Training: Skills revolution fails to start: managers are doing very little to further the Government's initiatives, writes Roger Trapp

TRAINING - we are constantly told - is the vital ingredient for future British industrial success. Management gurus, politicians, even business people themselves agree that the combination of intense competition and leaner, flatter organisations puts a premium on knowledge and creativity.

But so far there is disappointingly little evidence of these theories being put into practice. A recent survey by the Institute of Management and Manpower, the employment services company, found that Britain's most senior managers were unaware - or unconvinced - of the benefits of the National and Scottish Vocational Qualifications and Investors in People.

Although senior managers had heard of the initiatives - which are central planks in the Government's plans to revolutionise work-based training - they had little detailed knowledge, with some needing to be persuaded of the benefits to their own organisations.

Part of the problem might be that companies are still not sufficiently encouraged to make an investment that does not have a clear and swift impact on the bottom line.

A recent gathering of human- resource or personnel directors from a variety of businesses, part of the Royal Society of Arts' inquiry into 'Tomorrow's Company', demonstrated the level of interest in the issue - and the lack of a clear idea of what to do about it.

There was strong support for a vigorous campaign to raise awareness of the training initiatives. A 'cradle to grave' approach was seen as important, emphasising the relevance of training of all kinds at every stage of individual educational and career development.

But some companies have already acknowledged the need for this and spent significant sums putting something in place - only to find that it does not fit in with the NVQs. One executive put the cost to her company of switching schemes at more than pounds 2m - money that could be better spent on training itself.

Other companies are put off investing in the people extolled in annual reports as the 'greatest resource' by the increasing trend away from life- long careers. The meeting saw general agreement about the need to encourage individuals to take control of their own development from an early stage.

This is fine for those who realise the need to be well equipped with skills, but less good for the mass that has not cottoned on. And with widespread agreement that government incentives only encourage spending for the wrong reasons, there is plenty of excuse for all but the most far-sighted companies to evade the issue for a while yet.

However, there is hope in the fact that such a discussion was happening at all. Part of the remit of the RSA inquiry, of which the discussion formed a part, is an investigation of how far companies should acknowledge other interests besides those of shareholders.

The debate is growing about the role to be played by other 'stakeholders', including creditors, employees and the community as a whole, and there are signs that companies will be accountable for more than their profits or dividends.

Many of those attending the RSA discussion felt that this notion should be used to pressurise companies into revealing their commitment to training. A company's training policy or its per capita expenditure could be a legitimate indicator of prospects for its long-term prosperity, they said.

(Photograph omitted)