an article by Allan Butler (Royal Agricultural University, Cirencester, UK) and Matt Lobley (University of Exeter, UK) published in International Journal of Training and Development Volume 20 Issue 4 (December 2016)
Abstract
This paper reports original research which measures the social and economic impact of training and skills development on individuals who participated in training provided by social purpose, nonprofit organizations. An implicit policy assumption is that such organizations contribute to social and economic regeneration.
Examining the costs and benefits of training to trainees, an adapted Return on Investment methodology measures any economic benefit, while an Index of Social Benefit measures changes in individual well-being.
The results demonstrate that while changes to both the economic and social well-being of trainees occur, it does not necessarily relate solely to the training they received.
Instead, changes reflect other, often complex, aspects of trainees’ lives, although training may facilitate change.
Furthermore, social purpose, nonprofit organizations need to evince the socioeconomic benefits of their training programmes to secure future funding, public or private, but proving their successful delivery may be difficult to determine.
Showing posts with label return_on_investment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label return_on_investment. Show all posts
Friday, 10 February 2017
Sunday, 24 July 2016
The purpose and value of higher education: an economic perspective
an article by Yu Peng Lin (affiliation unknown) published in International Journal of Economics and Accounting Volume 7 Number 1 (2016)
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to understand the rationality of applying the concept of return on investment in valuing higher education from the perspective of economics.
Higher education serves its own unique purposes. Instead of attempting to directly define the purpose of higher education, economists more frequently try to tackle the question from the output side by trying to figure out how to value the outcome of college education. Yet, there are some uncertainties in the higher education system, which lead to the observed heterogeneous market price on the graduates. We show that while the market achieves equilibrium, the market wage tends to be equal to the graduate's expected productivity.
The data of the median earnings for adults during the years 2005-2013 confirms that the market institutes value on higher education. Overall, the results of this study shed some light on justifying the use of return on investment in the task of valuing college education.
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to understand the rationality of applying the concept of return on investment in valuing higher education from the perspective of economics.
Higher education serves its own unique purposes. Instead of attempting to directly define the purpose of higher education, economists more frequently try to tackle the question from the output side by trying to figure out how to value the outcome of college education. Yet, there are some uncertainties in the higher education system, which lead to the observed heterogeneous market price on the graduates. We show that while the market achieves equilibrium, the market wage tends to be equal to the graduate's expected productivity.
The data of the median earnings for adults during the years 2005-2013 confirms that the market institutes value on higher education. Overall, the results of this study shed some light on justifying the use of return on investment in the task of valuing college education.
Wednesday, 6 March 2013
Return on investment for workplace training: the Canadian experience
an article by Jennifer C. Percival (University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Canada), Brian P. Cozzarin (University of Waterloo, Canada) and Steven D. Formaneck (American University in Cairo, New Cairo, Egypt) published in International Journal of Training and Development Volume 17 Issue 1 (March 2013)
Abstract
One of the central problems in managing technological change and maintaining a competitive advantage in business is improving the skills of the workforce through investment in human capital and a variety of training practices.
This paper explores the evidence on the impact of training investment on productivity in 14 Canadian industries from 1999 to 2005.
Our productivity analysis demonstrates that in 12 out of 14 industries, training had a positive effect on productivity.
However, when the analysis is put within a financial context, the return on investment was positive in only four industries.
Faced with negative rates of return, why should managers in most of the industries in the study promote investment in training? Probably the best explanation is that new technology requires an investment in training. The investment in training is necessary just for the firm to maintain its current labour productivity.
Employee turnover necessarily impedes the efficacy of training, because trained workers leave, and untrained workers arrive. Thus, training in this instance again is necessary just to maintain current labour productivity.
Abstract
One of the central problems in managing technological change and maintaining a competitive advantage in business is improving the skills of the workforce through investment in human capital and a variety of training practices.
This paper explores the evidence on the impact of training investment on productivity in 14 Canadian industries from 1999 to 2005.
Our productivity analysis demonstrates that in 12 out of 14 industries, training had a positive effect on productivity.
However, when the analysis is put within a financial context, the return on investment was positive in only four industries.
Faced with negative rates of return, why should managers in most of the industries in the study promote investment in training? Probably the best explanation is that new technology requires an investment in training. The investment in training is necessary just for the firm to maintain its current labour productivity.
Employee turnover necessarily impedes the efficacy of training, because trained workers leave, and untrained workers arrive. Thus, training in this instance again is necessary just to maintain current labour productivity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
