4.3 Review

Three decades of interventions for the unemployed - review of practices between 1990 and 2020 and their effects on (re) employment competencies

期刊

EDUCATION AND TRAINING
卷 64, 期 2, 页码 230-243

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/ET-02-2021-0053

关键词

Employment; Programmes trainings; Outcomes; Unemployed; NEET

资金

  1. la Caisse des Depots
  2. Synergie Family

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the outcomes of training programs for the unemployed, focusing on psychological, technical, and employment aspects. The most significant results were found in the psychological domain, while consistent results in the effectiveness of training types were lacking due to the diverse socio-cultural backgrounds of interventions. Deep interdisciplinary analysis of the socio-cultural context where the trainings were conducted is recommended to better understand their impact on the target populations.
Purpose This paper provides evidence of the outcomes proposed by the reviewed programmes and their level of effectiveness. Design/methodology/approach Articles were screened by title and abstract to ensure correspondence with exclusion/inclusion criteria. Themes were analysed through collective coding and scoring. Size effects were calculated. Findings Three expected outcomes: psychological, technical and (re) employment. The most frequent and significant results are found in psychological. The review could not find consistent results in effectiveness of the type of training, because of the diversity of propositions and socio-cultural origins of interventions. Research limitations/implications Socio-cultural context acts as variable; thus, deep interdisciplinary analysis on context where trainings were developed is suggested in order to understand the impact of trainings according to their population defining effectiveness. Originality/value There is no previous review of type of interventions for the unemployed focusing on last 30 years.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据