for employers tobenefit from training. Government policy mustsupport the conditions political, economic,and social essential for the stability andexpansion of enterprise.

Tax policies, for example, must favor investment,business expansion, and market stability.Working capital must be available, so thatemployers can upgrade and expand. Currencyregulations must not impede supplies of materi-als, machinery, equipment, and spare parts.Barriers to markets must be removed, especiallyin the case of small employers. Labor regula-tions must support staff development, andincentives for investing in training must bepresent. These conditions determine whetheremployers seek out and make use of trainingservices, and they affect the relative usefulnessof training services (A.I.D. 1987; Grindle, Mann,and Shipton 1987).

Second, public policy must establish conditionsthat support not only the general economicclimate but also the ability to provide effectivetraining. These conditions influence whethersociety accepts and supports training interven-tions, determining the kinds of programs thatcan be implemented and affecting the qualityand effectiveness of training (Herschbach 1985).

Financial constraints, for example, may precludea government from providing the funds needed tomeet training costs. Political control of staffingmay interfere with the recruiting of trainedindividuals. There may be competition for thecontrol and use of resources, or the hiring andpromotion policies of firms may work as trainingdisincentives. Society may not support thedevelopment of strong working relationshipsbetween training it stitutions and employers, orconflicts may exist among cot ipeting groupssuch as unions, employers' associations, minis-try officials, producers, and various ethnic ortribal groups. Employers may perceive trainingas a means of pressuring for higher wages,giving an unfair advantage to business competi-tors, or as an indirect way of imposing taxation.

Political interference can range from the benignand subtle to the overt and hostile, and mani-fests itself in a variety of forms. In the 24 A.I.D.projects reviewed for this study (see Appendix A),political interference was an important environ-mental condition impinging on program success.In the Human Resources Development Projectimplemented in Djibouti, for example, a criticalproject component was eliminated from theproject plan by the government, ". . . thusradically altering both the activities and theresults obtained" (Norris 1984, 6). In the VehicleMaintenance Training Project implemented inEgypt, a disagreement developed among USADD,the contractor, and the local agency over respon-sibilities largely because political issues were notresolved initially (USAID/Egypt 1984). Theoriginal objectives of the Basic Skills TrainingProject in Jamaica were distorted throughpolitical control, resulting in the diversion offunds from some project elements to otheractivities and the addition of a costly traininglayer to an already overextended system (seeAppendix B).


Economic ContextThe economic context is another importantenvironmental condition affecting the implemen-tation of training programs.

First, for most institutional forms of vocationaleducation to succeed there must be an increas-ing demand for labor in the formal sector (Bowels1988). Unless the demand for labor is rising,training grach,ates have few employment possi-bilities, employers are not interested in collabo-rating with training providers, and few resourcesare available for training. Planners tend to beoverly optimistic, often projecting many more jobopenings in the formal sector than will ever exist(Bowels 1988; Davis 1988). Most estimates onwhich training is based predict high levels ofdemand regardless of the long-term economicoutlook, thus leading to mistaken decisions andpoor use of resources (Dougherty 1969).

Second, the income level of a country affects thesuccess of training interventions. This is one ofthe most crucial elements to consider in decisionmaking. Without a threshold level of nationalincome, vocational programs cannot be success-fully implemented over the long term. The moresuccessful national training systems of LatinAmerica, such as SENA in Colombia and SENAIin Brazil, are those in middle-income countries.The less successful attempts to establish nation-al training systems are generally in the low-income countries.

Middle-income countries enjoy considerablygreater potential than low-income countries forimplementing training programs of all types. Theoverall resource level of middle-income countriesis greater their economies are more robustand their management capabilities more mature.They are able to develop the elements requiredfor the successful implementation of trainingprograms, including management systems,instructional resources, and evaluation andcertification systems. The trainee populationtends to have a higher education level; thus, ahigher level of training can be offered. Moreplacement opportunities exist for programcompleters; greater potential exists for linkageswith employers; and employers are more willingto support training. These and other conditionsmake it possible for middle-income countries tooffer a broad range of training options, frominstitution-based to enterprise-based programs(Middleton and Demsky 1988).

In contrast, low-income countries lack thematerial and human resources to develop strongcapacities for program implementation. Admin-istrative and management support for trainingprograms is generally weak. Training programsare not able to recruit, train, and retain enoughproficient managers to successfully run pro-grams. At the institutional level, programimplementation is also weak. It is difficult torecruit and retain qualified teachers because oflow salaries; instructional resources are in shortsupply; curriculum development activities arerestricted; and certification and evaluationsystems are lacking. There is no capacity toexperiment with and adapt programs. The unitcost of instruction tends to be high becauseprojects are relatively modest and economies ofscale cannot be realized. Project costs in low-income countries tend to be higher than in moreaffluent countries. Finally, enterprise capacity isunderdeveloped, and employment demand isusually weak. Opportunities for collaborationwith industry and business are limited, andvirtually no possibilities exist for financialsupport from employers (Middleton and Demsky1988).

Most A.I.D.-financed training projects are target-ed at low-income countries. Project priorities arebased on the perceived need for income andemployment generation. While low-incomecountries may have the greatest need for trainingprograms, they have the least capability forimplementing such projects. The result is thatprograms are established but cannot be sus-tained. Project complexity usually exceeds thecapacity for successful implementation.

Box II-1 summarizes the steps involved inassessing the implementing context.

Project ComplexityProject complexity directly affects project imple-mentation and sustainability, as well as thechoice of what kinds of training programs will bedeveloped. The relationship between projectcomplexity and the implementing context iscrucial. Complex training projects require highlysupportive conditions to be implemented suc-cessfully.

Complexity manifests itself in a number ofdifferent ways. At the institutional level, Fullan(1989, 21) observes, "Complexity can be definedin terms of (1) the number of components of


23

practice affected, (2) the magnitude of differencefrom existing practices and beliefs, and (3) thedifficulty of learning the new practice." Complex-ity also depends on whether a project focuses ona specific activity (e.g., building a facility) orencompasses organizational development (e.g.,strengthening management). In the 'ormer case,the specific activity is of primary cont,m, and,although the organizational structure is impor-tant, it remains in the background. The projecttends to be more focused, stable, and amenableto completion within a set time frame. In thelatter case, the amount of initial uncertainty isconsiderably greater; relations are complex andmust evolve from the development process; andmodifications involve changes in what people doand think. "Achieving successful change,"Fullan (1989, 8) suggests, "is difficult because itmust contend with a personal and collectivelearning process on the part of individualsworking in an organizational context."

Over the course of the past decade, the range ofproject activities has broadened, both at nationaland donor levels. Project objectives have becomemore ambitious as emphasis has shifted frombuilding and equipping facilities to systemconcerns, such as strengthening organizational

structures, investing in instructional develop-ment, conducting teacher training, and fosteringinstitutional improvement. This shift has beennecessary in order to improve the quality andsustainability of projects. Without strengthenedsystem and organization capabilities, specificdonor interventions have a greater probability offailing (Middleton, Woldemariam, and Mayo-Brown 1986; Middleton and Demsky 1988;Dougherty 1989; Fullan 1989; Rondinelli,Middleton, and Verspoor 1989; Verspoor 1989).

Improving the way training organizations operaterequires, in general, a greater emphasis on thedevelopment of the dynamic, and less certain,project components, such as human resources.Complex organizational requirements must beaddressed, and interventions must be compre-hensive and sustained over time. "Internationaldonors and governments of developing coun-tries," observe Rondinelli, Middleton, andVerspoor (1989, 46), "soon discovered that thoseprojects for improving the performance of educa-tional systems are far more complex than thosefor physical construction."

Project complexity is also a function of theparticular training mode as well as of the scope

of implementation. Establishingand maintaining training centers,

BOX II-1Assessing the Strength of the Implementing Context

The probability of successfully implementing a particular trainingproject is relative arid depends mainly on the context, or environ-ment, in which the program occurs. Donors have limited influenceand control over the context; only marginal changes can be madein some factors. The most prudent policy option, then, is to assessthe strength and stability of the implementing context and baseprogramming decisions on this assessment. "Although judgmen-tal, the assessments can indicate the degree of uncertainty.stability, and complexity likely to affect the implementation of aproject" (Rondinelli. Middleton, and Verspoor 1989, 49).

Project selection and design require three critical steps(Herschbach 1985):

First, donors and project planners must assess the implement-ing context to determine what conditions are present andoperating in a supportive manner.

Second. they must gauge the degree to which nonsupportiveconditions can be changed.

Third. they must carefully weigh the consequences of projectimplementation if the requisite conditions cannot be developed.

for example, is a complex under-taking. And when implementa-tion occurs on a regional or na-tional scale, the complexity of theproject substantially increasesbecause of the sheer number ofinstitutions involved. Similarly,implementing a single employer-based training program is muchsimpler than addressing theneeds of numerous employers.When a training program linkspublic institutions and privatefirms, the complexity increasesstill further. In other words, asmore organizational levels areinvolved, the scope and complexi-ty of a given project increasesignificantly.

The administrative and manage-ment requirements of a projectvary with its complexity. Lesscomplex projects place demandsmainly on the operating unit,


such as an individual training institution orplacement center. As project complexity increas-es, major administrative and managementrequirements extend to line agencies, such asdistrict educational offices; to support agencies,such as curriculum units; and to policy andplanning agencies and groups, such as minis-tries or employer organizations (Verspoor 1989).The development of sufecient administrative andmanagement capacity for project implementationmay call for the development of organizationalcapacity at each of these levels. Project complex-ity must be accommodated in project design, andthe choice of project activities must be based onan assessment of implementing capacity.

The relationship between the size and thecomplexity of a project is direct but not exact.Larger projects tend to be more complex becausethey involve a greater number of components,span a number of organizational levels, andembrace different and competing groups ofindividuals. When implementation capacity islacking, it is crucial to reduce project size.Project size, however, is often determined by anassessment of the particular development "need,"or by the desire to demonstrate support for agovernment or agency, and not necessarily by afull assessment of implementation capacity.Although project planners may examine thetechnical feasibility of project implementation,they usually do so in a perfunctory manner,undertaking little more than a general reviewrather than a detailed analysis of existing humanand institutional capabilities. Project size andcomplexity should be based on an assessment ofimplementation capacity rather than on anassessment of needs, because needs will alwaysexceed implementation capacity.

Given the low level of implementation capacity inmany developing countries. A.I.D.- and otherdonor-assisted projects tend to be too complex.The projects have many objectives, some ofwhich are too complicated or too ambitious to beaccomplished given the proposed time frame andthe existing resources. In over half of the A.I.D.projects reviewed, many of the objectives werenot realized for this very reason (see Appendix A).

Relationship Between Context andComplexityThe relationship between implementing contextand project complexity is critical, for it deter-mines the degree to which projects will be

successfully implemented. Complex projectshave complex management requirements, and ifthe requirements far exceed the existing manage-ment capacity, there is little chance that projectimplementation will succeed. In that case,project design and scope must be altered.

As project design becomes more complex, under-standing and accommodating the relationshipbetween the implementing context and projectcomplexity become more crucial. The followingfigure and discussion describe the possible levelsof the relationship, and examples from the A.I.E:.projects reviewed (see Appendix A) illustratethese levels.

FIGURE 11-1

Project Outcome as a Function of Supportand Design

COMPLEXITY OF DESIGN

`1.-CC

a.a.

co0zizZw2w..,a.2u.0w

J

x

Low Support/Low Complexity

Under conditions of low support and low com-plexity (A), the most likely project outcome ismoderate success in the initial implementationphase. and the strong probability that the projectwill not be sustained after donor support isconcluded. Because complexity is low, theproject can be implemented successfully with thesupport and backing of the donor agency. Butonce this backing is withdrawn, the implement-ing environment is too weak for the project tosurvive on its own. (See example in Box 11-2.)


BOX 11-2Low Support/Low Ccxmplexity

In the Small Business and Employment Gener-ation Project, USAID undertook to improve thewell-being of low-income youth in Quito, Ecua-dor, by expanding the opportunities for voca-tional training. The project provided assistanceto the Quito Working Boys' Center for the designand implementation of pre-vocational trainingprograms in carpentry and automobile repair, aswell as in small business organization andmanagement.

Although simple in its original design, theproject ultimately failed when USAID increasedthe outputs expected from the training. NeitherUSAID nor the Working Boys' Center had theresources needed to meet the new targets. Overtime, the quality of training and the physicalcondition of the new shops for carpentry andautomobile repair deteriorated. In expanding theobjectives of the project, USAID pushed theproject beyond its own capacity to oversee andthe host institution's capacity to implement.

Under these conditions, the most prudent policyoption is a "permanent pilot" program (Verspoor1989). Initial funding is modest, and the donorexpects to remain involved for a considerabletime. The donor cannot withdraw completelybecause the project would collapse. As long asthe project is sustained by the donor, activitiesshould not be expanded on a national scale.

The major benefit of the permanent pilot ap-proach is that it allows for the introduction of apotentially useful innovation, thus demonstratingthe possibility of change. The donor maintainsits presence, while a small but effective cadre istrained and successful change demonstrated. Atthe same time, a more favorable implementingcontext can be cultivated. If this is achieved,then the project could move to incrementalexpansion.

Low Support/High ComplexityComplex projects should not be designed underconditions of low support (B) because of the highlikelihood of eventual failure. An implementingenvironment that is already weak will be furtherstressed by the requirements posed by a complexproject.

Because of perceived need, large and complexprojects are often designed for countries with lowimplementing capacities. Although these coun-tries have the greatest needs, they have the leastability to manage projects. Many A.I.D. projectsare implemented under conditions of low supportand high complexity, and the outcome is poorimplementation and low sustainability. Whenproject design is based on identified need ratherthan on an analysis of implementing capacity,this is the most likely outcome. (See example inBox II-3.)

BOX 11-3Low Support/High Complexity

The Manpower Planning, Training, and Em-ployment Project addressed the need for amanpower reporting and planning system inJamaica. The system would collect relevantemployment data and supply them to planners.employers, and job-hunters. In addition,information would be provided to traininginstitutions to help them better target theirprograms. As designed, the project was fairlycomplex. with six separate components to becompleted in four years.

The project required different government andprivate sector organizations to coordinate theimplementation of complicated activities. With-out careful coordination, the project would notsucceed. Sophisticated planning techniqueswere designed but could not be implemented.Complex tasks were undertaken with insufficienttime and resources. In the end, governmentpriorities shifted, and the project was leftwithout host country interest or support. Mostoutputs were not achieved, and there was nofollow-through on project activities.

Under these conditions, it is important to includeelements that will enhance successful implemen-tation. The best policy option is to designrelatively simple projects with modest manage-ment requirements and sustained donor assis-tance.

High Support/Low ComplexityA scenario of high support and low complexity(C) offers the most promising set of conditions forsuccessful project implementation. Interventionscan be carried out over a relatively short periodof time. Modest programs can be sequentially

Policy Framework - 12 23

expanded with a high probability of success aslong as complexity does not increase and supportdoes not diminish. (See example in Box II-4.)

BOXHigh Support/Low Complexity

In the late 1970s, Paraguay experienced a periodof strong economic growth. There was a highdemand for skilled workers and mid-leveltechnicians and a large potential labor pool ofunskilled laborers and rural workers. TheSalesian Development Institute, a private volun-tary organization with broad experience workingamong the rural poor, wanted to develop voca-tional training programs to prepare unskilledworkers for jobs with industry.

USAID provided assistance to the Institute indeveloping and implementing training programs.Project objectives were clear and specific. TheInstitute was deeply committed to the projectand had a strong management structure able toabsorb its requirements. All objectives of theproject were met. A successful training programwas instituted instructors trained, curriculadeveloped, facilities improved, equipment pro-cured. The Institute increased enrollment from150 to 320 students, and 90 percent of thegraduates went on to work in the fields in whichthey were trained.

Training projects conducted by private voluntaryorganizations have tended to be very successful.In general, these organizations have strongmanagement structures and are highly commit-ted to their target populations. The success rateof project implementation with private voluntaryorganizations is high due to the modest scale ofactivities and the strong support provided by theimplementing agency.

High Support/High Complexity

Under conditions of high support and highcomplexity (D), success is likely only if the truecomplexity of project implementation is fullyconsidered. Although support may be high, atraining system's capacity to absorb rapid andcomplex change may be limited. Even under thebest of conditions, institutions cannot absorbchange faster than their ability to develop the re-quired structures. (See example in Box 11-5.)

BOX 11-5High Support/High Complexity

The vocational skills training system of Jamaicawas spread throughout nine government minis-tries, resulting in a loosely structured, uncoordi-nated, and underfunded collection of trainingservices. The Basic Skills Training Project wasdesigned to upgrade certain elements of thissystem, coordinate activities, and strengthen tiesto the private sector. Both USAID and theGovernment of Jamaica committed considerablefinancial resources to the project. The projecthad strong political support from the PrimeMinister's office.

The project was highly ambitious and complex,with major components in three different govern-ment agencies. New activities involving plan-ning, policy making. and training design andimplementation had to be carried out in relative-ly short time periods, with no allowance forexperimentation. The project placed extremelyheavy demands on a management structurealready weak and overburdened.

Because of government interference, projectresources were concentrated in one componentto the detriment of others. The output of semi-skilled workers increased, but the output ofskilled and semi-professional workers in areas ofcritical need decreased. Overall placement ratesfor graduates from project-supported trainingacademies were poor, ranging from a low of 3percent to a high of 12 percent. Program costswere very high, making it difficult for the govern-ment to sustain operations once the project wasconcluded. Finally, the training system remainsseriously underfunded, poorly managed, andonly loosely linked with business and industry.

A strategy of incremental expansion, in which acomplex innovation is adopted in stages, ensuresa higher probability of success. Initial projectgoals are modest; considerable experimentationoccurs with ongoing monitoring, assessment,and correction; and large-scale expansion occursonly after the implementing institutions havedemonstrated the ability to perform. A relativelylong period of time should be allowed for thisprocess, with the final objective being compre-hensive, large-scale implementation of thetraining program.


Policy Makers Must Broaden Range a AnalysisPolicy makers are confronted with difficultinvestment decisions. Training investmentsmust be sustainable as well as cost-effective.Both internal program efficiency and externalefficiency must be addressed in decision making,requiring an understanding of the implementingcontext and of program complexity. Any type oftraining intervention can be implemented cost-effectively if the implementing context is support-ive. The challenge faced by policy makers whenmaking investment decisions about vocationaltraining is to broaden the analysis to accuratelyassess the level of support from the implement-ing context and the degree of complexity in theproject design.


This chapter reviews the implementing require-ments of the major training alternatives and theirappropriate uses. Formal vocational programsare discussed first, followed by nonformalprograms, both institution-based and employer-based, as well as the small, targeted programsthat are often funded by donors to addressspecial needs. A concluding section examines thetraining requirements of employers small- andmedium-sized employers in particular.

Although vocational education and training is anextremely varied enterprise, planners tend tothink of training alternatives as located along acontinuum that ranges from formal vocationaleducation at one end to simple on-the-jobtraining at the other. Metcalfs (1985, 9) com-ment is typical: "At one extreme is secondaryschool-based training. Next comes training ininstitutions like the vocational secondary schoolsin Israel or the Indian Training Institutes. Thencomes the South American-type sandwichtraining of the SENAI or SENATI variety. Finallythere is firm-based training. . . ." Furthermore,planners often assume that one form of trainingcan easily be substituted for another, with theobvious choice being that form which yields thegreater rate of return.

Both of these assumptions lead to faulty invest-ment decisions. The idea of a continuum impliesa continuity and a homogeneity that do not exist.Dougherty's observation (1989. 1) is germane:

Training is infinitely more complex anddiversified than formal education. Train-ing providers are more heterogeneous anddispersed, course lengths range fromhours to years, applications range from thepurely manual to the most abstract. Inimposing some order on this chaos, it isdifficult to avoid what Claudio Castro calls

Training Alternatives:

Selecting the

Appropriate Program

the pitfalls of generalization and aggrega-tion, the first being an unwarranted pre-sumption that a particular training ar-rangement will be equally effective in othercontexts . . . and the second being atendency to neglect the variety of trainingprovision that is masked by the use ofsuch terms as apprenticeship or vocationaleducation.

Training modes differ significantly in theirimplementing requirements. Establishing anin-service training program for new job entrantsin an unskilled occupation, for example, is mucheasier than establishing a pre-ernploymenttraining program for technicians. A less obvioussource of divergence is the relationship betweena training program and the implementingcontext in an unsupportive environment, evena relatively simple training mode will be difficultto implement.

Another important way in which training modesdiffer is in terms of the training product. Certainkinds of programs are better suited to addressingcertain trainee populations and their skillrequirements. For example, although formal andnonforxnal training centers share similar imple-menting requirements, they perform distincttraining functions. One offers pre-employmenttraining; the other serves workers. Similarprogram types vary, also, according to theimplementing agency. An apprenticeship pro-gram run by a local vocational center will besubstantially different from one conducted by aLade association.

Planners must consider the real, if sometimessubtle, differences among program types inmaking investment choices if they are to estab-lish a training configuration that is both cost-effective and functional. As a result of economic

Training Alternatives - 15

9 9

development and diversification, a country'straining needs change over time. Furthermore,developing countries follow very different devel-opment paths with correspondingly differenttraining requirements. What works and isappropriate in one country at one time is notnecessarily the best option in another country orat another time (Middleton, Ziderman, and VanAdams 1989).

Because workers and technicians can learn theirskills in many ways, there are no simple answersto guide policy makers and donors as theychoose how to invest in vocational education andtraining. The political and economic environ-ments of developing countries are complex anduncertain, and the most prudent policy is torecognize the need for diverse training paths.Box III -1 sets forth key elements of a comprehen-sive vocational training policy.

BOX M-1Key Elements of Vocaticsoal Training Policy

Planners and policy makers must consider five key issues in developing a comprehensive vocationaltraining policy if it is to truly address the needs of a particular nation.

Training foryoii h. The qualification profile of the majority of young people who will be seeking employ-ment must be addressed. Skill formation, in whatever form it takes, must build on a solid foundation.The most successful vocational training policies emphasize the need to strengthen the basic educationsystem so that there is a literate population that can profit from training. Vocational training policyshould not be formulated separately from general policy to improve and expand primary and secondaryeducation; vocational training is not a substitute for basic skills development (Salome and Charmes1988). In countries where the skill base is weak and where youth have no opportunity to gain pre-employment vocational training, investments in training that complements general education are pro-ductive. Such training should be considered part of basic education, however, not specific skill prepara-tion (McMahon 1988).

Thrining for unskilled worioers. The qualification profile of the unskilled, working-age population of acountry must be addressed. In many developing countries, there is a large working population thatlacks minimum basic skills. Such workers have had little opportunity to obtain formal schooling orparticipate in skill development programs. Economic development cannot be built on such a foundation.A comprehensive training policy must address the need of unskilled workers for basicskills developmentin order to profit from vocational training.

1"rairaing needs of small- and medium -sized firms. Institutional structures and programs must be devel-oped to meet the training needs of small- and medium-sized employers. Although these employers havethe least capacity to train workers, they have the greatest potential to generate employment. Thepredicament of Third World countries," Castro (1987, 606) observes, "is that industry is weak and so areits collective bodies." A comprehensive training policy must address the needs of small- and medium-sized employers and will involve using combinations of institutional and employer-based training as wellas nontraditional forms (Fluitman 1989).

Tedmolow and training. The introduction of new technology must be given priority. Almost all newtechnology in developing countries comes from the industrialized nations (Westphal. Yung, and Pursell1981). and training programs become obsolete if they make no provision for the introduction of newtechnology. Regardless of the training form, there must be a way of infusing instruction with state-of-the-art knowledge and technique. In some countries. the problem of retraining and upgrading existingworkers may be greater than the problem of providing pre-employment skills training for new workers.

Links between employers and training institutions. Finally, bridges must be built between employers andtraining institutions. Better articulation ensures a more constructive use of resources. The changingdynamics of labor markets require effective flows of information between employers and training institu-tions, so that training can truly address the needs of employers.


Formal Training ProgramsFormal training programs are publicly financedprograms administered by ministries of educa-tion usually, but not exclusively, at thesecondary level. These programs provide school-ing for students who are judged less academical-ly talented than those who attend academic highschools. Program completers are usually award-ed a diploma; in some cases, they may be able tomatriculate into higher levels of education.

Formal programs vary considerably in terms ofthe type of training offered and the studentpopulation served. Instruction ranges fromgeneral pre-vocational preparation to highlyjob-specific training, from three- and four-yearprograms to short-term training. One of thedistinguishing characteristics of formal programsis the academic instruction provided, in contrastto nonformal centers and employer-basedprograms which focus on narrowly defined jobskills.

The needs of large formal educational systemsare so great that donor funds usually have littleimpact Donor funds tend to replace, ratherthan enhance, government funds. In general,A.I.D. has provided only limited assistance toformal vocational programs. This is especiallytrue in the Latin American and Caribbean region,where most middle-income countries have rela-tively well-established formal vocational pro-grams. The trend in recent years among donoragencies has been to invest in nonformal train-ing, particularly training centers and programstargeted to special groups such as unemployedwomen and youth (Middleton 1988; seeAppendix A).

Implementing ConditionsFormal training programs require sustaineddevelopment over a long period of time. Theirmaturation process is relatively slow on theone hand because of the complexity of thetraining systems involved and on the other handbecause of the unsupportive implementingcontexts found in many developing countries.Implementing conditions must be favorable ifformal training programs are to succeed. Aparticular program must be chosen for itspotential to contribute to the overall social andeconomic development of the country.

Formal vocational educational systems are notconsidered cost-effective investments when:

the economy is E mating (Bowels 1988);

programs are internally inefficient (McMahon1988);

students are boarded (McMahon 1988);

programs are underenrolled and dropoutrates are high (Bowels 1988; Moock andBellew 1988); and

curricula are outdated (McMahon 1988).

Most low-income countries do not have theadministrative and financial capacity to success-fully implement formal vocational educationalsystems (Chapman and Windham 1985; Middle-ton and Demsky 1988). Limitations imposed bybudget restrictions are compounded by deficien-cies in human resources. Shortages of qualifiedstaff are common. These conditions contributeto poor instruction, which is one of the mostserious problems associated with formal voca-tional education.

Under conditions of resource constraints, donorsshould make modest investments that have ahigh probability of being sustained. The trainingsystem should not be overexpanded. Alternatefinancing sources should be explored to supportgovernment investment, and cooperative ar-rangements should be developed with industriesto share facilities and equipment and to ex-change technology and instructors. In suchprograms, not only are costs reduced, butinstructional obsolescence is also countered.The obsolescence of instructional content is amajor problem in formal programs, which tend tolag six to ten years behind industry in equipmentand technology (International Labor Office 1997).

In middle-income countries, formal vocationaleducation programs can be successfully imple-mented if resources are sufficient to attract andretain qualified managerial and instructionalstaff, to provide instructional materials, and tolink programs effectively with industry (Middle-ton and Demsky 1988; Dougherty 1989). Formalprograms require high initial outlays of capitaland concomitant supplies of recurrent funds. Tomaintain program quality, adequate annualoutlays must be made for supplies, materials.


and maintenance. The availability of recurrentfunding is a major factor affecting programquality, more so than the size of capitalinvestment.

Successful formal programs provide trainingopportunities for their management staff andinstructors. They establish professional certifica-tion systems and implement supervision andmonitoring, linked to ongoing in-service trainingand institutional development (Herschbach1989). The availability of instructional materialsalso contributes to the quality of training pro-grams. Successful programs invest in thedevelopment of curricula and of instructionalmaterials, and they are flexible in terms ofcourse content, methods of instruction, andmode of delivery. Successful programs providesupport services to assist students in making thetransition from school to work.

General versus Specific TrainingMuch of the criticism of formal vocationaltraining programs stems from the fact that thetraining is less specific than expected (WorldBank 1986). This criticism is largely misplaced.As discussed in Box III-2, broad, general voca-tional training produces program completers whoare more flexible and adaptable in the labormarket. Instruction includes general educationas well as technical content, thus schooling stu-dents in basic academic skills. Students gainthe technical and theoretical foundation for morespecific training that could be given just beforeactual job placement.

Standardized programs can be offered to relative-ly large numbers of students, most of whomwould be too young to have made definite careerchoices. Standardization facilitates instructionaldevelopment, makes it possible to achieve econo-

mies of scale, and allowsstudents more options.

BOX M-2Value of Formal Programs:

Laying the Foundation for Successful Workers

General programs should not be expected to result in high levels of directjob placement. They provide instruction in broad occupational fields, thusestablishing the foundation for graduates to enter a number of relatedfields with a minLnum of additional training just prior to or at the time ofemployment. Formal programs can achieve substantial flexibility in theirgraduates an important asset in uncertain economic markets wherelabor needs cannot be estimated with any accuracy. As Dougherty (1989,71) observes, "The broader and less occupation-specific the definition ofvocational education, the greater the absorptive capacity is likely to be."Formal training, then, should be considered the first step in occupationalpreparation, not the end point.

Formal training programs are very much characterized by the nature oftheir student bodies; thus. admission policy plays a large role in definingthe institution. Schools that enroll low achieving students are character-ize

document resume ed 354 337 ce 063 046 author … · 2014. 5. 5. · document resume. ed 354 337 ce...

Documents