workforce capability problem. Organizations may provide training and develop-
ment internally, externally, or in combination to ‘make’ a competent workforce,
attempt to ‘buy’ by recruiting or poaching skilled labor, paying attractive pre-
mium rates with what is saved on training expenditure, or endeavor to reduce
dependence on skilled labor altogether through particular choices of technology,
work organization, and outsourcing. Where organizations do train, the overrid-
ing objective is to develop the competence or ability of employees, but in such a
generalization, axiomatic perhaps to the point of tautology, the complex diversity
of approaches is lost.
Why are there such diVerences in approaches to training and development
given that all organizations need a competent workforce? Decisions on whether
or not to provide training, and if so whether to do so internally or externally, are
not made in a vacuum but are inXuenced by national and sectoral cultures,
institutional arrangements, and state policies on education and training. This
chapter seeks to explore the diversity of approaches and oVer some explanations
by situating the policy and practice of training and development within diVerent
national and supranational contexts. To this end, the chapterWrst addresses the
political economy of skill formation, tracing the inXuence of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and International Labor
OYce (ILO) policies on the strategies developed by regional supra-state bodies
such as the European Union (EU) and the Asia-PaciWc Economic Cooperation
(APEC) countries and the implementation of these strategies at the level of
nation states.
This review provides the context for the subsequent sections which address in
turn training, development, and competence. In the training section, theory,
policy, and practice are considered, including the diversity of national systems
for vocational education and training (VET) and the relationship between work
organization and workplace learning. The development section is distinguished
from training in terms of objectives and scope, while the emergence of Human
Resource Development (HRD) is explained not only in terms of a more strategic
focus but also in relation to initiatives like corporate universities. The compe-
tence section addresses the confusion surrounding the term, contrasting four
predominant approaches derived from the USA, the UK, France, and Germany,
each of which has inXuenced other countries to varying degrees. Drawing
on these four traditions, a more holistic approach to competence is presented
as the model currently being used to structure learning outcomes within the
European QualiWcations Framework. Section 16. 6 considers the major trajectories
of theory, policy, and practice in this domain, while theWnal section oVers an
overall summary and conclusion, drawing out the major issues for theory and
management practice.
training, development, and competence 325