Head to head on skills

Manufacturing News, Source : The Manufacturer
Published : 15 Oct 2002 16:33

The second SAP-sponsored Manufacturing Alliance meeting met manufacturing’s most serious issue head on. Gay Sutton reports on the consensus of opinion on solving the skills shortage

The most animated topic to emerge from the first Alliance meeting formed the basis for the second meeting that kicked off day two of The Manufacturer 2002 Expo. Hosted by Conquest’s managing editor, Ken Hurst, the debate homed in on the skills shortage, perceived by many to be the most serious issue facing manufacturing today. Calling on a wide range of expertise, the panel consisted of Ian Parkes, director of Coleman Parkes who were commissioned to undertake the Manufacturing Attitudes Report (MAR), and the Annual Manufacturing Report for The Manufacturer, Rebecca Rhodes, group programme manager at the Learning and Skills Council (LSC), Andy Sloane, MD training and performance services group for Rockwell Automation, and Tony Boylan, national network manager for the new govern-ment Manufacturing Advisory Service. All agreed that the skills shortage was damaging British manufacturing, but the overwhelming message was that something could be done about it.

The skills shortage has been around for 20 to 30 years. The demise of the old apprenticeship has added to the problem, but Rebecca Rhodes would welcome an active partnership with manu-facturers as part of the solution. She echoed Dan Jones’ comment of the previous day when he told the audience that you have to be more aggressive in telling universities what you want. For vocational training Rhodes said there are more than 380 colleges of further education in the UK, and private skills providers who organise training to recognised national standards, and the content is decided by the needs of local industry. “If you want it to change, you’ve got to get involved in it. The LSC would welcome you with open arms.”

Training is, however, not the prerogative of the young. Figures show that increased training leads to increased productivity, yet Tony Boylan pointed out that a third of British workers don’t have training organised by their company, and one in five have had no formal training since leaving school.

Andy Sloane commented that: “We still have too much self training on the job. Smart people can figure out how to do the work, but there is a cost associated with this type of learning.” But he did give an example of an area where enlightened companies in the US are operating differently. As part of their kaizen (continuous improvement) drive they have given their shopfloor teamleaders the licence to go out and improve their workers’ training.

Closer to home, Rhodes admitted that: “Young people have a well structured move from school to college. But people over 24 don’t have that structure or investment in skills. We need to focus there. Companies need to invest in further education for over 25s, and the LSC needs to respond to that.”

But then the knotty problem of the poor public perception of manufacturing surfaced again. The MAR revealed that 93 per cent of manufacturers believe that the image is just too poor to compete with other sectors, leading most talented young people to shun engineering and manufacturing.

The consensus of opinion was that kids need to know what it’s like to be an engineer or to work in manufacturing. From conversations with manufacturers during the event, it was clear that a number of companies are collaborating extremely well with schools to provide work experience, school visits, competitions and more. And where that happens, the results are excellent. “The North West of England has a school,” Boylan told the Alliance, “which is building a manufacturing facility within the school and it’s not for the 18 year olds, it’s for 14 to 15 year olds. Companies will come in and help, sponsor it, work with the students and take them at an early age, before decisions are made on their futures. It’s an interesting pilot scheme.”

Such schemes are, however, still rare. A straw poll among those gathered for the debate, showed that very few of those attending were actively involved with schools. This sort of engagement does not need to be expensive. One enthusiastic contributor from the audience, pointed out that schools now are able to become specialist in areas such as sport, art, technology, engineering and so on. All it takes is £50,000 backing from local people or groups, and the school will then specialise in that subject, attracting considerable extra government funding. If there are just 50 manufacturers in the area, each willing to put in £1000, they could have a specialist school on their doorsteps, feeding to them all the talent and skills they require.

Rhodes raised an interesting idea, suggesting that we have a real problem in this country with what we value in education. “Tell me, gentlemen, why do you have people with degrees, GCSEs and A levels, because that is not a level of competence, its a level of knowledge. You’ve got to value vocational skills. Until you do that, young people will not value vocational skills, they’ll go to university and get degrees and you will have a graduate community within your organisation. A degree is a step along the path, not a destination.”

Andy Sloane summarised the discussion by saying: “The answer is we have to do something. If we wait for government or trade associations to fix it, we’ll be waiting a very long time, and two years from now we’ll be talking about a widening skills gap.”

The balance of opinion from the debate suggested that all the structures were in place to provide the necessary skills. What needs to happen is for manufacturers and education providers to come together to structure the education that local industry requires.

Comments on this story

click here to add a comment