Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik Measuring Employability – A First Empirical Approach Dr. Helmut Apel ISG - Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik apel@isg-institut.de
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik Overview 1. Motivation and Background 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 3. Empirical Application 4. Results 5. Conclusions and Outlook Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 2
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 1. Motivation and Background Institutional background: Evaluation of reformed means-tested welfare system „Basic security benefits for job-seekers“ (SGB II, Hartz IV reform) Specifically: Evaluation of the temporary experiment concerning the the two models of implementation, i.e. ARGE: Cooperation of municipalities and local employment agencies (in 355 regions) zkT: Municipalities alone (in 69 municipalities) Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) has established a research network comprising 4 research fields: Field 1: Data collection and descriptive analyses (IAT, ZEW) Field 2: Implementation and governance analyses (ISR, infas, WZB) Field 3: Micro-econometric impact analyses (ZEW, IAQ, TNS Emnid) Field 4: Macro-economic analyses (ifo, IAW) Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 3
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 1. Motivation and Background Since SGB II mainly aims at combating long-time unemployment “preservation and improvement of employability” is an important objective of the new welfare system. Hence, the administrative contest between ARGE and zkT focuses on two outcomes: Job placement (primary objective) Progress in employability (secondary objective) � In research network: Field 3 is supposed to develop an empirical concept for measuring employability progress . ISG as coordinator of the research network has together with Field 3 initialised a pilot study for this purpose. Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 4
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 1. Motivation and Background Specific requirements and restrictions Applicable in telephone interviews (CATI) Quantitative information Data parsimonious Almost no examples in existing literature � Particularly the application by CATIs implies important limitations for the collected information Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 5
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework Primary theoretical contributions Bernard Gazier (1999): Employability. Concepts and Policies. Susanne Blancke, Christian Roth, Josef Schmidt (2000): Employability als Herausforderung für den Arbeitsmarkt. Axel Deeke, Thomas Kruppe (2003): Beschäftigungsfähigkeit als Evaluationsmaßstab? Existing empirical concepts „Fachkonzept Beschäftigungsorientiertes Fallmanagement SGB II“ (job-oriented case management concept of Federal Employment Agency) Arbeitshilfen Eingliederungsvereinbarungen und Profiling (Aktuelles“ Nr. 40, HE/GA) (manual and guidelines for „Integration Contracts“) Evaluation concepts from municipalities‘ labour market projects (Prof. Trube, Universitiy of Siegen) Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 6
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework Review of theoretical literature and existing empirical concepts can be summarized into six dimensions of employability which are feasible for a CATI-survey: I. Activities level Job-seeking activities Further education activities II. Motivation level Intrinsic motivation Extrinsic motivation III. Willingness for concessions with respect to: Working conditions (e.g. status, mobility / flexibility requirements) Income Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 7
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework IV. Assessment of skills and capabilities Job-related self-image („ ... got good qualification / experience“) Self-assessment soft skills (e.g. reliability, team-orientated) Self-assessment basic skills (reading, writing, internet) V. Social context Social network (meeting friends, knowing to be needed) Social support (being supported by family / friends) Milieu / peers (many unemployed friends / friends successful in job) Private situation (family conflicts, ties and obligations) VI. Psychological and somatic health Physical conditions / troubles Emotional problems Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 8
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 3. Empirical Application Data base Survey data 4,000 CATI-interviews (2,000 SGB II / 2,000 SGB III) Full range of unemployment duration In small number of selected ARGE-regions Controlled regional variation: east-west; urban-rural Age restriction: 18 – 57 years Interview period September 22 – October 19, 2006 Survey information is matched with data from Federal Employment Agency Labour market status five month after interview: � Employed (regular employment or apprenticeship) � Not employed (otherwise) Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 9
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 3. Empirical Application 1 st Step: Principal components analysis (PCA) Multivariate statistical method to reduce information redundancies and to identify empirically independent dimensions PCA retrieves important “factors“ and their “marking variables“ � Aim: Identify a compact set of survey items which capture relevant components / dimensions of employability Result: 18 variables - out of originally 77 - to represent the six dimensions (2 - 4 variables for each dimension) Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 10
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 3. Empirical Application Active job search during last 4 weeks I. Activity level Preparation of self-employment Participation in further education in last 12 months Intrinsic: „I set and pursue targets for myself“ II. Motivation Extrinsic: „Most important issue w.r.t work is income“ level Change of occupation III. Willingness for Change of residence concessions low(er) income Self-grading: reading IV. Assessment of Willingness to learn: „I enjoy ... new experiences“ skills and „I have sound professional experiences“ capabilities Self-grading: writing e-mail Social support: „Nobody really supports me“ V. Social context Disintegrated milieu: „... got many unemployed friends“ Social integration: „… often joining friends …“ Family ties and conflicts „.. too many fam. conflicts“ Physical fitness: Hours, being able to work per day VI. Psycho-somatic Positive attitude: „ … mostly find positive aspects, too“ health Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 11
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 3. Empirical Application 2 nd Step: Probit estimations LHS variable : Employed five months after interview (yes / no) RHS variables: Observable socio-demographic characteristics: sex, age, schooling, professional qualification, situation before unemployment (work, training) 18 indicators of employability identified by PCA Seven specifications: Spec.1: Socio-demographic variables only Specs. 2-7: Stepwise inclusion of the 6 groups of employability indicators � Aim: Testing the predictive power of the employability indicators controlling for socio-demographic characteristics Idea: Employed individuals exhibit high degree of employability ⇒ variables displaying a significant association with employment probability indicate relevant dimensions of employability Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 12
Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik 4. Results Continuous increase of pseudo R 2 : Model pseudo R 2 1: Benchmark: Socio-demographics only .062 2: plus Job search / further education activities .066 3: plus Motivation level .073 4: plus Willingness for concessions .089 5: plus Assessment of skills and capabilities .096 6: plus Social context .098 7: plus Psycho-somatic health .116 Predictive power of group of socio-demographic characteristics continuously decreases; but variables remain jointly significant Each group of employability indicators is jointly significant (at least weakly); individual significance of indicators within each group varies Helmut Apel Evaluation Conference Nürnberg, 13.06.2007 13
Recommend
More recommend
