Collaboration between vocational education and training (VET) institutions and workplaces has been widely examined, for instance, from the perspectives of learning and pedagogy (e.g., Nykänen et al., 2022), VET relevance (Hiim, 2023), as well as regional and sectoral development (e.g., Buchanan et al., 2017). While cooperation between VET and the world of work is often regarded as self-evident in contemporary VET systems, this study takes a closer look at how policy documents frame both the need for such collaboration and the ways in which it is expected to materialise. Building on Weber’s (2015) view that formal, written documents function as key instruments through which modern bureaucracies define, stabilise, and legitimise institutional practices, analysing policy texts becomes essential for understanding how collaboration between VET institutions and workplaces is conceptualised and justified.

Europeanization refers to the process through which EU‑level goals, rules, and policy paradigms shape national policies, often leading to greater convergence across member states (see Loogma, 2016). However, European and national policy documents are shaped by distinct systems, which may frame and prioritise collaboration between VET institutions and workplaces in different ways. For this reason, the study examines policy documents at both the EU and national (Finland) level and addresses the following research questions:

RQ1) How is collaboration between VET institutions and workplaces conceptualised in European educational policy documents?

RQ2) How is collaboration between VET institutions and workplaces conceptualised in Finnish educational policy documents?

RQ3) What are the main (in)consistencies in the framing of collaboration between VET institutions and workplaces between Finnish and European policy documents?

Document analysis is a qualitative approach that enables researchers to trace how policy texts are constructed, justified, and framed through specific discourses and value positions (Cardno, 2018). It is particularly suitable for analysing official strategies and policies that cannot be directly observed through methods such as interviews. In this study, we approach policy documents primarily as texts that make different policy contexts visible (Ball, 2015). Our focus is on what the policy states and how it is linguistically and structurally formulated, rather than on its practical implementation or outcomes. At the same time, we acknowledge that policy documents are not merely descriptive texts; policy can also be understood as discourse that, when enacted, shapes practices and actors in VET. For this reason, we do not treat policy documents as neutral or innocent representations of reality (cf. Nikander & Vehviläinen, 2010). The data consists of ten Finnish policy documents and eight EU-level policy documents published between 2002 and 2025, covering the period following the Copenhagen Process, which established a voluntary cooperation mechanism to improve the quality and attractiveness of VET. During the analysis, expressions relating to cooperation or collaboration were systematically coded from the documents. The coding process was guided by the analytical questions what, why, and how, which directed attention to how collaboration is described, justified, and constructed. Coding emphasised semantic content, capturing explicit meanings and links related to cooperation and collaboration between education and work in the text (Saldaña, 2016).

In the European policy documents, the terms cooperation or collaboration are used only sparingly. Instead, the texts emphasise the labour market relevance of VET, which is expected to be achieved through various forms of partnerships (e.g., public–private partnerships, strategic partnerships, active and relevant partnerships). Alongside partnerships, collaboration is operationalised through the combination of education and work, particularly by promoting work-based learning and companies as learning environments. In the Finnish documents, strengthening collaboration between VET institutions and the world of work is explicitly framed as a policy goal. Collaboration is presented as a means to enhance the quality and labour market relevance of VET, secure a skilled workforce, support regional and workplace development, and respond to the needs of different learner groups. A key distinction between the two levels is that European policy documents focus primarily on justifying the need for collaboration (labour market relevance) and defining its structural forms (partnerships), whereas Finnish policy documents frame collaboration itself as a central objective of VET policy. By revealing the differences in how collaboration is conceptualised, justified, and operationalised, the study contributes to the broader discussion on policy convergence and divergence and shows that collaboration between education and the world of work is not necessarily framed in the same way across EU and national policy levels. The analysis also offers a lens through which European researchers and practitioners can examine their own national contexts.

Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(3), 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279 Buchanan, J., Anderson, P., & Power, G. (2017). Skills ecosystems. In C. Warhurst, K. Mayhew, D. Finegold & J. Buchanan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of skills and training (pp. 444–465). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199655366.013.21 Cardno, C. (2018). Policy document analysis: A practical educational leadership tool and a qualitative research method. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 24(4), 623–640. Hiim, H. (2023). How can collaboration between schools and workplaces contribute to relevant vocational education? Results of an action research project in the school-based part of Norwegian vocational education and training. Vocations and Learning, 16, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-022-09300-z Loogma, K. (2016). Europeanization in VET policy as a process of reshaping the educational space. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training (IJRVET), 3(1), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:12193 Nikander, P., & Vehviläinen, S. (2010). Discourse analysis. In P. L. Peterson, E. L. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International Encyclopedia in Education, vol 6 (pp. 373–379). Elsevier. Nykänen, M., Kurki, A.-L., & Airila, A. (2022). Promoting workplace guidance and workplace–school collaboration in vocational training: A mixed-methods pilot study. Vocations and Learning, 15(2), 317–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-022-09289-5 Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage. Weber, M. (2015). Bureaucracy. In: T. Waters & D. Waters (Eds.), Rationalism and modern society: New translations on politics, bureaucracy, and social stratification. Palgrave MacMillan.