In the increasingly digitalized world of work knowledge about specific technology is quickly outdated. Besides subject-related knowledge, workers need personal and social competencies, such as flexibility, learning ability and willingness to keep on learning (Vaughan 2008). Increasingly important gets the ability for self-organisation, the ability to work on different teams, as well as the ability to reflect about one’s individual learning pathway and career (Cedefop 2009; Heinz 2009). In dynamic sectors of the economy, routine work loses significance and transfer and problem-solving skills are becoming more important (Hämäläinen 2014). Modern workplaces react to these affordances in providing further training for their employees and initial vocational training for their apprentices that aim at developing technical, personal, and social competencies and that lay the ground for lifelong learning. Such training can be modularised or project-based (e.g. Rohs & Seufert 2018). Particularly important is how apprentices are supported throughout their apprenticeship. Coaching as a rather new approach to guidance and support has become a central aspect in training in modern industries.

A major field in which coaching has originally become popular and widely discussed is the field of organisational and human resource development. According to Geissler (2008) the digital revolution has led to a paradigm change in organisational management. Management has changed from primarily a top–down organisation towards more autonomy at lower hierarchical levels. In this context, coaching has become a popular tool for self-development as human resource development in organisations (Geissler 2008). Today, coaching has spread across organisations and has been professionalised (Göhlich 2011; Helsper 2002).

Although the term ‘coach’ is increasingly used also in the workplace training context (e.g. Mikkonen et al. 2017; Cedefop 2014, Negrini 2015) often there is no clear picture of what the role of the coach exactly entails. Coaching is expected to be implicitly understood: “The term coaching seems to radiate such a suggestive power, that many do immediately believe that they at least roughly know or at least have an idea what is meant by coaching” (Hartmann 2004, p.8). This paper explores the realisation of coaching in a training company that operates in a dynamic sector of industry and that uses coaching as a primary tool in workplace training. Data stems from a large case study within the Swiss telecommunication industry.

The main goal of the workplace training examined is the enhancement of apprentices’ autonomy in learning. Workplace training is completely individualized. Apprentices work in different projects and teams, in which the corresponding team leaders are responsible for their technical training. The apprenticesThey search and select projects themselves at the firm-intern ‘marketplace’, an online depository that all employees of the enterprise can access and where projects for learners are advertised. Internal coaches (Hartmann 2004; Rauen 1999), employed by the HR department, coach the apprentices. They focus on strengthening the apprentices’ ability to reflect upon their learning and how they cope with the various challenges of workplace training and the demanding request for self- organisation. The applied form of individual coaching (Hartmann 2004) enables coaches to adjust their coaching to the individual level of the learners’ development.

The paper characterises structural aspects of coaching within the workplace training of apprenticeships and as well as conditions of successful coaching. Two main research questions will be addressed: How is coaching used within the workplace training of apprentices? Which aspects characterize successful coaching at the workplace?

The study is part of a line of case studies concerned with learning cultures in enterprises (see also Yin 2014). The enterprise studied operates in the telecommunication industry and is a major provider for traditional telecommunication services as well as software solutions in Switzerland. The enterprise was chosen because of its size and relevance within the Swiss telecommunication industry, its high engagement in training apprentices and public reports on its approaches to modernising apprenticeships. In the enterprise, coaching is a central aspect of workplace training. In the data analysis, the focus was on the conception of coaching and coaching practices. Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews in the telecommunication enterprise with apprentices, coaches, and VET management. In total, 29 semi-structured interviews were pursued (17 interviews with apprentices, 3 interviews with regular workers that work together with the apprentices on a daily basis and are responsible for their technical training, 5 interviews with coaches and 4 interviews with members of VET management at the enterprise). The sample represents a large range of apprentices in different occupations and at different locations (Italian, German and French-speaking regions in Switzerland). Furthermore, the research team of four scholars visited and observed seven working sites and learning venues. Participants for the interviews and locations for the site visits were selected by the team of researchers together with a VET manager at the enterprise. The conditions were that the team of interviewers would have access to a mix of apprentices who coped reasonably well with the training structure in the enterprise and those who struggled with it. The interviews lasted between 30 and 60 minutes. They were transcribed in the original language (German, French and Italian). The interviews inquired about the learning as well as coaching experiences. Open-ended questions were asked that initiated narrations about individual experiences, perceptions, and ideas. Data collection also included document analysis of VET-related documents of the enterprise. These were mainly documents that the team of researchers came across while visiting the different working and learning sites, such as internally specified curricula and guidelines, invitations to particular events and advertisements or flyers that described the philosophy of the training. The case study data were analysed by content analysis (Kuckartz 2016), which led to a wealth of information on the conception of coaching and coaching practices in the enterprise.

Coaching is not a pedagogical but a practical innovation in the world of work (Geissler 2012). It is used to excite employees’ flexibility and autonomy in learning, skills needed in modern industries- apprentices as the future workforce are trained accordingly. In the case studied, coaching is understood as a form of individual advice and complements technical training in the projects. Each apprentice has a coach assigned, who helps him/her to reflect their specific experiences at the workplace and ideally use them as learning opportunities. Coaches are available flexibly when needed. In most cases the need for coaching decreases during the apprenticeship. Subject to coaching sessions is mainly the professional development of apprentices but sometimes also obstacles for learning, such as personal problems. There is not one single correct way, no specific step-by-step guide on how to coach. Effective coaching is characterised by the understanding that the coach cannot take on the problems from the person being coached. Coaches report that they do not define what apprentices must do or what they must achieve. Much more, they try to perceive and encourage the development of individual resources. The specific attitude required in coaching is marked by trust in the apprentice’s ability to learn. Coaches communicate with apprentices at eye-level. In coaching, the person being coached is accompanied to explore new ways of action (and perception). Trying out new ways to proceed requires much courage and is a quite personal endeavor. Therefore, trust is a precondition of effective coaching. The findings of this case study offer insights into the conception of coaching in the context of apprenticeships and provide a basis for reflections on roles in VET at the workplace in contemporary and future workplace training structures.

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop). (2009). Modernising vocational education and training: Fourth report on vocational education and training research in Europe: Executive summary. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) European Commission (EC). (2014). Guiding principles on professional development of trainers in vocational education and training. Geissler, H. (2008). Coaching – ein Bildungsrisiko? In: Y. Ehrenspeck (Ed.), Bildung: Angebot oder Zumutung? Wiesbaden: VS, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Geissler, H. (2012). Coaching– von der Erwachsenen- und Berufsbildung zum Führungs- und Organisationslernen (pp. 15-31). Göhlich, M. (2011). Reflexionsarbeit als pädagogisches Handlungsfeld. Zur Professionalisierung der Reflexion und zur Expansion von Reflexionsprofessionellen in Supervision, Coaching und Organisationsberatung. In: W. Helsper, & R. Tippelt (Eds.), Pädagogische Professionalität (pp. 138–152). Weinheim u.a.: Beltz. Hämäläinen, R. (2014). VET workers’ problem-solving skills in technology-rich environments: European approach. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training (IJRVETi), 1(1), 57–80. Hartmann M. (2004). Coaching als Grundform pädagogischer Beratung: Verortung und Grundlegung. Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophie an der Fakultät für Psychologie und Pädagogik der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Heinz, W. R. (2009). Vocational identity and flexible work: A contradicting or constructive relation? In: F. Rauner, E. Smith, U. Hauschildt, & H. Zelloth (Eds.), Innovative apprenticeships: Promoting successful school-to-work transition. Berlin: Lit Verlag Dr. W. Hopf. Helsper, W. (2002). Wissen, Können, Nicht-Wissen-Können. Wissensformen des Lehrers und Konsequenzen für die Lehrerbildung. In: G. Breidenstein, W. Helsper, & C. Kötters-König (Eds.), Die Lehrerbildung der Zukunft (pp. 67–86). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Verlag. Kuckartz, U. (2016). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse – Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag. Mikkonen S., Pylväs L., Rintala H., Nokelainen P. & Postareff L. (2017). Guiding workplace learning in vocational education and training: A literature review. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 9(1), 1-22. Negrini, L. (2015). Subjektive Überzeugungen von Berufsbildnern: Stand und Zusammenhänge mit der Ausbildungsqualität und den Lehrvertragsauflösungen. Springer-Verlag. Rauen, C. (1999). Coaching innovative Konzepte im Vergleich. Göttingen: Verlag für Angewandte Psychologie. Rohs M. & Seufert S. (2018). Berufliche Medienkompetenz. In: R. Arnold et al. (Hrsg.), Handbuch Berufsbildung, Wiesbaden: Springer. Vaughan, K. (2008). Workplace learning: A literature review. Report prepared for Competenz. New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.