CAREER DEVELOPMENT POLICY MODELS
Synthesis Paper
Second International Symposium on Career Development and Public Policy
Vancouver, Canada, March 2001
David H. Fretwell, Peter Plant
I.
Introduction
1.
The following paragraphs summarize career development policies from countries in Europe, North
America, and South East Asia. The synthesis draws primarily from Symposium papers developed by
individual country representatives, and is supplemented by the authors’ experience in working in several the
countries as well as in several neighboring countries. The following sub-topics are addressed in this
synthesis: (a) the setting and starting point for career development policy; (b) governance and finance of
career development policy and programs; (c) how policies reflect preventative, reactive, and/or remedial
approaches; and (d) how the policies address and affect access, decentralized vs. centralized approaches.
Under each topic general and divergent trends are noted, with country examples, and identification of issues
related to adoption or adaptation of different policy options.
II.
The Setting and Starting Point for Career Development and Public Policy
2.
Career development and public policy is affected by multiple factors including, but not limited to:
the geo-political environment, the heritage and level of economic development, social and cultural norms,
and the sub-sector that takes leadership at the outset.

Geo-Political: Policy development in countries within the EU (Ireland, Spain) and Candidate Countries
(Hungary) are directly affected by EU policies, including the EU Social Charter, EU Employment
Action Plans, and Structural Indicators which emphasize employment, innovation, social inclusion, and
economic reform. A positive outgrowth of these policies is benchmarks and indicators – some of which
provide national direction for career development policy (i.e. Leonardo Program, National Resource
Center Guidelines for Vocational Guidance). A potential negative outgrowth of these policies,
particularly for candidate and accession countries, is that such policies may not be appropriate and may
limit available options. Several EU country papers make considerable note of the linkage with EU
policies (Ireland, Spain) while others do not emphasize the linkage (Denmark, Netherlands, Germany).

Level of Economic Development: Policy development in Hungary, Israel, China (HK), and other middle
income countries are directly affected by the level of economic development. Economies, which are
making the transition from a socially planned, to a democratic market, economy (Hungary), have to deal
with radical changes in the role of the state, the individual, and the economy. This has an immense
effect on the starting point, nature, and investment in, career development. Similarly the level of
development in some countries (Israel) where there are large numbers of poor citizens. They may not
have much chance to consider career choices when they are operating at the lower levels of Maslow's
hierarchy of needs, and this will affect investments in and use of career development programs.

Heritage and Culture: The cultural heritage in some countries (South East Asia), may not ascribe to free
provision of career information, open career choice for youth, and rapid labor mobility. Family,
religious, and social norms are forces that will affect career development policies and must be taken into
account when attempting to adapt western style policies.

Labor Market vs. Educational Leadership: Initial leadership for career development policy varies
between countries, changes over time, and directly affects policy content, application, and outcomes. In
most countries, a fault line divides the career development field. On one tectonic plate: the labour market
and the labour market institutions and their career development services (in Employment Services etc).
On another tectonic plate: The educational institutions and their career development services. Seldom do
the two meet in mutual collaboration, yet they constantly influence each other and interact. Other plates
are in motion too, as indicated below. When societal objectives move suddenly (e.g. Hungary) and
political systems and values shift, profound changes occur in terms of life/work: this is where career
development can facilitate such changes and where carer development policy models become important.
Based on the track selected career development policy may be focused on labour market issues (i.e. more
often than not: the short term interests of employers in need of human resources), and another which is
focused on learning and personal development. The two may come together, but often do not. This forms
the basis for much policy tension: the aims of career development differ. There seems to be little room
for neutral ground between the two, yet the traditional borders are under erosion: economic, ecological,
educational, social, and labour market policies are interwoven in modern society. In governmental
structures, this is reflected in constant reshuffling of departments and ministries (e.g. Netherlands).
In most countries, policies in this field mirror a publicly funded sector with public (state or regionally
based) common policies, most of which aim at sustaining economic growth, more than sustainability in
an ecological sense. In short, career development strategies are largely part and parcel of each country's
economic and social policy areas: such policies span broad issues as 'full employment', 'social inclusion',
'social equity', 'minority rights', and 'equal opportunities', to mention some main categories. As is evident
from this list of heavy societal issues, career development infringes on numerous major policy areas.
Little seems to be done to ensure that such policies in fact accomplish their goals, even though
evaluations are abundant in many countries (e.g. UK, Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, USA, Canada).
III.
Stakeholders, Governance, and Financing
3.
The papers discuss stakeholder involvement fairly extensively, and address to a some degree how
this is translated into governance, but do not address the issue of financing in depth.

Stakeholders: In many countries (e.g. Sweden, Germany, Denmark) the stakeholders (social partners) are
heavily involved in both policymaking and delivery, due to the prevailing political culture. For historical
reasons, tripartite structures are in place in some countries (e.g. Germany, Hungary). In others, the social
partners seem to play a more subdued role. Where this is the case, professional organisations (Career
Counsellors' Associations etc) seem to play a more pronounced role in term of lobbying and even
accrediting qualifications (e.g. UK, USA, and Quebec in Canada). Social partners, in most cases, include
trade unions and employers' associations/ chambers of commerce/ industrial confederations. In some
countries 'social partners' comprise wider groups such as Autonomous Regions (e.g. Spain), or
Associations of Municipalities or Counties (e.g. Denmark). In various ways, according to the national
culture and context, wider bodies such as The Guidance Council (UK), The National Council for
Educational and Vocational Guidance (Denmark), The Canadian Career Development Foundation and
The Life/Work Centre (Canada), all represent a move towards involving more (and broader) social
partners, ensuring a mutual understanding, instigating a common vocabulary, developing standards,
professional development, and initiating research in career

Governance: Governance often starts out with informal inclusion of different stakeholders and then
often moves toward formal inclusion. Informal inclusion and advisory functions are found in Hungary
(Working Committee for Job Placement and Guidance). Professional guidance and counseling
associations are also key forces for policy development is some countries (US, Sweden). More
formalized inter-agency groups often grow out of these initiatives (the Canadian Intergovernmental
bodies of Ministries of Labor and Education). These groups can evolve into formal and legislated
governing bodies such as in the US National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee and the
Danish National Council for Educational and Vocational Guidance. These stakeholder and governing
groups can develop informal guidelines, create more formal “white papers” (Sweden), and lobby for
inclusion of career development concepts in key legislative initiatives (Spain, Denmark, Ireland).

Finance: Development and recurrent financing is critical for maintenance of quality career development
programs. Financing is linked with governance, must address both developmental and recurrent costs.
Financing is directly affected by overarching policies regarding centralized vs. decentralized approaches,
and can vary considerably between education and labor institutions. In a number of countries,
particularly where there are national inter-governmental initiatives, national funds provide a major
portion of program development costs (USA, Germany). Development financing may also come from
outside sources (World Bank in Hungary, European Social Fund in some EU countries). In a number of
countries recurrent delivery costs are substantially supported by national authorities in both the education
and labor sectors (Sweden, Netherlands). Some countries split the development and recurrent costs
between national and local sources (USA, Australia). This approach tends to be more prevalent in
education than in labor market institutions. Devolution and decentralization has a major, and at times
negative impact of recurrent financing of career development programs. If some national leadership and
financing is not available it may result in fragmented, scattered, and duplicatory development,
particularly if local authorities must fund recurrent costs but have limited funds (Israel), or do not see
guidance as high priority (Netherlands). Finally, while public financing and service delivery predominate
in a number of countries (Hungary, Germany, New Zealand, Denmark, Sweden), there is a move to
contract out services to private and NGO services providers in other countries (USA, Australia), and to
expect adults to pay for some services (New Zealand – with the exception of targeted at risk groups).
Even in countries where privatisation has been taken far (e.g. UK & Netherlands) (or quasi privatisation,
e.g. New Zealand) public guidelines seek to ensure quality measurement through national standards and
strict evaluation procedures, rather than international comparisons, for example. In fact, the more
privatised, the more control in terms of formal evaluation procedures seem to be in operation. From a
practitioner's point of view this is a challenge: it urges career development services to be more specific
in terms its the benefits, output, success criteria etc; more so than in services which are merely based on
the assumption that 'Guidance is good for most people'. Which people? Using which methods?
IV
Preventive, Reactive or Remedial Career Development Policies
4.
There appears to be some disconnect between stated policies and actual practice, the policies vary
considerably between education and labor institutions, and while both preventive and remedial are needed
the following situation appears to exist.

Preventive: These policies are most prevalent in educational and youth career development settings
where there are deliberate attempts to develop skills for life-long career planning and decision making
in courses or programs like the “Real Game” (Australia, UK, NZ, Ireland, Canada, US, Netherlands). In
several countries there appears to be some disconnect between stated educational policy and practice,
perhaps because of shortages of trained staff and supporting materials (Spain) or because the
interventions occur rather late for youth (i.e. at the end of compulsory or secondary school such as in
Germanys, Sweden) as opposed to providing services during elementary school (Denmark). Finally,
adult continuing education and labor institutions in a number of countries do attempt to be proactive
with adults, in particular to prevent long term unemployment. EU Employment Guidelines have
benchmarks for provision of services to unemployed youth and adults within prescribed periods of time,
but actual implementation in EU countries appears spotty, Australia has service provision benchmarks
for unemployed over and under 25 years of age, and the US and State Employment Service use profiling
techniques to identify those who have a potential to become long-term unemployed.

Reactive and Remedial: These policies predominate in labor institutions which are dealing with the
unemployed in many countries (Hungary, UK, New Zealand, Ireland, etc). And, as noted in the previous
paragraph, reactive programs predominate in education and youth settings in some countries (Spain, and
to some extent in Canada with the exception of Quebec which has a special proactive program for
youth). Special note should be made of the difficulties being experienced by transition economies in
Europe and Central Asia which are shifting to democratic market from socialist planned economies
where unemployment was virtually unknown, the unemployed were considered social misfits, most
counseling was done by psychologists and focused on Skinnerian as opposed to Rogerian concepts,
repetitive job changes were frowned on, and the state planned labor demand. Development and
implementation of modern proactive career policies for the masses, as opposed to intensive
psychological counseling for a selected few, is a major challenge in these environments.
V
Access, Entitlement, and Targeting
5.
Access is affected by a number of previously described factors including a countries setting and
starting point, governance, and financing as well as the availability of qualified staff. There are several ways
of looking at access and entitlements including from a legislated point of view, from an institutional point of
view, or from a client point of view.

Legislation: Legislation does not guarantee access, but it can facilitate it and provide a framework for
financing development and recurrent costs and development of related regulations, guidelines and
programs. A number of countries have taken specific steps to provide overarching legislation ranging
from public policy statements about employment, career development, and education in constitutions,
laws, and white papers (Spain, Germany, Sweden, USA, Australia, etc). Similar initiatives are
exemplified by the European Commission Structural Indicators, Employment Policy, and Social Fund.
Normally legislation supporting career development is embodied in legislation for vocational training
(Hungary), education (Spain), labor (Germany), and recently in legislation and initiatives supporting
life-long learning (Canada).

Institutions: Educational institutions, in particular secondary schools, are the primary access point for
career development services for youth in most countries. However there are several notable variations. In
some countries, in-order to enhance career development programs, there is a deliberate effort to provide
some services in upper elementary schools (Denmark, and to some extent in US career awareness
initiatives). In other countries interventions are left to the end of compulsory school or are implemented
at departure from secondary education (Spain, Germany, Sweden). This latter approach may lessen the
impact if “tracking” has already occurred within secondary schools. In many countries career
development is common and emerging service in post-secondary, adult and higher education programs
(US, Canada, Australia, UK, Sweden) but is sometimes missing in higher education institutions. Labor
institutions, notably national and local labor offices, provide a range of career development services to
unemployed adults in all countries, but the level and quality of services can vary from simple job
matching and job bank approaches, to full services including individual assessment, access to a range of
active labor programs, and job placement. Other institutions, including Non Government Community
Agencies and private agencies, either with public or private financing, increasingly provide services to
adults in a number of countries (US, Australia, New Zealand). Provision of labor services in Germany
and Sweden, previously public monopolies, has recently been opened to other providers

Client Targeting: Two groups are routinely targeted in most countries including: (a) in school youth, but
the quality, duration, and timing of the programs varies considerably; and, (b) unemployed youth and
adults. Special targeted services are provided, in some countries, to help prevent long term
unemployment (Australia, US, some EU countries). Other programs are targeted to (a) refugees and
displaced persons (Sweden), (b) minorities and indigenous people (New Zealand), (c) the disabled in a
number of countries including Hungary and New Zealand, and (d) those on social assistance and welfare
(Canada, US, Australia).

Life Long Learning and Career Development: Nine of the country papers indicate that they are
undertaking specific policy initiatives to address career development in the context of life-long
learning. Presently many countries have fragments of systems in-lace, and as noted in a recent OECD
review of lifelong learning, while many countries are embracing the idea of lifelong learning and career
development few have determined how to finance and implement it effectively.

Information Technology; The use of information technology (IT), including expanding use of the
internet, as a method to increase access to career development assistance and self-service is mentioned
in many country papers and advanced and comprehensive services are increasingly available in a
number of countries (Canada, US, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark). Others are just beginning
development (Hungary, Israel) and some countries are raising questions at to which services can be
provided by IT, and what services require face to fact contact between clients and career development
specialists. Job matching and labor market information are two services where there appears to be some
consensus about IT provision, but assessment and career development planning are more controversial
(i.e. IT delivery of the “Real Game” would be problematic). There are concerns about the availability
and appropriateness of standardized IT services for poor, and possibly some indigenous, people. The
use of IT services is being driven by the expanding nature of the internet and low cost communications,
coupled with efforts to reduce cost of delivery and provide services to increasing numbers of clients.
VI
Centralization vs. Decentralization
Public policy in many countries continues to move toward decentralization and this trend has a
major impact on career development policy. Recent examples of decentralization include devolution to the
four entities in the UK, a major decentralization of public services in New Zealand and Hungary, moves to
decentralize in Germany, and long standing examples in the US and Canada where decentralized state,
provincial, and local government is a basic tenant of the political fabric of the countries. The EU, on the
surface, may appear to be a counter trend. However, while economic, social, and employment policies are
designed to promote free movement of labor and capital, each country is very much responsible for its own
education policy. Decentralization is more advanced in education (school) governance, finance, and delivery;
than in labor institutions (i.e. labor offices). However, Poland as a part of overall local government reform,
recently disbanded the national network of labor offices and gave management to local government. The
impact of decentralization on career development policy can be dramatic, and if not accounted for can have a
negative impact on program development and continued operation.
The issues with regard to decentralization are highlighted in Denmark, which although a relatively small
compact country compared to Australia, notes that under an “extreme culture of decentralization; provision,
target groups, and priorities vary considerably – this is a coin with two sides: fruitful variations coincide
with overlaps and gaps and decentralization has its price: disparity”. Experience in several countries
indicates that it is crucial to combine some national leadership, standards, and guidelines. The more
decentralised, the more active the role of the local and regional level of the social partners. Some countries
feature centralised policy models (e.g. Finland, New Zealand, Germany), especially in terms of labour
market related career development policies, whereas others are decentralised to a point where little
coherence is assured (e.g. USA). Some aim at combining centralised and decentralised models (e.g. AUS).
In most cases, educationally based career development services work under more decentralised policy and
management structures, some to a degree where each municipality, in fact, forms its own policy under loose
central guidelines (e.g. Denmark). Some tension and rivalry may occur under such circumstances, along with
some policing of boundaries. Even in highly centralised, almost monopoly-like circumstances tensions may
arise, especially when monopolies are abandoned (e.g. Germany), as to who does what in this new
environment.
VII
Summary
8.
In summary, there are no golden keys for career development policy that be applied to assure all
citizens in a given country can achieve both self-fulfillment and become a fully productive members of
society. Even in this age of globalization nations are still bound by their history, geography, and myths, and
policy makers who this fact when developing career development policies do so at their own risk.
Philosophical, social, cultural, and economic differences exist between developed countries in Europe, North
America, and other parts of the world, as they do between the developed and developing countries. Many of
the latter increasingly need to address human resource and career development issues as globalization of
trade and commerce proceeds. There are multiple alternatives with regard to starting points, governance and
financing, addressing proactive and reactive issues, and dealing with the implications of decentralization.
Each country needs to review the alternatives, and make selections with knowledge of the downstream
implications of each choice as they move from informal to formalized policy development and
implementation.