Scottish Government

Patricia Findlay, Robert Stewart, Eli Dutton and Chris Warhurst
Scottish Centre for Employment Research, University of Strathclyde

The Scottish Centre for Employment Research at the University of Strathclyde was commissioned by the Scottish Executive to evaluate the 5 rounds of the Scottish Union Learning Fund ( SULF) funded by the Executive over 2000-2005. The objective of the evaluation was to assess the difference made by SULF to trade unions' capacity to enhance workplace learning.

Main Findings

• Unions are using SULF for its intended purpose: to deliver workplace learning that is additional to that already existing. This learning is both job-related and non job-related, both accredited and non-accredited, and successfully draws in non-traditional and traditional learners.
• Unions are delivering learning through partnerships with employers, learning providers and other unions. Project implementation and management have improved considerably across rounds.
• SULF has generated significant measurable outcomes including at least 1,820 learning awareness events; 9,962 individual and 1,543 company learning needs assessments; 22,434 employees advised on learning; 10,582 and 2,456 learners undertaking non-accredited and accredited learning respectively; 1,960 learners undertaking other IT learning. 6 learning centres have been opened. SULF has also levered additional funding of just over £1m from non-Executive sources.
• SULF has also generated a range of less easily quantifiable though still beneficial outcomes for learners, unions and employers. Learners have benefited by developing improved personal, social and technical skills. Employers have also benefited from the latter, and from improved relations with employees and unions. Unions have benefited through enhanced profile, membership gain, improved internal capabilities and improved relationships. These benefits have contributed to union capacity, organizational performance, social inclusion and employability.
• It is widely accepted that these benefits arise from the unique position of unions in accessing and engaging 'hard to reach' learners in the context of a high-trust relationship with members.
• However, learning and developing learning capacity is hampered by practical difficulties in the workplace, and there is a need to widen the type of employees taking up learning opportunities, for better application of ILAs and for more comprehensive inclusion of the Highlands & Islands. There is also a need to embed ULRs into both union and employer structures.
• Whilst sustainability of workplace learning beyond SULF funding has not been achieved in most cases, there are important indicators that in some unions it is close to achievement. There is a strong indication that both unions and employers are committed to lifelong learning as it has emerged through SULF, and are prepared to offer further ( i.e. own) funding to support it.

Background

SULF was established by the Scottish Executive in August 2000. Its aim is to 'encourage workplace learning in its widest sense'. SULF enables Scottish-based trade unions to develop this workplace learning in partnership with employers and others. The key premise of SULF is that trade unions enhance workplace learning additional to that already provided.

To the end of 2005, there were 5 rounds of funding totaling almost £3.3m. Fifty-four projects, involving 23 unions, have been awarded funding. All projects are intended to contribute to wider Scottish Executive policy, specifically lifelong learning and a smart, successful Scotland.

SCER was commissioned to evaluate SULF. This evaluation assesses the implementation, process and outcomes of SULF projects. Implementation includes funding, partnership and governance arrangements. Process includes project management and relationships between all stakeholders. Outcomes include for learners, employers, unions and other stakeholders. The aim of the evaluation is to help inform future SULF policy.

Method and Research Stages

The evaluation required a broad research design with different stages that included both qualitative and quantitative research tools, some pre-existing, some custom-designed. These tools were developed in collaboration with the Scottish Executive and its SULF Advisory Group. The research stages were:

• Review of existing documentation and other material from government, business and academic sources.
• Survey of Union Project Officers ( UPOs) for all 54 SULF projects. The response rate for the survey was 80%.
• Survey of employers and interviews of other partners. All 116 employers identified in project bids were surveyed. The response rate was 22%. Four respondents were also interviewed from the most frequently cited learning providers.
• Survey of learners drawn from the PCS learner database. 1200 questionnaires issued to PCS. The response rate was 11%.
• Interviews with 21 Significant Others drawn from unions and the Scottish business community and government.
• 7 case studies selected by stage of project, sector and industry, involving interviews and/or focus groups with UPOs, employer human resources/training managers, ULRs and learners, and, where relevant, learning providers.

Research Findings

Project Implementation

Consistent with Scottish Executive aims, unions are involved in SULF to train ULRs, to increase learning and skills development generally, and support non-traditional learners. Involvement in SULF also raised unions' profile and extends services to members.

Employers and other stakeholders endorsed union involvement in workplace learning because of their ability to widen access to potential learners, particularly those with core skills deficiencies. In addition, unions can provide the only focus for learning in industries in which work and employment patterns are not conducive to employer-provided training.

Project Operation and Processes

Project governance was partnership-driven, primarily between unions and management but also including learning providers and other unions. Ninety-three per cent of projects had a steering group, almost three-quarters of which met regularly throughout the project.

Over 90% of projects had employer involvement. Employers made financial contributions, provided learning facilities and time-off for ULRs to do their duties. Sixty-eight per cent of employers participated regularly in these projects.

There were early difficulties in establishing effective links with learning providers and obtaining relevant and accessible courses, particularly for shift workers and rurally-based learners.

Critical factors in project success or failure mainly relate to project management issues and the degree of support for projects from key stakeholders. There is evidence of real learning by unions across the rounds of SULF: projects funded in later rounds have been less affected by these factors than those in earlier rounds, as unions have built stakeholder support and involvement into the design of projects and have developed greater project management capability.

There were some problems with the implementation of projects because of pressures on union resources and competing union objectives. Recruiting ULRs and establishing systems of communication amongst and support for these ULRs were problematic for unions. Over time, unions attempted to address these problems by better integrating ULRs into union structures, both locally and nationally. Time constraints were also an issue. Although the duties of ULRs are legally enabled, some ULRs are undertaking their duties in their own time.

Lack of time-off for learners was a particular problem. Operational managers face practical difficulties replacing staff undertaking learning. To a lesser extent, the cost of learning plus a lack of confidence amongst some learners were also issues.

There is a relative lack of project coverage for learners in the Highlands & Islands despite high demand. The reasons are due to financial constraints on project stretch to these areas and additional costs incurred in providing and supporting learning in these areas. There is evidence however of greater though still limited cross-union collaboration to address these problems.

Project Outcomes

SULF has led to at least 1,820 learning awareness/dissemination events; enabled 9,962 individual learning needs assessments and 1,543 company learning needs assessments; 22,434 employees had been provided with personal information, advice, and guidance on learning; 10,582 and 2,456 learners have undertaken non-accredited and accredited learning respectively, with an additional 1,960 learners undertaking other IT related learning. Projects have also levered additional (mainly 'in-kind') funding of just over £1m or around £24,000 per project from non-Executive sources.

Targets for actual learning were largely met or exceeded. However, the least successful type of learning occurred in relation to core skills, with 31% of projects failing to meet specified targets.

Nevertheless, 71% of learners were non-traditional. Seventy-five per cent had low or no qualifications prior to SULF. Twenty-nine per cent of learners were professional employees. Of all learners, 5% were from ethnic minorities and 6% had impairments/disabilities. Fifty-nine per cent were men, 73% worked full-time but where union members tended to be female this was reflected in the sex of learners.

Both the vast majority of UPOs (97%) and, significantly, learners (80%) rated learning experiences as either excellent or good.

In terms of developing learning capacity, returns reveal that at least 6 learning centres have been opened, 46 courses developed to fill gaps in provision, 141 flexible learning programmes created, and 54 learning partner agreements established amongst partners.

For unions, SULF has created 56.5 new Scottish-based project workers and 846 trained ULRs, with 266 of these ULRs having undertaken additional training and 175 trained to support core skills development.

Unions also state that SULF has increased their profile, their membership and participation in union activities, and generated more supportive attitudes amongst employees and management towards unions. Learning has also become more prominent within unions.

SULF has also raised awareness about learning amongst employers and employees. In addition, individual learners clearly benefit from SULF in terms of enhancing work, personal and life skills. Employers have also reported significant benefits in terms both of workforce skills and attitudes ( e.g. greater willingness amongst employees to engage in learning), skills gaps and employability and improved workplace relations.

Few employers however are able to identifiable tangible positive outcomes in terms of overall firm performance, profitability or labour flexibility. The difficulties in measuring direct performance contributions arising from SULF-generated learning was a general point across respondents.

Future Sustainability

Whilst sustainability of workplace learning beyond SULF funding has not been achieved in most cases, there are important indicators that in some unions it is close to achievement. These indictors include the appointment of dedicated staff from internal union funding, a willingness to pursue other forms of funding, and adaptations to existing union priorities, rules and structures to incorporate an extended and continuing role for learning.

Unions are very aware of the need to learn how to sustain learning capacity. In particular, they recognize the need to embed ULRs into both union and employer structures. Enhanced awareness of learning amongst members and the demand for learning is likely to maintain pressure on unions to sustain their commitment to learning.

Sustainability is made more likely due to the benefits arising from SULF for all stakeholders.

Conclusions/Recommendations

Despite some difficulties, the most important finding is that unions are using SULF for its intended purpose: to deliver workplace learning and for the intended target groups. Indeed, 70% of projects fully met or exceeded objectives, and very few projects failed to deliver substantially on targets. SULF was almost unanimously endorsed as meeting its objectives by the Significant Others in the business and policy communities.

Further, the evaluation reveals 3 important points about SULF. Firstly, projects are delivering additionality: lifelong learning that is not substituting but supplementing employer training (where this exists). Secondly, SULF is meeting (though not yet matching in some cases) a so far unappreciated large demand for workplace learning. Thirdly, SULF funding is proving to be a catalyst for learning culture change amongst employees who previously would not have considered let alone been involved in learning as well as within unions who are now demonstrating commitment to it.

SULF has generated a range of benefits in terms of organizational performance. It has expanded accredited learning and skills and it has expanded non-accredited/'soft' skills learning which, while difficult to measure, have the potential to contribute to organizational performance. There is evidence that involvement in SULF has led to improved relations between workers, employers and unions.

SULF has also been successful in promoting social inclusion. Projects have attracted non-traditional learners and ethnic minority workers. Whilst still underdeveloped, it has also promoted geographical inclusion. Importantly, it has delivered genuine lifelong learning across all skill levels.

SULF has generated learning capacity - the ability to deliver additional workplace learning distinct from employer training. This has been achieved via the appointment of dedicated officers, the recruitment and development of ULRs and the delivery of accredited and non-accredited learning to a range of learners.

SULF has contributed to unions' organizing capacity thus increasing unions' commitment to SULF. Involvement in projects has increased internal capacities through new sources of representation and new (and transferable) skills in communication, project management, representation and negotiation.

SULF has also delivered learner capacity, such that individuals progress not only in the substance of their learning but also in their willingness and ability to access other forms of learning.

SULF has also contributed to employability by increasing qualifications, enhancing 'soft' skills and dealing with problems arising from market failure where no learning provision exists.

There have, however, been some problems. Employers' organisations have not engaged actively in SULF, and there has been a lack of penetration of SULF in small firms. Learning and developing learning capacity is hampered by the practical possibilities of time off for both ULRs and for learners, and for ULRs to adequately undertake their duties and for learners to learn.

The suspension of ILAs impacted on the ability of some SULF projects to meet targets. Given their re-introduction this may be less of an issue in future, although the income threshold for ILAs will reduce their relevance for some unionized workers.

There are difficulties in the delivery of SULF projects relating to the particular circumstances of Highlands & Islands, despite evidence of a high demand for lifelong learning.

Considering the earlier evaluation of SULF Round 1, it is clear that many of the strengths identified then have continued to feature, and that some of the weaknesses identified therein have been addressed in later round projects, in particular in relation to the degree of project management skills within unions, unions' familiarity with the learning marketplace and the limited substantive involvement of, and support from, employers.

In evaluating the operation of SULF, it is important to appreciate the time required both to generate a broader learning culture within workplaces and to create sustained learning capacity. It is also important to appreciate that some time is required for the learning outcomes from SULF projects to become apparent. Significantly, it is also important to acknowledge that much of the learning arising because of SULF and its impact on worker employability and firm performance will remain intangible.

We make the following recommendations:

• SULF should continue to be funded, and the current level of funding should be maintained.
• Effective partnerships assist in delivering positive outcomes but it is important that SULF continues to be union-led.
• There is a need to promote better awareness of and engagement with SULF by employers' organisations and by small businesses in particular.
• Delivering learning capacity should continue to be a strategic priority in future rounds as there is no evidence of saturation across and within unions.
• There is a need to consider why some unions have not been involved in SULF in order to identify any barriers to their participation.
• New priorities in future rounds might include a specific focus on the needs of Highlands & Islands and on supporting cross-union learning activity.
• Unions need to consolidate further learning activities in order to embed them more securely within firms. In particular, they need to consolidate the position of ULRs.
• There is a need for more systematic data to be collected and recorded by ULRs, particularly data on learners and pertaining to measures of organisational performance and employability.
• Notwithstanding the above, the Scottish Executive should recognise that many of the outcomes of SULF-led learning are, whilst beneficial, largely intangible.
• The Executive should also recognise the time required to embed learning activities within unions and workplaces.
• There is a need to clarify the position of SULF in relation to other public agencies.
• Some evaluation is required of the relevance to SULF of ILAs and on ways in which both might be more effectively promoted together.
• Consideration should be given as to how time off for learners might be encouraged. While a statutory route to this is a reserved matter, the promotion of time off might be achieved in other ways, for example, via collective bargaining.

If you have any enquiries about social research, please contact us at:

Tel: 0141 242 0262
Fax: 0141 242-5455
Email: socialresearch@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Website: www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

The report "Evaluation of the Scottish Union Learning Fund ( SULF) (2000-2005)", which is summarised in this research findings is a web only document and is available on the Social Research website at www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

This document (and other Research Findings and Reports) and information about social research in the Scottish Executive may be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

The site carries up-to-date information about social and policy research commissioned and published on behalf of the Scottish Executive. Subjects covered include transport, housing, social inclusion, rural affairs, children and young people, education, social work, community care, local government, civil justice, crime and criminal justice, regeneration, planning and womens issues. The site also allows access to information about the Scottish Household Survey.