世界银行-缩小劳动力发展与劳动力市场之间的差距：基于SABER工具的印尼劳动力发展体系评估（英文）-2021.3-87页_6mb

Summary of "Closing the Gap Between Workforce Development and Labor Markets: An Assessment of Indonesia's Workforce Development System Based on the SABER Tool"

Core Content

This report assesses Indonesia's workforce development (WfD) system using the World Bank's SABER-WfD tool, which evaluates three functional dimensions: strategic framework, system oversight, and service delivery. The analysis highlights both existing strengths and areas needing improvement to better align the system with national development priorities and labor market demands.

Key Findings

• Strategic Framework: Indonesia scores low in this dimension, indicating challenges in coordination among stakeholders and a lack of a unified demand-led approach.
• System Oversight: There are multiple strengths, including a national qualifications framework and competency standards, but gaps remain in funding, monitoring, and accreditation fragmentation.
• Service Delivery: Indonesia scores the highest in this dimension, showing a diverse training market, active links between training institutions and employers, and performance data collection practices.

Main Policy Goals and Reform Areas

Policy Goal 1: Articulating a Strategic Direction for Workforce Development

• Reform Area 1: Establish a centralized leading entity to coordinate WfD efforts and align with national priorities.
• Recommendation: Create a Skills Development Council with strong private sector involvement to guide the national WfD agenda.

Policy Goal 2: Fostering a Demand-led Approach to WfD

• Reform Area 2: Strengthen employer engagement in shaping WfD priorities and policies.
• Recommendation: Develop mechanisms for open communication and strategic vision development with employers.

Policy Goal 3: Strengthening Critical Coordination for Implementation

• Reform Area 3: Expand attention to continuing vocational education and training (CVET).
• Recommendation: Include CVET in the national WfD agenda and explore mechanisms for non-employer-financed adult training.

Policy Goal 4: Ensuring Efficiency and Equity in Funding

• Reform Area 4: Improve funding for CVET and enhance monitoring of its impact.
• Recommendation: Increase funding for CVET and establish regular performance assessments.

Policy Goal 5: Assuring Relevant and Reliable Standards

• Reform Area 5: Streamline accreditation processes and improve quality standards.
• Recommendation: Consolidate accreditation under a single agency and ensure alignment with training quality.

Policy Goal 6: Diversifying the Pathways for Skills Acquisition

• Reform Area 6: Promote lifelong learning and recognition of prior learning.
• Recommendation: Implement stacked credential models and strengthen local employment services.

Policy Goal 7: Incentivizing Diversity and Excellence in Training Provision

• Reform Area 7: Develop a national strategy for TVET instructors and administrators.
• Recommendation: Create a broader strategy to recruit and develop qualified personnel, ensuring long-term system effectiveness.

Policy Goal 8: Fostering Relevance in Public Training Programs

• Reform Area 8: Improve labor market outcomes tracking and data utilization.
• Recommendation: Conduct tracer studies and collaborate with research institutions and international actors.

Policy Goal 9: Enhancing Evidence-Based Accountability for Results

• Reform Area 9: Strengthen the use of data to inform WfD policy and performance evaluation.
• Recommendation: Establish a system for annual performance assessments and promote best practices across the system.

International Examples and Lessons

• Ireland and Finland: Have clear national strategies and defined leadership roles in WfD.
• Singapore: Aligns WfD programs with national priorities and uses financial incentives to encourage target fulfillment.
• Germany: Implements a dual system where employers play a key role in training planning and execution.
• Malaysia: Established a National Qualification Framework and improved standards through institutional reforms and increased funding.
• Korea: Uses data to monitor performance and has a robust system for assessing and improving training outcomes, including the Academic Credit Bank System and Work-net platform.

Key Challenges

• Limited coordination and duplication of efforts among stakeholders.
• Incomplete feedback mechanisms and lack of alignment between training and labor market needs.
• Insufficient financial support and monitoring for CVET.
• Fragmented accreditation systems and quality control issues in nonformal training.
• Focus on enrollment targets rather than quality and employment outcomes.

Conclusion

Indonesia's WfD system is at an emerging level of development, showing potential but requiring substantial reforms to become more effective and aligned with labor market needs. The report emphasizes the need for a strategic, coordinated, and demand-driven approach to workforce development, supported by robust funding, quality assurance, and data-driven accountability mechanisms.