In Skills We Trust but its Qualifications We Count:
Developments and Consequences for Graduate Labour
Chris Warhurst
INTRODUCTION: GRADUATE SKILLS
› Skills an economic and social panacea – once ‘a key driver’, now ‘the
key driver’ of prosperity and fairness (Leitch; also Scottish
Government).
› In Scotland, narrow aim – to be more productive; broader aim – to
become a smarter, knowledge-driven economy.
› Leads to policy interventions in supply and now demand with
emphasis on skills utilisation.
› Yet ‘paucity of data’ (Buchanan et al.) on skills utilisation generally
and that of graduates specifically.
› Want to discuss the reasons and the way forward.
2
Skill level
CONTEXT: SCER RESEARCH
Top
Shiona Chillas
Intermediate
Pauline Anderson
Routine
Scott Hurrell
Unemployed
Anne Marie Cullen

CONTEXT: HIGH SKILL ECONOMY
CONTEXT: EMPIRICAL OUTCOMES
CONTEXT: HIDDEN DEVELOPMENTS...
POLICY PUSH FOR GRADUATES
› 1990s focus on supply side and boosting education and training →
>50% of young in HE in early 2000s.
› Intervention free intervention (Keep), leaving the ‘black box’ alone.
› Pressure on universities to align courses to jobs and integrate skills
into courses (Willets; CBI)
› Had academic support (Finegold and Soskice): WD → OD → BD.
› No impact on competitiveness in Scotland, just created over-qualified
workforce and under-employment in work (30-40% employees)
(Strathclyde Careers Service; Felstead et al.; Skills Australia).
› From mid-2000s policy shift to demand; jobs must exist that need
these skills – skills a ‘derived demand’ (Scottish Government;
UKCES).
› Recognise now that BD → OD → WD. How to trigger is now the
policy concern.
7
DEMAND FOR GRADUATE SKILLS
› Some gradates still entering ‘graduate jobs’ (i.e. SOC2 requiring L4
qualifications); some cascading down SOC into previously non-graduate
jobs – ‘the jobs graduates do’ (Elias and Purcell).
› But what’s happening? Differing accounts:
- Skills mismatch as supply outstrips demand (Felstead et al.). Too much supply,
not enough demand.
- However graduatisation can be a professionalisation strategy (Anderson). Leads
to spiralling credentialism.
- Multiple matching as different pathways into different jobs (Chillas). Maintains
tight coupling of university and jobs but labour market not process focused.
- Degree as a signal of ability and employers being rational; unaware of actual
skills possessed. Qualification a labour market ticket rather than reflective of
labour process skill demands (Warhurst and Thompson).
- The skills required to do the job can be ‘soft’ or at least unaccredited (Warhurst
and Nickson).
KEY ISSUES IN GRADUATE LABOUR
› Need to distinguish between skills that:
1. Are possessed prior to entering higher education.
2. Are acquired through higher education
3. Are required to obtain employment.
4. Are required to be deployed in work.
› Means going upstream, examining family and school, and
downstream, inside firms, entering the ‘black box’.
9
PROBLEM 1: POLICY TO PRACTICE GAP
› Evidence base about skills utilisation ‘patchy and disparate’
(Buchanan et al.)
› Firm-level practice is weak and need to engage employers.
› The incentive is the need to change business strategy – most usually
market pressures (Jung et al.).
- Management not good at reading market signals (cf. Bosworth).
- Understand government’s aim but have little incentive to open black box.
› For workers more and better skills a private good, beneficial to:
- Employability, pay and prospects.
› For government, more and better skills delivers public good:
- Reduced unemployment and poverty, and improved social mobility (Scottish
Government).
10
PROBLEM 2: MEASUREMENT GAP
› Not clear what employers are being exhorted to do.
› Lack of conceptual clarity about skills utilisation; two issues:
- 1. Failure to distinguish skills as P and J:
- P=J equates to effective skills utilisation
- J>P equates to workers’ lack of skills to do the job
- P>J equates to workers’ skills under-utilisation.
- 2. Remedial action:
- J>P → use of better skills – or upskilling and doing a better job
- P>J → better use of skills – or exploit existing skills to do a job better
- The first is the goal of government – high skill economy; the latter
addresses untapped potential of workers.
11
PROXIES ARE UNHELPFUL
› Proxy is HPWS; provides seemingly neat aspirational and inspirational
benchmark but unhelpful:
- Take up of HPWS not high in Scotland, the UK and elsewhere e.g. Australia
(WERS, Martin and Healy).
- What is ‘high’ in the US is standard practice elsewhere (Boxall and Mackay).
So doesn’t necessarily deliver.
- Links between HPWS and firm performance ambiguous and difficult to
evaluate (Payne).
- Skill utilisation not measured, instead proxied e.g. QCs (Huselid) but QCs can
lead to work intensification (Tuckman).
- Little consensus on what constitutes HPWS or their most effective
combination (Huselid; Ramsey et al.).
12
MOVING FORWARD
› So definition weak and as a new policy push, not surprising that not
recognised or understood by employers; if can’t understand it, can’t
implement it.
› Need better understanding amongst stakeholders (but not another
label cf. CfE).
› Don’t need to reinvent the wheel with skills utilisation. Lessons exist
e.g. AMO (Appelbaum and Batt)
› The use of better skills approach is important but limited:
- The number of high skill jobs is constrained.
- Can’t magic high skills from soft skills (cf. ies).
› Better to focus on better use of skills – more realistic (and needed?).
- Addresses over-qualification, under-employment and untapped potential.
› But need to understand what skills in P and J; and context of the
relationship.
13
BETTER UNDERSTANDING GRADUATE SKILLS
› There are five obstacles to be overcome:
1 The type of analysis
- Stop ‘occupational label-gazing’; need labour process, not just
labour market research
2 The focus of analysis is myopic
- Need to disentangle qualifications and skills
3 The focus of analysis is undifferentiating
- There are different types of skill and knowledge
4 The conceptual scope of analysis is limited
- Beyond skill supply still need to take skill utilisation seriously
5 The empirical scope of the analysis is limited
- Need to analyse graduate and non-graduate labour; research
needs to focus on where it is most applicable – services.
MOVING FORWARD GENERALLY
› Need inductive research through qualitative organisational case studies,
preferably action research and longitudinal to evaluate outcomes
(Payne).
› But researchers who best understand skills wary of policy engagement
and inexperienced of action research. Need to develop the critical mass
of willing and able researchers
› But in context of partnership and with protocols for the research and
stakeholder involvement (Ramstad; cf. Better not Cheaper campaign).
› Concept agreement, systemic tools, project funding and political and
social partners’ support. Must also involve a co-ordinated network of
colleges and universities, research institutes, consultancies, firms, labour
market organisations and policy bodies (cf. SCER IAS bid).
15
CONCLUDING REMARKS
› Skills policy thinking still evolving but skills utilisation push, whilst logical,
is in danger of running into the sand: policy to practice and measurement
gaps.
› Know too little about skills utilisation generally and in relation to
graduates.
› Need broader focus in analysing graduate skills: development, supply,
demand, deployment.
› Need to disentangle skills and qualifications before re-assembling through
education and training.
› To do so useful to develop ‘collective interests’ (all stakeholders, bridging
private/public good); develop ‘innovation ecosystem’?
› Within this system need better research informed by protocols and
partners.
16