The high skills project and the limits of possibility: a response to Coffield

Abstract

In 2003, we wrote a critical reply to Frank Coffield’s reflections in this journal on the significance of the Performance and Innovation Unit’s project on workforce development for the future direction of skills policy in England. As Coffield made clear in a rejoinder, underpinning our arguments are fundamental disagreements about what would be required to tackle the low skills equilibrium and develop the UK as a high skills society. Coffield criticised our project for being unrealistic and as offering no threat to the status quo. In this reply, we respond to these criticisms before subjecting Coffield’s own policy recommendations to closer scrutiny. The danger with following his approach is that it not only results in academics setting their sights too low but is overly optimistic about what can be achieved by working with policy makers given current political and ideological constraints.

Acknowledgement

This research is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council Centre on Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance.

Notes

1. According to the survey, the proportion of workplaces with a high‐involvement orientation was 16% in 2004 compared with 13% in 1998. During both these years, such workplaces covered 28% of the workforce. Adding problem‐solving groups into the definitional criteria reduces the degree of penetration to 6% of workplaces in 2004, covering 15% of all employees.