It is undisputed that education achieves superficially positive results (cf. Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2018, 191). For the field of literacy and basic education, an international research review shows that basic education measures have an impact both in terms of literacy gains and so-called Wider Benefits (such as health and well-being) (cf. Aschemann 2015). However, international comparative studies such as PISA (OECD 2022) and PIAAC (Rammstedt 2013) also show that educational measures fall short of expectations and that the effects are less positive than expected (cf. Wolf/Jenkins 2014). Specifically, for Germany, the LEO study shows that 6.2 million German-speaking adults have low literacy skills (Grotlüschen et al. 2019). In addition, an enormous shortage of skilled workers is lamented across Europe. The concept of work-oriented basic education, in which low-literate individuals are integrated into the labor market and participate in further education and training at the same time, therefore appears promising. 

Linked to this is the possibility of motivating employees to learn through the perspectives thus revealed, qualifying them in line with the requirements of the labor market and thus contributing to the long-term integration of skilled workers. The added value of work-oriented basic education can therefore be seen systematically at the individual and institutional levels in particular:  

At the individual level, the added value can be expected in the form of competence acquisition or growth, for example in terms of increased literacy. It has also been clearly demonstrated in a longitudinal study that low-literacy individuals benefit in the context of work-oriented basic education, particularly with regard to their social and self-competence; however, the positive effect is strongly dependent on the extent to which these competencies can actually be applied in the workplace (cf. Klinkhammer/Schemmann 2019, 61). There are also both lower risks of occupational and social exclusion and higher earned incomes (cf. Rammstedt 2013, 158; Hartley/Horne 2006). 

At the institutional level, the added value arises in terms of employer image, working climate, and employee recruitment and retention (cf. Rendant 2016, 90). Low literacy can also lead to poor work performance or additional costs. In conclusion, AoG can help to qualify people for the labor market and reduce the risk of errors in the work context (cf. Ehmig/Heymann/Seelmann 2015). Furthermore, at the macroeconomic level, international competitiveness increases and transfer payments for those in need of assistance are reduced (cf. Rendant 2016).

However, social investments and interventions such as work-oriented basic education face the challenge that their effects are manifold and cannot be measured directly in terms of economic added value. Thus, the available studies provide only very limited information on the concrete monetary added value achieved by work-oriented basic education.

Within the framework of the BMBF-funded Alpha-Invest project, we are therefore linking up with existing findings and investigating what the monetary added value of work-oriented basic education is. Therefore, the focus of this paper is on the company perspective. 

The central question for the project is: What monetary added value results from investments in service measures of work-oriented basic education from the perspective of companies? 

One challenge is that work-oriented basic education measures cannot be implemented in a standardized way: due to a variety of internal learning cultures and organizational resources on the one hand and very heterogeneous competence levels of the employees on the other hand, work-oriented basic education offers have to be tailored directly to the companies. Therefore, when analyzing the added value of work-oriented basic education, it is of great relevance to choose a research framework that allows for a systematic approach and at the same time is open to the diversity of companies and work-oriented basic education.

Due to the lack of a comprehensive empirical basis in the research field and the diverse range of possible implementations of work-oriented basic education measures in companies, we conduct an exploratory study. The framework is the Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis model. Guiding the analysis of this project the procedure is a SROI light analysis (following Rauscher/Mildenberger/Krlev 2015, 103; cf. Then et al. 2017, 33). The SROI approach aims to make social interventions measurable by translating certain aspects of social values into monetary values. The focus of the SROI approach was originally on organizations that tried to reintegrate unemployed people into the labor market (cf. Krlev/Münscher/Mülbert 2013, 16; Kehl/ Then/Münscher 2012, 314). Therefore SROI is specifically usable for heterogeneous target groups and for non-experimental research. In this process, an impact model with (causal) relationships is created for a specific project, program or organization. The identified impacts are measured and, where reasonably possible, converted into monetary units (cf. Then et al. 2018, 14). It is important to note that the goal is not to empirically prove impact relationships (causalities). This is usually only possible with elaborate (quasi)experimental research designs. Rather, the SROI approach allows impact relationships to be based on assessments with experts. SROI approach is suitable as a framework for analysis, in order to significantly include and make measurable the diverse implementation possibilities of work-oriented basic education offers. Data collection: In order to be able to capture the added value of the service measures from the perspective of the companies, both qualitative and quantitative methods are used. Persons in companies who hold a managerial position and at the same time are familiar with work-oriented basic education in their company will be interviewed. In preparation, a round table discussion was held with seven company representatives. Based on these results, an online questionnaire for company representatives will be developed. It is expected that the questionnaire will cover the topics of effects and changes resulting from the implementation of work-oriented basic education (e.g. change in the working atmosphere, change in communication, change in the company's image (e.g. "employer branding"). It is expected that about 100 company representatives will participate in the online survey. In addition, the financial expenditures (or monetary investments) for work-oriented basic education will be surveyed. data analysis: The round table discussion will be analyzed by means of qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz 2018). The questionnaire will be analyzed descriptively.

The findings gained are monetized - if possible - and offset against the investments. Finally, on the basis of realistic worst- and best-case scenarios, so-called SROI key figures are determined, which provide information about what the investments are or can be worth for the company. For the comprehensive presentation of results a distinction is made between the input the output and outcome. The output includes the services that are implemented in the service measures by means of the investments: Counseling, Placement, Design, and Implementation. The output achieves an effect on the stakeholders. The outcome area comprises the effects that are achieved among the stakeholders. Examples include improved communication within the company and a reduction in occupational accidents. As an example of monetization, it can be mentioned at this point that arising costs to both the company and the health insurance company occur due to occupational accidents. The monetary value saved by reducing occupational accidents can be "offset" against the investment. Based on current findings, it is assumed that a wide range of effects can be calculated, particularly at the individual and institutional levels. In this presentation, based on the round table discussion and the online survey, the effects of the service measures will be analyzed, assigned to the output and outcome area and monetized. Using worst and best case scenarios, SROI metrics for the added value of work-based basic education will be calculated. With a view to practice, this study is intended to contribute to the differentiated identification of the various effects of work-oriented basic education for the company, the employees and thus also society, in order to provide companies and politicians with an empirically supported decision-making basis for the implementation of work-oriented basic education.

Aschemann, B. (2015). Basisbildung wirkt. Wie wirkt Basisbildung? Eine internationale Forschungsübersicht. Materialien zur Erwachsenenbildung. 1. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Frauen. Verfügbar unter: https://erwachsenenbildung.at/downloads/service/materialien-eb_2015_1_wiewirktbasisbildung_aschemann.pdf (10.03.2020) Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2018). Bildung in Deutschland 2018. Ein indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Wirkungen und Erträgen von Bildung. wbv. Verfügbar unter: https://www.bildungsbericht.de/de/bildungsberichte-seit-2006/bildungsbericht-2018/pdf-bildungsbericht-2018/bildungsbericht-2018.pdf (10.03.2020) Grotlüschen, A., Buddeberg, K., Dutz, G., Heilmann, L., & Stammer, C. (2019). LEO 2018 – Leben mit geringer Literalität. Fragebogen. Universität Hamburg. Hartley, R., Horne, J. (2006): Social and economic benefits of improved adult literacy: towards a better understanding. NCVER. Kehl, K., Then, V. & Münscher, R. (2012). Social Return on Investment: Auf dem Weg zu einem integrativen Ansatz der Wirkungsforschung. In: Anheier, H. K., Schröer, A. & Then, V. (Hrsg.). Soziale Investitionen: Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 313-331. Klinkhammer, D., Schemmann, M. (2019). Effects of Work-Oriented Adult Basic Education Trainings: Addressing Employee´s Competencies across Sectors. Internationales Jahrbuch der Erwachsenenbildung, 42, 51 – 64. Krlev, G., Münscher R. & Mülbert, K. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of practice in Social Return on Investment (SROI) studies published 2002-2012. Centre for Social Investment, Heidelberg University. Kuckartz, U. (4 2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Beltz Juventa. OECD (2022), Are Students Ready to Take on Environmental Challenges?, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8abe655c-en. Rammstedt, B. (Hrsg.). (2013). Grundlegende Kompetenzen Erwachsener im internationalen Vergleich. Ergebnisse von PIAAC 2012. Rauscher, O., Mildenberger, G. & Krlev, G. (2015). Wie werden Wirkungen identifiziert? Das Wirkungsmodell. In: Schober, C., Then, V. (Hrsg.). Praxishandbuch Social Return on Investment: Wirkung sozialer Investitionen messen. Schäffer-Poeschel, 41-57. Rendant, M.-L. (2016). (Hrsg.). Grundbildung: Bildung mit Mehrwert. Lang. Then, Volker, Schober, Christian, Rauscher, Olivia, Kehl, Konstantin (2018): Social Return on Investment Analysis. Measuring the Impact of Social Investment, Palgrave, Basingstoke. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-71401-1. Wolf, A., Jenkins, A. (2014). Do ‘learners’ always learn? The impact of workplace adult literacy courses on participants’ literacy skills. 40 (4). British Educational Research Journal, 40 (4), 585- 609.