Specificity of Occupational Training and Occupational Mobility: An Empirical Study Based on Lazear’s Skill-Weights Approach
According to standard human capital theory firm financed training cannot be explained if skills are of general nature. Nevertheless, investments of firms into general training can be observed and there has been a large literature to explain this puzzle, mostly referring to imperfect labor market issues. In German speaking countries firms invest heavily into apprenticeship training although it is assumed to be general. In our paper, we study the question to what extent apprenticeship training is general at all. Our paper for the first time studies how specificity of training may be defined based on Lazear’s skill-weights approach. In our empirical part we use a unique German Qualification Survey, containing extensive information about the required skills at a workplace. We build occupationspecific skill-weights and find that the more specific the skill portfolio in an occupation is in comparison to the general labor market, the higher are the net costs firms have to bear for apprenticeship training in the respective occupations. At the same time, the more specific the skill requirements are in an occupation, the smaller is the probability of an occupational change during an employee’s entire career. Due to the new definition of occupational specificity, we thus find that apprenticeship training - formerly seen as general training - is very heterogeneous in its specificity.
|Date of creation:||Nov 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Plattenstrasse 14, CH-8032 Zürich|
Phone: ++41 1 634 29 27
Fax: ++41 1 634 43 48
Web page: http://www.isu.uzh.ch
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Edward P. Lazear, 2003. "Firm-Specific Human Capital: A Skill-Weights Approach," NBER Working Papers 9679, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Harhoff, Dietmar & Kane, Thomas J., 1995.
"Is the German apprenticeship system a panacea for the US labour market?,"
ZEW Discussion Papers
95-19, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Thomas J. Kane & Dietmar Harhoff, 1997. "Is the German apprenticeship system a panacea for the U.S. labor market?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 171-196.
- Harhoff, Dietmar & Kane, Thomas J, 1996. "Is the German Apprenticeship System a Panacea for the US Labour Market?," CEPR Discussion Papers 1311, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Euwals, Rob & Winkelmann, Rainer, 2001.
"Why Do Firms Train? Empirical Evidence on the First Labour Market Outcomes of Graduated Apprentices,"
IZA Discussion Papers
319, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Euwals, Rob & Winkelmann, Rainer, 2001. "Why do Firms Train? Empirical Evidence on the First Labour Market Outcomes of Graduate Apprentices," CEPR Discussion Papers 2880, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Katz, Eliakim & Ziderman, Adrian, 1990. "Investment in General Training: The Role of Information and Labour Mobility," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1147-58, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iso:educat:0038. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christian Eggenberger)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.