Using mixed method approach in measuring effects of training in firms: Case study of the European Social Fund support |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. University of Economics, Prague, Faculty of Economics, Department of Regional studies, nam. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67, Praha 3, Czech Republic;2. Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Science, Department of Social Geography and Regional Development, Albertov 6, 128 43, Praha 2, Czech Republic;3. University of Basel, Center for Philanthropy Studies (CEPS), Steinengraben 22, 4051, Basel, Switzerland;1. Clinical Sciences Program at the Research Centre Charles-LeMoyne - Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sherbrooke University, Longueuil Campus, Canada;2. Department of Family Medicine at the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sherbrooke University, Research Centre Charles-LeMoyne - Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, Longueuil, Canada;3. School of Public Administration, University of Victoria -Victoria, Canada, Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sherbrooke University, Research Centre Charles-LeMoyne - Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, Longueuil, Canada;1. 4.669 Evaluation and Planning, United States;2. Director of Evaluation, Syntek Technologies, United States;1. Division of Nutrition, New York State Department of Health, 150 Broadway, Suite 517, Menands 12204, NY, USA;2. Graduate Student, School of Public Health, University at Albany, State University of New York, One University Place, Rensselaer 12144, NY, USA;1. Dept. of Education, Institute of Schooling Reform and Development, East China Normal University, China;2. Dept. of Educational Leadership, Research and Technology, Western Michigan University, United States;3. Dept. of Educational Leadership, Research and Technology, Western Michigan University, United States;4. W. K. Kellogg Foundation, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Public support of training in firms corresponds to the long-term importance of the quality of human capital in the competitiveness of firms and nations. Thus, the EU supports such training via the European Social Fund (ESF). The evaluation community evaluates the support by using either qualitative or quantitative methods. The simultaneous application of these two approaches is rare. The purpose of this paper is to combine quantitative (counterfactual impact evaluation) and qualitative (qualitative comparative analysis) methods in order to fill the methodological gap. Based on the combination of both approaches, it explores their strengths, complementarity and disadvantages to evaluate public support for employee training in the Czech Republic. The combination of methods makes it possible to identify not only the impacts but also their causes. Linking the ESF support to corporate competitiveness is crucial for demonstrating the effectiveness of public spending. |
| |
| Keywords: | Training Business development Human resources Counterfactual impact evaluation QCA Cohesion policy |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
