IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umagsb/2021023.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifying literacy and numeracy skill mismatch in OECD countries using the job analysis method

Author

Listed:
  • Pérez Rodríguez, Sandra

    (ROA / Labour market and training, RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research)

  • van der Velden, Rolf

    (RS: GSBE Theme Learning and Work, ROA / Education and transition to work)

  • Huijts, Tim

    (ROA / Health, skills and inequality, RS: GSBE Theme Learning and Work)

  • Jacobs, Babs

    (ROA / Education and transition to work, RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research)

Abstract

Skill mismatches have strong negative effects on productivity, job satisfaction, and other outcomes. To reduce skill mismatches, governments need to rely on accurate data on the prevalence of these mismatches. The Programme of the International Assessment of Adult Competences (PIAAC) is currently the most important data source providing excellent and unparalleled information for many countries on two key information-processing skills (i.e., literacy and numeracy skills). However, although these data contain rich information about possessed skills, countries lack directly comparable information on the required skills in those domains. Hence, it has been difficult to use the PIAAC data to identify skill mismatches, other than through proxies of required skills (e.g., the average skill level in occupations) or workers’ self-assessments of skill mismatch. In this paper, we use the Job Analysis Method (JAM) to determine the required skill levels of literacy and numeracy for all 4-digit ISCO08 unit groups of occupations in the same metric and scale as was used in PIAAC. JAM involves the use of occupational experts to rate the skill requirements in the different occupations. JAM has never been used before to identify required skill levels for literacy and numeracy as measured in PIAAC, and the paper thus presents the first results on the prevalence of skill shortages and skill surpluses in these key information-processing skills across different OECD countries and across different occupations and sectors that is based on a more direct estimate of the required skills. We provide estimates for the proportions of well-matched, overskilled and underskilled workers per country, and compare these with estimates based on alternative methods for estimating skill mismatch. We also compare JAM with these other methods in explaining wage differentials, as well as job satisfaction. We conclude that there are large differences in the estimates of the prevalence of skill mismatches depending on the method used. We show several advantages using JAM and discuss some of the limitations as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Pérez Rodríguez, Sandra & van der Velden, Rolf & Huijts, Tim & Jacobs, Babs, 2021. "Identifying literacy and numeracy skill mismatch in OECD countries using the job analysis method," Research Memorandum 023, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
  • Handle: RePEc:unm:umagsb:2021023
    DOI: 10.26481/umagsb.2021023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/76886309/RM21023.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26481/umagsb.2021023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:unm:umagsb:2021023. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Andrea Willems or Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meteonl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.