The National Report of the United Kingdom

Part I: The background and context for workplace learning partnerships in the United Kingdom

(Draft version 30.11.2006)

Workplace Learning Partnerships in automotive supply chains in England

Alan Brown, IER, University of Warwick

alan.brown@warwick.ac.uk

Abstract:

This paper analyses attempts made in a development project on Knowledge and Learning in Advanced Supply Systems (KLASS), funded by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the European ADAPT programme, to support the learning of individuals and organisations in the automotive industry. The project sought to support small and medium size enterprises (SMEs?) through inter-company, computer-mediated, learning networks that had a strong focus on both immediate performance improvements and longer-term educational objectives. The underlying pedagogical idea was that there is considerable value in attempting to link processes of knowledge creation with tackling the core problems of manufacturing practice as a means of engaging learners that have traditionally been difficult for educational institutions to reach. The model of learning used with its emphasis upon networking, knowledge creation, linking an initial focus upon performance with a progressive broadening of ideas about learning and development was particularly well suited to its context: supporting learning and development in advanced supply chains. However, the scale of the effort and resources required to make the project successful means that considerable challenges would remain if the model were to be successfully implemented in a range of other contexts.

Introduction

Small and medium sized enterprises in most sectors face intense pressures resulting from the strategies, tactics and operational methods of the large companies that dominate their markets, particularly where these are linked to supply chain restructuring. Stresses on SMEs? also emanate from the extending roles of e-commerce. Yet operational demands force them to deal continually with immediate tasks and problems, and they generally operate within extremely limited time horizons, leaving them with few opportunities to develop an overall strategic approach to their business. Here I analyse the attempts made within the Knowledge and Learning in Advanced Supply Systems (KLASS) project to support the learning of individuals and organisations in advanced supply systems in the automotive industry in ways that focused both upon immediate performance improvements and longer term objectives. This approach could improve the prospects for productive collaboration between SMEs? and institutions in the broad educational sector. It also supports the development of new capabilities in SMEs?, including those related to exploitation of the Internet and e-commerce, and fosters a shift from the immediate, short term focus of SMEs? to a more strategic perspective.

The strategic and operational contexts of SMEs? have been influenced by the changing patterns of innovation within supply systems for complex products in the automotive industry in the last decade. Current forms of product system integration now differ markedly from those of the past, which were based on single ownership of multiple stages of production and distribution. The newer forms have developed around the process of ‘de-integration’ in large companies, and are currently viewed in terms of the ‘supply chain’. They are generally founded on large firm control over market access at strategic points in the total product system  for instance, retailer control over access to consumers. This control is facilitated by intensive use of information and communications technologies and is used to achieve tight co-ordination over all stages of production.

The KLASS project was concerned principally with the automotive and aerospace component supply sectors, with the intention of improving production and sustaining supply chain participation among smaller companies. In this paper, however, the focus will be upon the contextual background of the automotive supply chain wand how learning in networks was supported in that sector.

The automotive supply chain

The automotive supply chain involves the total sequence of production from raw materials extraction and processing, through intermediate stages of component production and manufacture of sub-assemblies, into end product manufacture. In the automotive industries, the supply chain is increasingly being managed as a total product system. Within the product system, the KLASS project was concerned with the levels below that of the vehicle manufacturers – that is, in what is generically referred to as automotive component supply. Product systems are organised hierarchically, with the vehicle manufacturer at the top, controlling level. The characteristics of suppliers in the different tiers vary greatly, but some generalisations are useful. Those in tier one are mostly large or very large companies in terms of employee numbers and capitalisation. Many have a sophisticated technological base - for instance, those producing specialised electronic, electro-mechanical and mechatronic systems or subsystems. The capacities of the leading tier one suppliers include significant research and development, product design and other advanced innovative capabilities. These companies are pressed to develop these capabilities further by manufacturers that are increasingly outsourcing elements of product development and manufacturing (Abreu et al 2000). The tier one suppliers have an expanding role in vehicle specification, but this is accompanied by closer scrutiny of their practices by the manufacturers through 'supplier assessment'.

By contrast, the numerous companies in tiers two to four are mostly SMEs?, including many micro enterprises. Some of these provide specialist functions, but many have very limited technological capabilities. The KLASS project was primarily concerned with companies in these tiers, although manufacturers and tier one companies can have a central, motivating role in stimulating these smaller companies to participate in learning networks. These SMEs? have been faced with changing patterns of supply, and with significant restructuring within the industry, adding an extra dimension to the uncertainty they face.

Structural change in the automotive sector

Since the early 1990s, growth in vehicle ownership has exceeded by the rate of growth in manufacturing capacity, and in this highly competitive context, the sector has experienced a fundamental restructuring  as has been evident in recent changes in the UK-based automotive sector. Among the vehicle manufacturers there have been some major changes in the structure of ownership, through mergers (like Daimler-Benz and Chrysler) and acquisitions of smaller car makers, such as Saab and Volvo, by larger companies. Other companies have become linked through share ownership - such as Renault’s 38% of Nissan and General Motors’ 20% of Fiat. This restructuring could ultimately lead towards global dominance by five or six car producers.

Restructuring has involved a major shift from internal production to outsourcing, bringing new opportunities for suppliers, particularly at the tier one level. Their roles are expanding as they take on the design and production of major systems and modules. However, this is accompanied by closer scrutiny of tier one capabilities by the manufacturers in selecting preferred suppliers, and the 'de-listing' of many other suppliers, that is contributing to a concentration among tier one companies. Mergers and joint ventures have increased, and the number of tier one suppliers, approximately 800 in the late 1990s, is continuing to fall dramatically. There is a parallel reduction in the number of suppliers in the lower tiers.

This change follows from several factors, including attempts to shift towards variants of the 'lean manufacturing' methods associated with Japanese manufacturers. The approach emphasises tight co-ordination between the companies within a vehicle manufacturer’s supplier base. Continual improvement in supplier performance is required to meet manufacturer 'cost-downs' – that is, annual or more frequent reductions in the prices paid to suppliers throughout the production life of a car model. These have become a standard requirement in contracts with suppliers. As the share of total added value accounted for by suppliers rises, supplier efficiencies become increasingly critical to a vehicle manufacturer's competitiveness in relation to product costs and quality and for manufacturing flexibility. Responding to this changed environment presents all suppliers with major challenges to their financial, human and physical resources. The challenges are particularly daunting for SMEs? in tiers two to four since their financial resources and management expertise are generally limited.

SME’s capacities for response are also shaped by a fundamental divide in the emerging supplier hierarchies between the suppliers of more specialised components or services and suppliers of commodity parts and components. The former generally depend on high levels of skills that can be hard to replicate – as is reflected in product development capacities, relative product complexity, and manufacturing capabilities. These capabilities yield relatively high returns and vehicle manufacturer or large tier one customers are often keen to retain these companies as suppliers, because of their contribution to product distinctiveness and value added in the end product. However, commodity items are increasingly sourced by large companies by electronic means, using ‘reverse auctions’ in which potential suppliers bid on price alone for supply contracts. This extends supply opportunities for suppliers in low labour cost locations, and puts pressure on commodity suppliers elsewhere. However, some commodity suppliers in Europe have retained advantages through their proximity to major manufacturing sites and their established abilities to comply with the total quality and kanban delivery requirements embedded in supply contracts.

However, many UK based SMEs? – such as some of those participating in the automotive learning networks – are poorly placed in relation to commodity supply. The underlying problems often relate to very poor standards of management and inefficiencies in their pattern of work organisation. These are reflected in low productivity levels, as is illustrated by Toyota’s work with UK suppliers that improved productivity by some 500% over a five year period (EMTA 2000). Poor performance is also evident in quality shortfalls and in failures to meet customers’ delivery schedules. These shortcomings are also related to inadequate workforce skills. Further problems for these SMEs? often include limited capacities for moving from reliance on commodity products towards activities that yield more added value.

Competitive pressures are thus particularly acute for the approximately 7,000 companies in the UK automotive sector – even before such issues as exchange rates are considered. Many companies are poorly equipped to respond because they lack training oriented management cultures. Often, the management culture is ill suited to recognising the scale of change needed for survival or to initiating the responses required for survival. The scale of the challenge can be indicated by the main capabilities now increasingly sought in suppliers by the large companies. These are:

• consistent output quality  increasingly at the zero defect standard (workplaces where this capability has not been valued rely on high cost ‘inspecting out’ of non-conforming items); • the manufacturing flexibility required to meet customer requirements of small batch deliveries of varied parts; • continuous improvements in production methods to meet regular customer ‘cost-downs’; • the inter-organisational capabilities to meet increasing VM pressure for tight integration and co-ordination of production, product design and development and other functions across the automotive supply chain; • team capabilities depending on multi-skilled team members with high levels of autonomy in determining work priorities; • capabilities for using e-commerce for business to business interactions and transactions across the supply chain; • the development of new management capabilities attuned to these conditions.

The KLASS project: ideas and implementation

The previous sections establish the context of a project focused on learning and knowledge development to facilitate collaborative functioning and improved performance between companies. Project partners included manufacturing and distribution companies, training organisations, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Industry Forum, a college, several universities and network organisations such as the Merseyside Automotive Group. The Open University lead the project, that also involved partners in Denmark, France and Spain. The key project objectives were to:

• clarify and meet organisational and inter-organisational learning needs where co-ordination and integration of design, production and other processes extends across multi-company, multi-stage product supply systems; • identify and utilise the mix of distance learning technologies that is best suited to the combination of individual learners, SMEs? and the project learning networks; • support SMEs? in adapting to demands for increasing knowledge as a foundation for supply chain relationships, and in extending their adaptive and innovative capabilities; • investigate ways in which information and communication technologies can be used to support distance learning in team-focused inter-company contexts.

The project aimed to stimulate economic innovation in SMEs? through innovative learning. The approach centred on the development of two types of learning networks. type 1 networks were process oriented, comprising workplace teams of operators and managers, that linked up to eight suppliers to a main, tier one, customer. They functioned through learning about the core tools and skills needed to improve performance. Teams undertook ‘hands-on’ learning by doing, which involved problem identification, and the development and testing of solutions. The type 2 networks were aimed at senior managers in SMEs? in tiers two to four, which were linked as buyers or suppliers. The focus was on developing awareness of the scale of the threats that they face, and on establishing the measurement and improvement tools required to meet the increasingly demanding quality, cost and delivery standards of customers. Another aim of these networks was to foster the cultural adaptations needed in the current competitive environment.

In both cases, KLASS was building on prior, pioneering work by members of the partnership. A web-centred learning approach also supports the development of e-commerce capabilities and network group learning undertaken between multiple, linked workplaces. Learning support is provided, face to face and via project web-based facilities, by a team of experienced professional engineers, trainers, learning support specialists and mentors.

In the type 1 networks, tier one companies persuaded their suppliers to identify key individuals with central responsibility for shopfloor innovation in supply management. These people, nominated as 'change agents', became project participants, and Open University students, following a course on Stimulating Competitiveness in Supply Chains. They were invited to a series of one week, intensive workshops at the tier one company, led by an engineering tutor (employed by Industry Forum) together with a learning support tutor. In the four week intervals between workshops, the change agents applied what they learned in a practical context in their own companies. They kept in touch with other students via a computer conferencing system and undertook assignments designed to encourage them to reflect on their learning and the implications of applying it. The learning support tutor offered considerable educational support where necessary and marked the students’ assignments.

As the course progressed, the focus shifted from work in individual companies to collaborative learning across the network of participating companies. There are obvious advantages of such a programme for the tier one companies who see rapid benefits in terms of the cost, quality and delivery performance of suppliers. There are also competitive advantages for all the companies in the network. Students also gain as individual learners. Overall, the expectation is that the future competitiveness of the companies will be enhanced, whether they are working with this particular customer or not.

In the type 2 networks, groups of senior managers from SMEs? are brought together at the site of one of the project partners for a diagnostic workshop which aims to help them identify the learning needs of their companies. They then participate in a series of half day workshops that match those needs and, again, use computer based conferencing and activities to keep in touch and to facilitate the application of what they learned within their own environments. The forerunner of the type 2 networks was funded from the DTI initiative 'Learning from Japan'. A Tier 1 or 2 supplier, or sometimes a VM, realised that the key to supply chain performance rested with SMEs?, and reorganised their suppliers into a network that, together, concentrated upon enhancing performance through focusing upon quality, cost and delivery. They used Industry Forum engineers to work on production improvements, and sometimes set up learning centres where employees, suppliers and customers could learn away from immediate pressures of work. Staff employed open learning centres could offer training and development, but also get involved in adapting 'best practice' to different settings. One driver of change has been the quality of sharing of information, knowledge and experience among suppliers across the supply chain.

The Merseyside Automotive Group acted as the key intermediary group in another network. This time there was a very strong pull from the top of the supply chain, and the group has received DTI support in establishing an Automotive College. With impressive facilities and underpinning funding it has been possible for those in education and training to work hard at building relationships with companies. Even SMEs? will work with trusted intermediaries once a relationship has been established, although it is important not to raise company expectations too quickly. The strategy is part of a sectoral approach to business improvement that includes the establishment of an e-business community and a programme of support for continuous improvement. [Note the approach developed by the Merseyside Automotive Group has now been broadened to a regional level in late 2004 with the establishment of the North West Automotive Alliance. This will be the body that will participate in the Workplace Learning Partnerships Project.]?

The type 1 networks were built around Society for Motor Manufacturers and Traders Industry Forum work and the comprehensive learning programmes focused upon improvements to manufacturing processes. The type 2 networks drew on the work of British Open Learning Development Unit and focused upon trying to generate support for supply chain network developments from SMEs?. Once they were launched, however, the networks exhibited a high degree of collaboration and knowledge sharing among the project partners.

The KLASS project: supporting innovation and learning

It is still too early to identify whether cultural shifts have been fully embedded, but achieving such change was one of the long-term goals of the work with the change agents in the companies. The way of working on materials production in which much emphasis is given to the production of meaning within the networks was for the project team indicative of the shift towards a more decentralised view of the processes of knowledge creation. The commitment to working with and through networks also meant that the project materials were tested in a variety of contexts. It is worth emphasising, however, that the focus upon SME skill needs in supply chains was the vehicle for a bold experiment in trying to accomplish organisational and inter-organisational learning and knowledge management across supply chains, as well as supporting individual learning. This implies a reshaping of the boundary between higher education, continuing education and training and organisational development. The underlying pedagogical idea is that there is considerable value in attempting to link processes of knowledge creation with approaches to tackling the core problems of manufacturing practice as a means of engaging learners (in SMEs?) that have traditionally been difficult for formal education and training institutions to reach.

Perhaps as important as the development of innovative learning materials was the recognition by the project team that innovation is a social process. Hence particular attention was given to building relationships to support innovation not just between the partners but also with the companies in the networks. The support for change agents was itself designed so that they would be able to support process innovations within their companies. This means that the networks offered not only a mechanism for technology and process transfer and exchange of ideas about development and practice, but also a means of supporting those interested in acting as change agents in support of development and innovation. The networks have the potential to grow as a general means of innovation transfer in supply chains. The project sought to give people not only access to innovative ideas, but also because of the way the project was structured it also gave learners opportunities to shape these ideas in ways that were directly useful to them in their work. This applied particularly to the work with company change agents.

A major concern with the development of learning networks to support practice is that the knowledge generated is often decontextualised. This may then mean it is of relatively little use to employees in coping with many of the problems they face in practice. One way the KLASS project addressed this concern was through focusing closely upon what the Industry Forum engineers saw as key problems of manufacturing practice in the workplace itself. This ensured attention was given to problems and dilemmas that are central to manufacturing practice. These problems and dilemmas have significance both for individual and organisational performance. The problems are likely to contain combinations of practical concerns, organisational issues and socio-cultural problems. The Industry Forum approach to process improvement was underpinned with an inter-locking series of products: MasterClass?; Supply Chain Group; Team Leader Training; and Value Stream Mapping. Details of this approach, together with case studies of their implementation are given in the DTI (1999) publication ‘Quality, Cost, Delivery: seven measures for improved competitiveness in manufacturing industry’. This approach also means that employees are directly involved in processes of active knowledge creation.

The project developed mechanisms for effective learner support and offered support too for work-based learning as a process. The KLASS project offered effective learner support not only through its system of tutors and assessors, but also through peer support through the network organisation. The focus within the project upon offering substantive support for learning and development of change agents within the companies also resulted in an increase in the capacity of those companies to support other forms of work-based learning. As some of the learning was grounded in improving manufacturing processes and practice there was little doubt that this contributed to improvements in efficiency. The competitiveness of SMEs? may also have been improved insofar as a consequence of the project in that they were able to operate more effectively within supply chains. This is particularly important as in the automotive industry vehicle manufacturers and Tier 1 suppliers are expecting greater independence in ways of working with suppliers and are expressing an increasing commitment to processes of quality training (Abreu et al 2000).

The significance of organised learning support for learning and knowledge development at work

The discussion so far raises the general question of how best to utilise the findings of this interesting, but very specific, project in order to contribute to addressing broader issues of how to support learning at work. Eraut et al (1998) highlight the importance of organised learning support for learning at work, but also draw attention to its relative rarity. So the KLASS project is an example of a highly structured approach to the provision of organised learning support. On the one hand, the case may be thought to have limited generalisability because of the amount of time and other resources poured into the development and implementation of a structured system of learner support. On the other hand, it could be regarded as illustrative of the scale of the effort required if companies and individuals are serious about the implementation of significant change based upon a transformation of the relationship between working and learning. The more specific contributions to this issue are as follows:

• The involvement of Industry Forum engineers and their established processes designed to embed performance improvements in quality, cost and delivery (with consequent promised effects on organisational effectiveness more generally) acted as a strong catalyst to galvanise the interest of companies. Once the initially narrowly focused learning approach was underway it was often (though not always) possible to broaden the interest of companies and participants in learning. • It is relatively easy to have an immediate impact on quality, cost and delivery in companies that have been primarily concerned with immediate operational issues. In contrast the process of embedding sustained continuing improvement is much more challenging and could take years to achieve. This is not to decry the value of the process outlined here, rather just to acknowledge that in organisational terms it is the ideally beginning of a longer-term process. • The focus of the Industry Forum engineers and the group of learners upon making real improvements in manufacturing practice and process at one level could fit with ideas about the collaborative creation of new knowledge. However, at another level their understanding of learning was formulaic: improvements were achieved by following a very particular approach to improvement based upon what they had learned from Japanese 'master engineers'. Hence within the project the engineering experts had themselves to learn more about learning. Involvement in the project resulted in a learning process for the engineers in how to link what they had been doing in terms of performance improvement to broader learning and assessment processes in the type 1 networks. Their involvement in the type 2 networks represented a further role enhancement for them and contributed to their own learning and development. • The approach to learning through networking could be seen as an example of an active model of learning whereby learners are engaged in the creation of 'new contextualised' knowledge, not recipients of a largely passive process of knowledge transmission. This is in line with the theoretical framework developed to explain processes of organisational knowledge creation by Nonaka and colleagues (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Nonaka & Konno 1998). This approach makes use of a social model of knowledge creation and transformation. The key process for genuine knowledge transformation to occur is that knowledge has to move from the individual level into wider communities of interaction that cross organisational boundaries as happens in the KLASS networks. It is worth expanding upon the link between KLASS networks and organisational knowledge creation in more detail.

Nonaka & Konno (1998) use the idea of ba as shared spaces for emerging relationships that provide a platform for advancing individual and/or collective knowledge and of generating collaborative processes that enable the transformation of that knowledge to other contexts. This fits with the KLASS approach, as does the idea that active involvement and collaboration in the networks allows participants to transcend their particular (traditional) perspectives. In supporting people in their attempt to bring about change in manufacturing processes opportunities have to be given for practitioners to transform information from written or broadcast material into practical individual and collective knowledge. It may also be that the analytically rational world represented in learning materials may be too 'cold' for many people: they may need a richer form of engagement. The processes of socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation that underpin Nonaka & Takeuchi’s (1995) model of dynamic knowledge conversions gives insight into why this lack of engagement may occur. It is therefore worthwhile viewing the approach of the KLASS project in the light of these processes in more detail.

Socialisation (through originating ba): Nonaka & Konno (1998) point to the need for an originating ba (or space for socialisation) where individuals can share feelings, emotions, experiences and mental models. This is necessary not only to generate initial commitment (the value of which has long been recognised), but also because genuine knowledge transformation also requires a 'magic synthesis' of rationality and intuition that requires a greater depth of human engagement than just thinking. Within the KLASS approach the originating ba occurs during the initial face to face network meetings.

Externalisation (through interacting ba): The creation of space for active reflection by groups can be seen in the way in subsequent network meetings groups would jointly examine a range of problems commonly associated with manufacturing practice. The groups would comprise individuals with a mix of backgrounds, knowledge and capabilities. Individuals could share their own ideas and understandings (although in the type 1 networks this phase was led by an Industry Forum engineer), and through processes of reflection and analysis, seek to generate some common understandings of how to improve manufacturing practice.

Combination (through cyber ba): This stage involves creating space for combining the ideas generated in the previous stage with existing information about how work is organised in a particular workplace. Network groups would jointly examine problems in a particular workplace. The groups would again comprise individuals with a mix of backgrounds, knowledge and capabilities. This time though individual ideas and understandings would be combined through processes of discussion and analysis in order to generate shared understandings of how to improve the manufacturing process in that particular workplace. This involves the generation of new forms of explicit contextualised knowledge.

Internalisation (through exercising ba) The exercising ba is a shared space to facilitate the conversion of the (newly generated) explicit knowledge into the tacit knowledge of individuals and groups. This will involve active consideration of how to apply that knowledge in different contexts and the use of strategies to support the knowledge conversion process. This was the task of the change agent, trying to embed new ways of thinking about manufacturing processes and practices in her or his particular workplace.

This approach involves the spiralling of knowledge creation and transformation through continuing cycles of socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation. The structure of KLASS project support was designed to allow material and ideas to be fed into the change processes over time. The essence of the ba of the learning community as a whole is that it does not involve a static accumulation of different materials, documents and information, but rather when it works well it possesses the dynamism continually to create new knowledge.

This approach to the development of practice is reflective, forward-looking and dynamic and works best within a culture that acknowledges the importance of developing practice, expertise and analytical capabilities in an inter-related way so as to be able to support the generation of new forms of knowledge. Those involved in such developments need to have a continuing commitment to explore, reflect upon and improve their practice (Schön1987). The initial key to going beyond competent practice lies in the ability to transfer skills, knowledge and understanding from one context to another (Eraut 1994). Increasingly those working in complex supply chains are expected to perform effectively when they work in teams or task groups with colleagues with different backgrounds and different kinds of expertise. The KLASS approach is predicated upon the idea that those engaged in particular work practices and processes have a key role to play in how new knowledge is generated and applied in practice (Engeström 1994).

An individual’s knowledge of practice can itself regarded as a personal synthesis of received occupational knowledge and situational understandings, derived from experimental learning, which are capable of being further transformed through a process of critical reflection. As expertise develops, and new contexts are utilised in the performance of practice, so the processes of analysis, review and reflection can lead to the creation of new forms of knowledge (Engeström 1994). Additionally Eraut (2000) points to how people have to deal with contextual variables, such as the time available and the volume of information to be processed, that mean they have to produce appropriate responses in situations where the conditions for ‘best practice’ are not present. Approaches such as those adopted in the KLASS project therefore constitute an important way in which to develop contextualised knowledge of how to affect continuing practice and process improvements.

The role of assessment in supporting individual learning and knowledge development at work

The benefits of the KLASS approach to companies and for individuals performing their work roles was evident in improved organisational effectiveness. However, what personal advantages might an individual gain from participation in KLASS activities? It is here that assessment and accreditation have a role to play. The Open University pursued a dual track towards recognising the achievement of KLASS participants, where individuals could accumulate credit towards either or both National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) units or higher education credit accumulation and transfer (CATS) points. This was an interesting approach to bridging between different types of qualifications. The use of assignments that involved critical reflection, adaptability and forward thinking was a powerful developmental supplement that overcame many of the problems traditionally associated with the relatively narrow focus of National Vocational Qualifications. The type1 network students worked towards an Award in Change Management comprising up to three units at NVQ level 3 or 4. Amongst the activities in the programme is support for the development of an Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning portfolio, which may enable some students to gain further accreditation.

There were clear benefits to change agents and some other participants of access to recognised qualifications, accreditation of some existing skills and knowledge and opportunities for further learning and development. They also had opportunities to experience new approaches to learning based upon collaboration and active reflection, with the consequence that participants were more likely to recognise that many of their skills were transferable and could be used in a variety of contexts. Indeed attainments in learning could be formally recognised if they were written up in a learner’s portfolio and/or if an individual completed all or some of the four written assignments.

The assignments helped students pull their learning together: for example, they could reflect upon how they might transfer what they had learned in the Industry Forum real-time workshops about improvements to practice and process to other contexts. The assignments also provided NVQ evidence as well as opportunities for learners to reflect upon their own learning, and were a valuable part of the personal development associated with working on the programme as a whole. The assignments were used by some employees as supporting evidence in company appraisal processes. The assignments therefore helped learning become more portable or transferable. [The downside to this process is that some employees were not enamoured of having to write up what they had learned in assignments. For them the spectre was not one of lifelong learning, but of lifelong homework!]?

Assignments give clear evidence of the effect on the organisation of individual learning, but a question is raised whether there is a need to recognise the efforts of a team. One argument is that this is especially necessary as the team is the key link if there is to be a continuing commitment to learning in the form of attempts to sustain continuing improvement and support the creation of new knowledge. The team can also be a vehicle for innovation and the development of adaptability, evidenced by the ability to perform effectively in a range of contexts. The goal is to get the team as a whole to be forward looking and proactive.

Unusually those involved in this programme can demonstrate improvements in aspects of company performance and improvements in their own individual learning. The latter are evidenced through reflections upon work and learning in assignments and portfolios and in the increasing quality of the assignments themselves, as evidenced by the ability to communicate effectively in writing, to be self-reflective and so on. There is value in portfolio building being coupled with active reflection upon what has been achieved with the tutor and other students, rather than being a passive and often dispiriting individual process of just documenting what you already know (Grugulis 2000).

Concluding discussion

One key question is how generalisable are the findings from this project. The first comment to make is that the level of provision of organised learning support was high, with assessors and tutors offering considerable individual as well as group support. There is little doubt that a reduced level of learning support would result in far fewer employees being committed learners. There is also a paradox in that some of the initial enthusiasm for learning comes precisely because the learning does not seem like learning ('something hard that involves you in doing things you would not do if left to your own devices'). That is, there is a step change involved in building upon the learning attained from well-defined Industry Forum processes that focus upon improving organisational performance. That is, learning is initially limited in terms of its scope and more in-depth learning is by its very nature more challenging.

Perhaps the major problem faced in trying to generate interest of SMEs? in learning and development (and in generating small business growth) lies with the career motivations and personal expectations of individual owners and managers. Many small firms adopt practices that are antithetical to efficiency and growth (Gray 1993). Indeed the most common small business ambition is for independence and autonomy rather than profits and growth (Gray 1998). Hence there are real limits to the applicability of the KLASS approach.

On the other hand it is clear that there were some general factors that contributed to improving commitment to learning at work of both companies and individuals that have been traditionally hard to reach. These included:

• The importance of rapport and a good working relationships between engineer and tutor in order that technical and learning development are mutually supportive. • Both type 1 and type 2 networks have a demonstrable value in getting companies thinking collaboratively and strategically about supply chain issues. The type 1 networks involving change agents from different companies working together meant that they could get a ‘feel’ for the capabilities of the other companies and this opened up possibilities for greater collaboration (for example, in joint bidding for contracts). The type 2 networks engaged senior staff from companies directly thinking collaboratively and strategically about supply chain issues. • In type 1 networks there was value in learning as a member of a group, including from others with a variety of backgrounds. • The use of a wide range of learning methods helped improve commitment towards learning. These methods included: participation in production process improvement reviews and implementation; Master Engineer workshops; group discussions; assignments; portfolio-building; discussions with tutor; use of computer-mediated communications for discussions, document transfer and tutor feedback. • There was a key role for the learning support tutor in helping learners build and then sustain commitment towards their learning goals. The tutor role involved providing advice, guidance and information and supporting all aspects of learning. Learners greatly appreciated the support and encouragement of tutors. • Many of the change agents recognised the value (and potential transferability) of the skills they were developing contributed to their commitment towards learning. For example, the skills required in coping with the challenges of trying to implement change involved compromise and dialogue and helped hone their communication skills. • The type 2 networks comprised mainly senior managers from SMEs? from Tiers 2 and below, individuals who were often quite difficult to get to attend training, so getting them to share and build upon best practice was a major step forward. • The KLASS project, however, had a significant advantage in engaging SMEs? because of the support of large companies as lead organisations in supply systems. SMEs? were much readier to take part in an initiative that had the explicit approbation of a major customer than if they were approached directly by providers of education and training. The participation of major manufacturers and Tier 1 suppliers in networks was therefore crucial in securing the commitment of SMEs? to engage with the project aims and objectives. The initial ‘hooks’ to engage SMEs? in learning activities were therefore particularly powerful. • The project gave people support to help them engage in patterns of thought conducive to learning. The project gave learners generally, but especially the change agents, the time and space to engage in critical thought, self-reflection and personal development. This included opportunities for both collaborative and self-directed learning.

Overall then, the model of learning used in the KLASS project with its emphasis upon networking, knowledge creation, linking an initial focus upon performance with a progressive broadening of ideas about learning and development was particularly well suited to its context: supporting learning and development in advanced supply systems. However, the scale of the effort and resources required to make the project successful should leave no-one in any doubt about the challenges that remain if the model were to be successfully implemented in a range of other contexts. It is to be hoped that the Workplace Learning Partnerships project offers one means of further knowledge exchange about how these challenges might be met.

References

Abreu, A., Beynon, H. and Ramalho, J. (2000) 'The dream factory: VW’s modular production system in Resende, Brazil', Work, Employment and Society, 14 (2): 265-282. DTI (1999), Quality, Cost, Delivery: seven measures for improved competitiveness in manufacturing industry, London: DTI. EMTA (Engineering and Marine Training Authority) (2000) Engineering Manufacturing Labour Market Observatory – Motor Vehicles Report, Watford: Training Publications Limited. Engeström, Y. (1994) Training for change: new approach to instruction and learning on working life, Geneva: ILO. Eraut, M. (1994) Developing professional knowledge and competence, London: Falmer. Eraut, M. (2000) 'Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge in professional work', in F.Coffield (ed.) The necessity of informal learning, Bristol: Policy Press. Eraut, M., Alderton, J., Cole, G. and Senker, P. (1998) 'Learning from other people at work', in F.Coffield (ed.) Learning at work, Bristol: Policy Press. Gray C (1993) 'Stages of Growth and entrepreneurial career motivation', in F.Chittenden, M.Robertson and D.Watkins (eds.) Small Firms - recession and recovery, London: ISBA/Paul Chapman. Gray C. (1998) Enterprise and Culture, London: Routledge. Grugulis, I. (2000) 'The Management NVQ: a critique of the myth of relevance', Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 52 (1): 79-99. Nonaka, I. and Konno, N. (1998) 'The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation', California Management Review, 40 (3): 40-54. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge creating company. How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schön, D. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.