Friday, September 27, 2019

What is hampering India's skill development program


India’s skill development mission which was launched in July 2015 and aimed to train more than 400 million people by 2022 is not meeting the targets which has been setup for it. At the time of launch everything looked right, there was a target segment, there was a need and there was a design for delivery. The projections were grand, big consulting firms worked 24X7 to make these grand plans and projections. A number of private training centres were given funds and mandate to run these programs. But still things are not looking rosy after four years. The number of people trained in first three years after launch was in the range of 20-22 million people with less than half of them landing in to some kind of job. 
The question is what is hampering this mission. Were the projections not correct? Whether the delivery mechanism, not right? Was the target segment not interested? Then comes the questions related to why placement targets are not met? How is the quality of training provided, does it really add value to trainees? Are the courses contemporary?
The projections were made by consulting agencies and they are masters of that, in the first place the target segment was not defined correctly. Every one coming out of educational system is not looking for skill training, he will not just turn up at the nearest training centre, asking for training. The program failed to identify the target segment correctly and then in creating a segment which will be interested in these trainings. 
Then comes the delivery mechanism. The program focused a lot on creating new private training centres to start with, this according to my understanding was a mistake. These training centres mushroomed everywhere, but their main focus was to get funds and then run these programs to make more money. Some big corporates joined in, but they also worked on franchise model, which suffered from same set of problems as the private training centres. Agencies both government and private failed to utilize the existing infrastructure of ITIs, Diploma/Engineering colleges, Medical colleges, Nursing colleges, Universities etc. Even good schools can do a better job than most of the private training centres.
Coming to the question of placement targets, the answer is simple. If so many of trained people were required in organised sector, companies would have hired these people and skilled them as per their requirement. If that is not happening it means the requirement is somewhere else. Question is, if placement should even be a KPI for this program. The program is run by bureaucrats and consulting agencies, and as their experience goes, they see jobs as a big opportunity. For them entrepreneurship is not an enabler. The focus of the program should have been creating more entrepreneurs, more self-working people than finding jobs.
Quality of training provided and programs being contemporary or not was another question mark. I will be a bit philosophical on this. What is contemporary in the current age? Most of the things are dynamic. Focus on development of learning skills can contribute more instead of training for a specific skill. To give credit where it’s due, course outlines for the program does highlight the need to develop learnability, but most of the training centres are ill prepared for that and only focus on specific skills.
The program needs to change its approach. Bureaucrats are running it like the way they only can, do more of same things which are not giving desired results. They are not working on analysing the situation and changing it to suite current needs. Changing the narrative might help in hiding the failures, but adopting a new narrative while accepting the failure might bring this program on track.