Continuing Vocational Education and Training is subject to various surveys such as the Adult Education Survey or the Continuing Vocational Training Survey at European level as well as to national reports such as the German IAB (Institute for Employment Research) Enterprise Panel. These surveys and panels provide information on the share of CVET on lifelong learning , participation in continuing education (extent, quantity, content etc.) as well as information on training formats, companies offering CVET, financing, organisational aspects and many more. However, there are far less extensive investigations on the influences of all the measured indicators on the meso level. Following the constituted thesis of “oblivion of interests of current in-company education approaches” by Peter Faulstich (1998, p. 2 ff.) and the reception and implementation of that thesis by Bernd Käpplinger (2016, dedication of the book), the presentation aims to explore the decision-making patterns in terms of the above-mentioned indicators. In contrast to the mentioned surveys which focus on describing and measuring relevant indicators of CVET, the presentation’s focus is on how they were taken by those persons responsible for CVET. Therefore, the presentation follows the research question:

Which decision-making patterns can we identify in the context of in-company CVET and to what extent do they differ?

The theoretical framework is provided by the culture-political approach of Peter Faulstich and the configuration theory-based approach of Bernd Käpplinger as well as on the behaviour-oriented approach of the process of decision-making by James G. March. The culture-political approach provides an opportunity to understand subjective interests, conflicts and power within the structures of a cultural dimension, which gives the formal rules and dominant values (Faulstich 1998, p. 5). This approach provides a realistic view on acting within a company because formal rules and procedures are adapted by subjects and not fulfilled mechanically (Heuer 2010, p. 56 ff.). With respect to the fact that there is no one-size-fits-all in-company CVET but much heterogeneity in this field (Käpplinger 2016, p. 113), a configuration theory-based approach serves as a field structured by the contents of decision instead of a field differentiated according to the fields of business, company sizes and so on which would be much less appropriate. Even if decision-theoretical approaches are dominated by normative models in this discussion about companies and decisions - generally to identify the one best rational choice/alternative - descriptive approaches, and this is one of my theses, are approaches most appropriate in order to describe and to evaluate processes of decisions. However, as there is no prototype of an organization there is no prototype of a decision-making process (except we would abstract excessively). However, according to James G. March, all decision-making processes in companies are based on the same key criteria but neither just linear nor treated in the same way (March 1990, p. 45 ff.).

The presentation focuses on the combination of the outlined theoretical approaches and will give an insight into empirical findings from a current project at TU Dresden (working title: reconstruction of decision-making in the context of CVET – analysing decision-making processes on providing CVET in companies). Beside that the presentation will follow the question, to what extent types of decision-processes lead to in- and exclusion and what types of employees are affected. Therefore, inclusion is defined as the widening of accessibility to CVET (Cedefop 2017, p. 6). In times of increasing migration and with respect to the lack of qualified workers CVET could be seen as a defender as well as an enemy (cf. Matthew effect) of social inclusion.

The data collection will be realised in summer 2018 and will be based on semi-standardised phone interviews of persons responsible for CVET in companies. Preparation and evaluation will be done by a qualitative content analysis (deduction: structuration) based on the model of Mayring (2010) as well as by statistical evaluation. Furthermore, data of the Adult Education Survey 2016 as well as findings of the CVTS 4 will be used.

The expected outcome of the presentation is a combined theoretical approach to explain decision-making patterns under the conditions of subjective interests and of corporate cultures within companies. Furthermore, decision-theoretical perspectives will be integrated. In addition, preliminary empirical findings on decision-making patterns reconstructed by interviews of persons responsible for CVET in companies will be analysed and presented.

Cedefop (2017). On the way to 2020: data for vocational education and training policies. Country statistical overviews – 2016 update. Luxembourg: Publications Office. Cedefop research paper; No 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2801/414017 Faulstich, Peter (1998). Strategien der betrieblichen Weiterbildung. Kompetenz und Organisation. München: Vahlen (Vahlens Handbücher der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften). Heuer, Ulrike (2010). Betriebliche Weiterbildungsentscheidungen: Aushandlungsprozesse und Bildungscontrolling. Fallstudienbericht. Bonn: BIBB (Wissenschaftliche Diskussionspapiere aus dem BIBB, 115). Käpplinger, Bernd (2016). Betriebliche Weiterbildung aus der Perspektive von Konfigurationstheorien. 1. Auflage. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann, W (Theorie und Praxis der Erwachsenenbildung). March, James G. (Ed.) (1990). Entscheidung und Organisation. Kritische und konstruktive Beiträge, Entwicklungen und Perspektiven. Wiesbaden: Gabler. Mayring, Philipp (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. 11., aktual. u. überarb. Aufl. Weinheim: Beltz (Beltz Pädagogik).