The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the extent and nature of Vocational Education and Training (VET) vis‐à‐vis other forms of training in three size categories of small‐to‐medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) from two industry sectors.
The longitudinal panel data employed in this paper are drawn from the Business Longitudinal Survey (BLS) conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) over the four financial years 1994‐1995 to 1997‐1998.
The results indicate that less than half of the enterprises in the three‐size categories provide apprenticeship training and traineeships – and in the case of micro‐ and small business, VET in any other field for that matter ‐ or used any of the widely recognised providers of accredited VET. While there is a positive association between enterprise size and the implementation of VET, nonetheless, the results demonstrate that small business investment in structured VET is minimal. The results also show that significant size‐related and industry differences exist in training provision, methods, fields and providers in small business, with substantive differences occurring between small and medium‐sized firms.
This paper relied upon a secondary data source, and is limited by the VET variables available in the BLS.
The findings in the paper indicate that, at the micro‐end of firm size, only the minority of firms provide training, suggesting that no matter what definition of VET is adopted, the majority of micro‐businesses do not provide training.
The paper focused exclusively on VET in SMEs in Australia, adding to the very few longitudinal inter‐industry studies conducted to date that have explicitly examined the nature and extent of VET relative to other forms of training in small business.
