German training revisited: an appraisal of corporatist governance

Abstract

Purpose -The aim of this paper is to re-examine the unique political economy of Germany's dual apprenticeship training model and its underlying philosophy of corporatist governance. It responds to recent arguments suggesting that Germany's collectivist skill regime is under threat, increasingly giving way to the introduction of "segmentalism". Design/methodology/approach -The paper reviews the political roots of a training system, which is moulded and shaped by corporatist interventions and neocorporatist compromises. It applies "public choice" theory to different interest groups in Germany's training market. The focus is on the German apprenticeship system as a social and political institution. The paper is positioned in the tradition of inductive enquiry, which draws on an interpretive framework and is informed by reference to a cross-section of the extant literature in several social science disciplines. Findings -The German training system is the product of a wider post-war consensus, yet continues to face social inequality concerns, which culminate in significant economic and societal costs. Despite modernisation attempts, the German apprenticeship is the outcome of a complicated political process, linked to its historical origins, which allows for a considerable degree of self-interest alongside its corporatist roots and values. Amongst Germany's social partners, heterogeneous self-interests and corporatism can co-exist, thus identifying an alternative model to collectivism and segmentalism. Originality/value -The paper rejects recent suggestions that the German system moves towards a model of "segmentalism". Instead, it interprets the German system as an example for a specific socio-political constellation where significant self-interests and corporatist rules can co-exist. Against this background, it demonstrates that continuing demands to copy the German apprenticeship model -if thought desirable -are unlikely to be successful unless this tangled web of political processes and interests is fully understood.

Why Triple Helix governance is useful to dual apprenticeship systems

“…Apprenticeship systems require attentive governance, which is often the result of complex political processes (Lange, 2012). Apprenticeship systems evolve over time: in Germany, the traditional state-driven steering-by-law approach has been replaced by a wider governance.…”

Los retos de la colaboración público-privada en la implementación de la formación profesional dual. Una revisión sistemática

“…Las evidencias señalan la importancia de un alto nivel de cooperación y consenso, junto a un ágil intercambio de ideas y demandas (INAP, 2013;Mongkhonvanit, 2017). Lange (2012) aboga por comprender la relación entre instituciones públicas, el mundo empresarial y los sindicatos antes de iniciar la transferencia del modelo. Establecer un trabajo previo en cuestiones como la capacidad de organización, diálogo y cooperación entre los agentes sociales es fundamental (Coletti, 2019;Deissinger, 2015) dado que una masa crítica de oferta y demanda, no puede ser creada de forma artificial ni instantánea (Eichhorst et al, 2015).…”

The Challenges for Indonesia to Integrate Dual Vocational Education and Training System

“…Cooperation between the numerous actors engaged in a dual VET programme's governance (essentially, public institutions, the corporate world, and labour unions) is one of the primary challenges to the successful introduction and growth of such a programme. Numerous studies (Bolli et al, 2018;Coletti, 2019;Deissinger, 2015;Lange, 2012;Mongkhonvanit, 2017;O'higgins, 2001) have highlighted the need to develop the capacity for organization, participation, and cooperation among all the agents involved to address the relationship between demand and supply of skills in the labour market.…”