Erhalten Sie Zugang zu diesem und mehr als 300000 Büchern ab EUR 5,99 monatlich.
- Herausgeber: Die Keure Publishing
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Französisch
An insight into PES policies and practices.
Public Employment Services are confronted with the ever-changing world of work from various angles: as organisation, as employer and as key actor on the labour market. Decisive mega trends such as globalisation, demographic shifts or migration, driven by tremendous technological developments and characterised by a considerable extent of complexity and volatility, have a huge impact on our labour markets and finally on PES.
Guiding citizens through this (r)evolution and supporting them to manage necessary or desired transitions is a shared challenge of European PES and a huge public responsibility PES are actively taking up. Thereby PES are contributing to well-balanced labour markets which are essential for sustainable growth and for maintaining our social welfare supporting systems.
PES jointly develop solutions through exchanging and learning from each other, rethinking practices and policies and continuously improving their organisations for more sustainable and inclusive labour markets and in order to better serve employers and jobseekers. This book gives an insight into PES policies and practices which are inspired by the close collaboration in the PES Network. PES Network members reflect on their European-wide learning organisation, they point out challenges and their strategic and operational answers from a national perspective, bringing in valuable personal experience. “PES Policies and Practices” thus touches upon a broad variety of PES core topics and gives you the chance to understand their business in a politically shaped environment, characterised by a unique collaboration.
The collection of voices from the PES Network world in this book demonstrates the Network´s potential to anticipate and respond to changes in the world of work.
EXTRACT
What is Benchlearning about?
How do other Public Employment Services (PES) solve problems? What is the secret of
their success? Can I learn from the others and transfer successful practices?
PES try to find answers on these questions through “Benchlearning”.
Comparing performance, benchmarking, was the main subject of the initial discussions
in the Network of Heads of PES going back to the 1998s. Over time, the focus moved to
mutual
learning and the exchange of good practices across Europe.
Benchlearning combines these two main elements. It is about interlinking benchmarking
and mutual learning. In more detail: The PES Network Decision defines Benchlearning as
“process of creating a systematic and integrated link between benchmarking and mutual
learning activities that consists of identifying good performances through indicator-based
benchmarking systems […] and of using findings for tangible and evidence-informed
mutual
learning activities, including good or best practice models”.
ABOUT AUTHORS
Fons Leroy was the chief executive officer of VDAB, the Flemish Public Employment Service, and current Chair of the European Network of Public Employment Services.
Lenka Kint was from 2011 to 2017 Executive Sercetary at WAPES, the World Association of Public Employment Services, and is currently Strategic accountmanager International Relations at VDAB.
Martina Winkler is a Seconded National Expert from the German Federal Employment Agency to the EU Commission, working in the PES Network Secretariat on the Benchlearning initiative.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 316
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:
Ähnliche
Cover
Title
FOREWORD
BY COMMISSIONER THYSSENfor the book to celebrate 5 years of the formal PES (Public Employment Services) Network
We are in the middle of a new revolution that changes the way we live and work. Computing power is improving. Big data is growing. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are speeding up technological change. The labour market is becoming more flexible. Digitalisation and robotisation are creating new jobs, but also replacing and changing jobs that exist today. The whole landscape of professions and skills that we need is evolving, while our active population is ageing. How we manage these challenges, will define the social future of our European continent.
We cannot stand by and watch technological advances polarise our labour markets. We need to keep pace with developments, harness the positive impact but at the same time prevent and tackle inequalities. Public Employment Services across Europe have to deliver a service portfolio balancing, more than ever, flexibility and security for all citizens. We need to foster quality employment. We need to reduce disruptive and precarious situations that arise from our changing labour markets and urgently address the need to appropriately protect workers in new forms.
The European Pillar of Social Rights, which was proclaimed at the Social Summit in Sweden in 2017, serves as a compass for exactly this. Our aim is to foster upwards social convergence in Europe. And to make sure that people and our rulebooks are ready for the future. But bringing the European Pillar of Social Rights to life means a tough piece of work in policy design and implementation – at European and national level. At European level we have put proposals on the table to put the Pillar into practice; by upgrading the skills of people, by updating our rulebook to protect the most precarious workers and offer adequate social protection to everybody who works. This needs to be complemented with action on the ground by national and regional authorities, municipalities and social partners.
The European PES Network is a prime example of how it contributes to the European Pillar of Social Rights. The PES Network, formally built in 2014, is a strong European voice of Public Employment Services that allows the bridging of the gap between design and delivery of labour market services.
I trust the PES Network to tackle head-on the challenges that we are facing. These challenges need co-creation and collaboration with partners on and around the labour markets. It requires re-thinking, modernising and reinventing the design and implementation of policies, and at times, even the structure and acting of entire organisations. PES have started, together with their partners, to reduce information gaps, for example, for sectors with high demand such as IT, green economy or services to individuals, and to improve skills’ matching with labour market needs. There is high potential of digital platforms using big data to help connecting jobseekers to suitable job opportunities. Still, tailor-made guidance and support along individual career pathways will remain very important. Discouraged jobseekers need particular encouragement. We also need to pay attention to the employment of older workers to make it possible to work for longer and with enjoyment. The PES Network has called for common actions in the education and employment field for equipping citizens with the right skills for our ever-changing labour markets.
This year, the PES Network celebrates its firth anniversary. The collection of voices from the PES Network world in this book demonstrates the Network’s potential to anticipate and respond to changes in the world of work. The Network’s commitment and ongoing activities to improve its performance through systematic peer-learning deserves great attention. I encourage PES to continue bringing the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights to life and offer my best wishes for its anniversary.
Marianne Thyssen
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1
EUROPEAN PES GROWING TOGETHER
Many years ago in Amsterdam – how the network of PES began
Gudrun Nachtschatt, Senior expert Benchlearning, EU Commission
The transition from the informal HoPES Network to the institutionalised PES Network
Wolfgang Mueller, Managing Director for European Affairs, German Federal Employment Agency, Alternate Member of the Board in the PES Net-work, PES Germany
Underlying ideas of the PES Network
Detlef Eckert, Huawei Global Government Affairs Dept
What is Benchlearning about?
Ralf Holtzwart, Managing Director of the Regional Directorate Bavaria, German Federal Employment Agency
Martina Winkler, PES Germany, Seconded National Expert at the European Commission, Expert Benchlearning, EU Commission
The second round of Benchlearning
Renata Häublein, Managing Director of the Employment Agency in Nuremberg, German Federal Employment Agency
Martina Winkler, PES Germany, Seconded National Expert at the European Commission
An example of Benchlearning and best practices from Spain
Gerardo Gutiérrez Ardoy, General Director of the Spanish Public Employment Service (SEPE), PES Network Board Member, PES Spain
An example of a sub-network: Collaboration in the Baltic PES
Aiga Balode, Deputy Director, State Employment Agency of Latvia, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Latvia
Inga Balnanosienė, Director of Vilnius client department, Employment Service under the Ministry of social security and labour in Lithuania, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Lithuania
Karolin Kõrreveski, Advisor on international Cooperation, PES Estonia, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Estonia
1. HISTORY OF THE PES NETWORK
1.1 Many years ago in Amsterdam – how the network of PES began
Gudrun Nachtschatt
It all started with a very first meeting of the then 15 Heads of PES in 1997 in Amsterdam. It took place during the Dutch Presidency of the European Union, following a EURES conference in Ireland in the previous year, where several Heads of PES had met and discussed that sharing know-how and experience among the managers would be a good idea.
1997 was the year in which the first Employment Guidelines were endorsed as a reaction to the economic and monetary integration of EU Member States. Later that year, employment policies were highlighted as an essential policy field in the treaty of Amsterdam. For the first time, PES were mentioned as important stakeholders and actors on the labour market. Their role in fighting against unemployment, social exclusion and providing skilled workers for growing economies was acknowledged. Consequently, a stronger cooperation amongst PES was put on the agenda.
However, employment policy remained a national task and the European Commission applied for the first time the method of open coordination, defining objectives and tasks and monitoring indicators. Employment was seen as the most important factor in the fight against poverty and social exclusion. Increasing the employment rate and preventing long-term unemployment were important objectives on the social agenda, in the European Employment Strategy as well as in most Member States. Still, it was up to the Member States and national organisations to decide how and what to do. Thus, a need for cooperation between the European Commission and the PES emerged.
The first meeting of Heads of PES – a Dutch initiative
Actually, it was a Dutch initiative to organise this first meeting for Heads of PES in cooperation with and funded by the Commission. The meeting was probably a success for both, the Heads of PES and the Commission. It was the starting point for numerous meetings to follow, usually twice a year and prepared by (newly introduced) meetings of assistants (today’s Advisors for European PES Affairs).
Rather boring “lectures” on the Employment Strategy
The aim of the Commission was to make Heads of PES better contribute to the objectives of the Employment Strategy, e.g. by collecting information on PES activities implementing the guidelines. Exemplary items of the agendas of these early meetings, like the one in Helsinki in 1999, reflected “the role of PES on the local labour market” or “recent development of the Employment Strategy”. It is the first agenda I have found in my folders. Other items on early agendas were the annually adapted guidelines, EURES, long-term unemployment or youth unemployment. Some of the topics should be followed by discussions, but I cannot remember an atmosphere characterised by open exchange of opinion. I would even say, first meetings have been rather boring. There were many more barriers than just language barriers. As participants, we received many slides with lots of text which everybody already knew. No doubt, that the Employment Strategy and the Guidelines build the foundation for a common mission of our PES organisations and this was an important step. But there was not yet a common ground and understanding of each other, which is essential for inspiring discussion. Yet, we had – with a few exceptions – no idea of what the other PES looked like; what their tasks were and how they were managed; what kind of jobseekers were registered and which were not; how jobseekers were counted; what was understood by the terms “transition to employment”, and “early intervention”, “labour market training” or “assessment”, and what are other PES doing to prevent long-term unemployment. Due to a certain lack of mutual and comparable information, contributions to a discussion did not fall on fertile ground. Indeed, there was nothing like the reports, fact sheets or capacity reports or the Knowledge Centre that we have today. Studies contracted by the Commission focussed rather on aggregated findings and rarely on single PES.
Still, the meetings continued, usually all Heads of PES attended and it was obvious that there was an added value: Mainly on important issues besides the formal agenda.
A hidden agenda – parallel networks and EU funded projects
The really important results of these early meetings were twofold: Firstly, we got to know our colleagues from abroad. Among the assistants especially, trust and confidence and even friendship was built up. Secondly, we had access to calls for tender and European cofunding of transnational projects. I think this was the main added value of the first years of the network of PES.
It was obvious that the hidden agenda was more important than the official one: Parallel to the official network several other sub-networks of Heads of PES were initiated and have been growing over time. These sub-networks were self-determined. I remember a network of Scandinavian PES, later on a Baltic one and a network of German speaking PES, still existing today.
The sub-networks, where first-hand experience could be exchanged among PES managers and site-visits took place to see how other PES were working, were one of the substantial consequences.
As important, for the further development of today’s PES Network, was that the Commission launched EU funds for transnational projects to stimulate mutual learning of PES. These projects, in which national experts participated, were exciting and challenging – since language barriers, different concepts and a lack of comparable information led to quite some misunderstandings and heated discussions. Still, we all learned and discussed projects e.g. dealing with self-service tools, individual action plans or on youth and long-term unemployment. New and exciting times with site visits and workshops in other PES were popping up.
EU co-funded projects – early PES initiatives
One project I remember in particular, because it illustrates what the needs of PES were like, is a French-Swedish initiative starting at the end of 1998. Together with some other PES, the Dutch, Le Forem, and the Spanish, worked on methods on how to find good practice and to share experience. When the report was presented in a final conference in Paris in early 2001 all agreed it was of big interest and importance to European PES. Thus, the Heads of PES decided on further developing a concept for structured cooperation and a systematic approach to enhance the exchange of knowledge, good practice and experience among European PES – and were willing to fund this initiative themselves. An autonomous and self-determined initiative with 17 PES was founded and called “Partners in Development” (PPD). The Swedish PES provided the secretariat. Several work groups were in place, for example on guiding and counselling, on indicators to compare results of PES or on further developing employer services. The Partners in Development were finally integrated as the European part of the World Association of PES: “WAPES-Europe”.
Besides the Partners in Development, another project, starting in 2002, can be seen as one of the roots of today’s Benchlearning in the PES Network. It was an Austrian initiative in cooperation with the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgian PES applying for EU funding. The aim of the project was to agree on common strategic goals and outcome indicators which should be relevant and measurable for all the PES involved. We (and our managements) expected to get answers to several questions: How to compare our results with those of other PES to know if we are doing well or not? How can good practices be identified? Finally, how can we achieve better results by comparing and learning? When discussing indicators in these working group meetings, many of us realised for the first time how different PES are. The differences did not only refer to the legal situation, the tasks and organisational context of PES, but also on the level of basic concepts. Suddenly all old certainties disappeared: What is an unemployed person? Only those receiving unemployment benefits? Those working part-time and looking for a full-time job? What about students graduating from schools and universities? Similar questions came up with regards to transitions into employment: What is “employment”? Every job with a few hours weekly? Or only a job with full contributions to social insurance? A job, which leads to an income to live from? What about self-employment?
It seemed everything had to be questioned and discussed in order to know what we are really talking about. 10 years later, the project (with in the meantime 20 PES participating) was stopped when the new network and today’s Benchlearning exercise became visible as a future task for all 30 PES.
Towards a PES knowledge base: PES to PES Dialogue
Over the years the Commission tried more and more to meet the PES’ needs. As part of the work programme during the last years of the former informal network of Heads of PES, the European Commission launched a comprehensive mutual learning programme for European PES, the PES to PES Dialogue (2010-2014). Topics were agreed with the network according to PES priorities for capacity building. For the first time, concept papers, summary reports and practices were published on a dedicated European PES website creating a knowledge base accessible for all. Many PES took up impulses and practices. The knowledge base was used by EU partner countries, ILO, WAPES and development agencies.
Together with the work of the benchmarking group, it provided the basis to do the next fundamental step: to come to a systematic assessment of PES performance and to target mutual learning and mutual assistance and support among peer PES.
1.2 The transition from the informal HoPES Network to the institutionalised PES Network
Wolfgang Mueller
The tradition of the Heads of Public Employment Services (HoPES) in Europe to meet is a long one. Starting in 1997, an atmosphere of collaboration and trust has been established over the years and survived the constant changes – not least the personnel changes both at the level of the Heads as well as the Assistants responsible for international/ European affairs. The idea of sharing experiences, looking at benchmarks, coming together in working groups and initiating bi-or multilateral projects was therefore not unfamiliar when the crisis hit. Having started as a monetary and economic crisis, soon the impact showed dramatically on the labour market as well. It became painfully visible that the Public Employment Services (PES) were neither prepared nor able to adjust in time to the scale and impact. As a result, all known performance indicators for PES decreased sharply.
At this point, the necessity for new innovative ideas was extremely high. When you start rethinking your business model, usually several options as a source for new ideas are available:
1.Asking your own staff, not necessarily in the Head Offices, but more from the grass-root-level
2.Asking academics/ researchers about the newest ideas
3.Looking at other national administrations, although the field of work differs
4.Engaging consultancy companies like McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group, etc.
5.And finally, asking your colleagues abroad who do work in the same area, even if constitutional or governance factors differ a lot.
When you start looking abroad, instantly one potential pool of innovative ideas comes into one’s mind: the European Social Fund. Designed as an instrument to finance new, in the national context non-existing, projects for evaluation for transformation into a national regular instrument, it could deliver a vast repository of successful and unsuccessful ideas. Sadly, there is no structured and systematic classification of projects, their intentions, their staffing, their indicators, etc. and it could therefore be ruled out.
The other idea was to extend the already existing exchange among peers in the HoPES Network. When it came to using this source for addressing the challenges deriving from the crisis, very quickly, the shortfalls of the structure and governance of the Network at that time became visible:
–Ownership was not among the PES themselves, but with the European Commission
–Funding elements focused on meetings, conferences and studies, but not on the exchange of best practices in a more detailed way
–Technically, there were only elements to measure performance, but no mechanism to systematically increase performance (or as one member pointed out: we do know how to weigh pigs, but we have no idea how to fatten them)
–A non-binding, extremely voluntary atmosphere.
Although there were a few shortcomings, to institutionalise the gathering of the HoPES was the most promising idea and we just had to think about a structured way to uphold the strong points for getting together and to address at the same time the identified weaknesses.
The basic concept stands on the following pillars:
–Institutionalisation and creation of a more binding commitment by a legal act: Labour market issues, but also educational and migration topics, are at the core of PES responsibilities and they become more important in Europe by the day. An all European PES including network with a clear mandate, tasks and procedures would on one side guarantee, that a comprehensive European picture can be created. Therefore, it could be ruled out that certain topics are dominated by the bigger countries or the most willing countries: the Network has to make sure that all national perspectives are brought together for a complete picture whereas at the same time each national PES is committed to actively participate and contribute for creating that whole picture. The Network should also be based on a legal act to enhance its reputation and credibility in the European sphere, as it is not “just” another informal network in Europe.
–Ownership among the PES through governance: PES know best what is important for PES, what subjects should be elaborated, what perspectives should be highlighted from which angle. At the same time the knowledge of the Commission, their hints and deep knowledge of all European affairs as well as how Europe “functions” are essential for a well-functioning and especially a well targeted work of the Network. So, the idea was to shift the management and the presiding role to the PES, whereas the Commission not only remains on the Board of the Network, but also runs the Secretariat of the Network. As a lot of PES are part of their Ministries and being a main body in employment affairs in Europe, it was quickly decided to give the Employment Committee (EMCO) the only observer role to the PES Network.
–Two major strands as tasks: PES have a very deep knowledge of what works and what does not work. Policy making always consists of policy design and policy delivery. One can have a perfect policy design and it will not live up to its expectations if it is poorly executed. On the other hand you can have a perfect delivery system/ organisation in place, but with only a little or poorly designed toolbox one cannot bring that “working muscle” to its full potential. Whereas the policy design level was well established (through the council structures), the crisis showed that there was no real insight into the delivery aspects of policy. It was therefore clear that the PES have to bundle their knowledge and expertise in a cohesive way and bring it up to the European institutions. At the same time, the crisis demonstrated mercilessly how ill-equipped European PES are, left alone to counter the effects of the crisis. It was obvious that one major task was to increase the capacity and capability of PES to become more crisis-adept – if not for now, then at least for the future. And there is no better help out there for these tasks than to ask your fellow PES who are working for decades on the same issues as one’s own PES. Every single PES, no matter how small or resource-poor it may seem, has good ideas and knowledge worth being shared among the others. To create transparency about that and to bundle this expertise in a systematic and structured way led to the decision to define this area as the second pillar for the PES Network.
The concept was introduced to the Council of Employment Ministers who endorsed it and tasked the European Commission to draw up a proposal for institutionalisation, including the above-mentioned elements. This time, there was an extensive consultation with all actors involved to convince them not only of the concept behind the proposal, but more of the bigger idea behind. In a relatively short time, the process came to a positive conclusion, but the final test was still to come: there was an element of volunteerism introduced into the legal note, so that any Member State could choose to participate or not to participate. The aim was of course that every Member State joins the Network voluntarily to participate bindingly in the task outlined in the legal act. If a Member State was not convinced of the bigger idea, the basic concept and the necessity to “open the books” for others to gain insight, the whole initiative would collapse. At the end, there was a unanimous decision to participate and in September 2014 it was time to say “Consummatum est”.
Finally, I also accompanied this transition from a rather loose relationship to the institutionalised PES Network. This happened in different ways: the idea for the original Benchlearning concept was proposed not only by the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, but by myself. It was only logical to become the head of the Working Group and to come up with a first concept for the methodology to be proposed to the Network for endorsement. Further conceptual work was necessary to establish the Rules for Procedure for the Network. As the first Chair of the PES Network, the CEO of the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, was elected, the first steps of the “newborn baby” needed to be accompanied and supported. Not clearly addressed issues had to be clarified, formats needed to be specified and still there was a lot of work to be done – besides creating transparency about the newly formed Network and convincing other stakeholders to recognise the opportunities coming from working with us. It should not be forgotten, that the crisis, especially concerning youth unemployment, was still ongoing. It can truly be said that this time was not only one of the busiest and challenging times of my professional life, but also the most rewarding one.
2. UNDERLYING IDEAS OF THE PES NETWORK
Detlef Eckert
The PES Network was the result of the increasing importance of labour market reforms across the European Union. Those reforms were necessary as a response to the steep rise of unemployment, in particular youth unemployment, following the financial crisis and the eurozone turmoil.
The predecessor of the PES Network was an informal advisory group of the Head of Public Employment Services (HoPES) to the European Commission. The group met regularly and the European Commission chaired the meetings. The objectives of the group were first to exchange ideas between the PES organisations and second to advise the Commission on labour market policies. PES possess unique expertise to combine practical, on-the-ground, employment measures with policy insights and advise. Over time, more precisely during 2013 and 2014, the idea of a more formal set-up of the Network with a policy mandate emerged. What was the rationale of this idea?
The most important development leading to the PES Network – as it is established today – had been the ‘European Semester’. The European Semester is an EU process based on a number of EU Directives setting out a process to make the EU more resistant to economic shocks and to contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 objectives. Among the five objectives was one employment related objective, namely, to achieve an employment rate of at least 70%. Achieving this target implies bringing unemployed people back into a job and increasing the labour market participation rate in general.
Every year in November, the European Semester process starts with the Commission publishing the ‘Annual Growth Sur vey’ which sets out the key issues it believes Member States should, together with the EU institutions, pay attention to. It is followed by in-depth country specific analyses leading to country reports. On the basis of these country reports and bi-lateral meetings with Member States the Commission proposes country specific recommendations.
Those recommendations are first discussed in two Committees, the Economic and Employment Committees. The European Council adopts the final version of the recommendations. The legal status of these recommendations varies depending on whether or not a particular Member State is in a macro-economic imbalance situation. Irrespective, politically the recommendations are to be taken seriously, as they are the result of learning from the financial crisis generating asymmetric shocks for which, in particular, the eurozone was not well prepared.
Quite a number of these country specific recommendations concerned active and passive employment policies and directly addressed the performance of the PES. Typically, recommendations would tell Member States to strengthen PES resources, implement a functioning IT system or establish a performance measurement system.
For instance:
–To the Czech Republic in 2012: Strengthen PES by increasing the quality and effectiveness of training, job search assistance and individualised services, including of outsourced services.
–To Spain in 2013: Reinforce and modernise public employment services to ensure effective individualised assistance to the unemployed according to their profiles and training needs.
–To Hungary in 2013:… enhance the client profiling system of the Public Employment Service.
–To Bulgaria in 2014: Improve the efficiency of the Employment Agency by developing a performance monitoring system and better targeting of the most vulnerable…
–To Spain in 2015: Take steps to increase the quality and effectiveness of job search assistance and counselling, including as part of tackling youth unemployment.
–To Romania in 2016: Strengthen the National Employment Agency’s services to employers and jobseekers, in particular by tailoring services to jobseeker profiles, better linking them with social services and reaching out to unregistered young people.
The Commission, when reviewing the implementation of the country specific recommendations, assesses the degree of implementation. And quite often Member States did not implement all the recommendations or only partially, including the ones related to PES. The recommendations were often formulated relatively generally, so that Member States did not get clear enough guidance. This was also due to the underpinning country reports which did not contain PES specific benchmarks, best practices or reference standards.
Employment related recommendations are mainly discussed by Employment Committee (EMCO) members who rarely conducted a ‘down-to-earth’ debate but focused on appropriate wording with countries who sometimes argue against too harsh a formulation. Therefore recommendations alone were not sufficient to drive a decisive reform of how PES are better organised, managed and financed.
Against this background, the idea of a formal PES Network became attractive. Such a formal Network would get closer involved in the European Semester and would ensure that the expertise of PES leaders are duly taken into account. It was also clear in the discussion within the previous HoPES members that the mandate of the Network would not be limited to supporting the European Semester but would be a vehicle to drive PES reforms and aim to improve employment measures across the EU, including countries with a good PES performance record. The Heads of PES recognised that everyone could and should learn from others and from good practices. In addition, the challenges of the digital transformation would raise new questions on how to re-train people and how to manage occupational transformation.
Therefore, the PES Decision based on Article 149 of the Treaty gives a rather broad mandate to the Network. The core of the mandate consists of a concept dubbed as ‘ benchlearning’, which consists of a combination of ‘benchmarking’ and ‘mutual learning’. The negotiation of the Commission proposal with the two legislators, Council and the European Parliament, revealed differences on the interpretation of Article 149. The PES Decision contains commitments of the Member States which the Council considered voluntary whilst the Commission and the European Parliament interpreted these as mandatory. The legal language has remained open to interpretation, but the EU institutions achieved an understanding that the PES Decision entails political obligations of the Member States and Ministers declared officially their full support to the objectives and measures of the Decision.
The PES Decision paved the way for an intensive collaboration amongst Member States. Supported by the Commission, the PES Network began a comprehensive review programme, by screening every PES based on self-assessment and peer reviews. Without doubt, this has contributed to efficiency gains and better analysis as part of the European Semester. Comparing the country specific recommendations of 2017 and 2018 with previous ones reveals that PES specific recommendations largely disappeared and active employment policies shifted to the recitals. This shows progress. The PES reform process is now firmly embedded in the PES Network based on the Decision. This is a great success for this institutional arrangement.
The PES Decision is linked to a support programme (Employment and Social Innovation – EaSI) which finances the Network and will run out in 2020. This means during the course of 2019 a decision about the future of the Network must be taken. The discussion about the future of Europe has shown the need for a more integrated labour market, in particular for the Eurozone. Therefore, it is a rather straightforward idea to develop the Network into a European Employment Agency which could be tasked to manage labour market mobility, i.e. EURES (European Employment Service Regulation), cross-border apprenticeships (facilitate ERASMUS for VET), analyse skills of the future and implement innovative training schemes as a response to digital transformation (artificial intelligence, big data, robots, etc).
Are European leaders ready to take the next step?
3. BENCHLEARNING
3.1 What is Benchlearning about?
Ralf Holtzwart, Martina Winkler
What is Benchlearning about?
How do other Public Employment Services (PES) solve problems? What is the secret of their success? Can I learn from the others and transfer successful practices?
PES try to find answers on these questions through “Benchlearning”.
Comparing performance, benchmarking, was the main subject of the initial discussions in the Network of Heads of PES going back to the 1998s. Over time, the focus moved to mutual learning and the exchange of good practices across Europe.
Benchlearning combines these two main elements. It is about interlinking benchmarking and mutual learning. In more detail: The PES Network Decision defines Benchlearning as “process of creating a systematic and integrated link between benchmarking and mutual learning activities that consists of identifying good performances through indicator-based benchmarking systems […] and of using findings for tangible and evidence-informed mutual learning activities, including good or best practice models”.
Why Benchlearning?
The rationale for Benchlearning is based on the conviction that well-functioning labour markets are essential for the future of Europe’s societies and that PES should play a major role solving today’s labour market challenges by providing excellent services to jobseekers and employers.
When looking across Europe, economies, labour markets, structures and performance of PES highly differ. Still, major challenges are comparable and there is a common under-standing of the added value of PES, offering services supporting employability and lifelong guidance. And even more important: PES Network members have the common will to collaborate and improve.
Benchlearning has been introduced in the European PES Network as key tool to compare and learn, finally to support each PES to improve their own performance through a structured and systematic reflection on their performance against the performance of other PES – and finally through institutional learning from peers. The aim is to learn from good practices and adapt them to their national circumstances. Benchlearning thereby is meant to build up a learning organisation across Europe, a self-sustaining system of continuous performance increase in an atmosphere of change.
The model behind Benchlearning
The model used for PES Benchlearning is based on the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) model which in turn comes from the EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management) Excellence model.
It frames the interrelationship between PES performance areas, the context in which PES operates, PES performance outcomes and learning activities, as illustrated in the Figure below.
FIGURE 3.1 BENCHLEARNING MODEL
So-called performance drivers or ‘enablers’ can have positive or negative consequences on the successful delivery of employment services, and they can therefore contribute to overall labour market outcomes. These include strategic management decisions, the design of PES business models or operational processes as shown under the seven performance sections A to G in the centre of the illustration. A qualitative benchmarking exercise focuses on these organisational arrangements while systematically reflecting various PES performance enablers such as one example in the field of relations to employers (section D) demonstrates.
Performance enabler “relations to employers” (performance section D) – Excellency description:
1. Employer strategy and management
For a target-oriented service provision to employers, a PES ideally has developed and implemented a transparent strategy for employers who are identified and managed as important strategic partners. This strategy is informed by thorough and regionally disaggregated labour market analyses. The strategy clearly distinguishes between (i) the core activity of actively acquiring vacancies and matching them with jobseekers including advisory services directly related to this activity and the use of ALMP-measures in this context and (ii) complementary further services for employers (e.g. use of different recruitment channels, continuing vocational training supports). Furthermore, the strategy explicitly addresses the segmentation of employer services and offers a clear concept whether employer services should be provided universally or in a segmented way. This also includes a clear strategy towards SMEs which can be an important customer group but which are difficult and costly to reach. Moreover, the strategy also contains clearly defined targets for employer services which are an integral part of the performance management system. Finally, the strategy is communicated to all relevant levels of the organisation.
2. Specialised unit for employer services
Ideally a PES runs a separate unit (department or team), responsible for pooling all contacts with employer customers. Members of staff display a clear customer service approach. The employers’ service unit embodies the principle “one face to the customer” and serves as a one-stop-shop for employers, with individual contact persons for each employer. Staff in the employer unit has a profound knowledge of the region-al/local labour market and a deep understanding of the companies’ needs. Services provision includes different channels including e-channels for vacancy submission.
3. Matching vacancies and jobseekers
Ideally a PES attaches particular importance to a well-functioning interface between the employer service unit and jobseeker services in order to match vacancies and jobseekers. Co-operation between the employer service unit and jobseeker services is continuously reviewed and integrated into the quality management system. Mutual meetings take place on a regular basis. To achieve the best possible matches a two-step process combines ICT-driven automated matching with a further refined selection by the employment counsellors. The quality of the matching process should be reviewed regularly taking employer feedback into account (e.g. via employer satisfaction survey).
