Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role

INDEPENDENT
EMPLOYMENT AND
SKILLS BOARDS
THINKINGCOLLABORATIVEACTION
Nicola Croden & Lynn Simmonds
Current and potential role

May 2008
The project team was Nicola Croden and Lynn Simmonds.
The team would like to acknowledge the support of Michael Davis at CFE and
representatives from DWP, DIUS, BERR and CLG. We would also like to thank all those
interviewed as part of this project for their invaluable contributions.

For more information about this report, please contact Nicola Croden at:
CFE, Phoenix Yard, Upper Brown Street, Leicester, LE1 5TE
Tel: 0116 229 3300
Email: nicola.croden@cfe.org.uk
Website: www.cfe.org.uk
CFE is a not for profit consultancy that brings practical insights to policy questions. We
create actionable ideas and then add the research and management expertise that can
bring them to life.
© CFE 2008

Employment and Skills Boards - Current and potential role CFE
Findings Paper 1
May 2008
Contents

Contents ........................................................................................................................... 1
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 8
2 Aims and objectives .............................................................................................. 10
3 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 10
Findings ......................................................................................................................... 12
4 Current landscape ................................................................................................. 12
5 Governance ............................................................................................................ 19
6 Membership ........................................................................................................... 28
7 Strategy and delivery ........................................................................................... 38
8 Funding .................................................................................................................. 41
9 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 45
Bibliography.................................................................................................................. 48
Appendix A ................................................................................................................... 51

Findings Paper 3
May 2008
Summary
Background
1 This paper presents findings from independent research exploring the current
and potential future role of Employment and Skills Boards (ESBs).  The
research was designed in consultation with DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG to
enable them to better understand the current landscape, and inform decisions
regarding Employment and Skills Boards and any role they may play in the
integration of the employment and skills agenda.  The policy considerations
presented represent the views of the authors based on the research findings.
2 The paper provides an insight into where ESBs and similar partnerships
currently exist, and what model/s they follow.  It then goes on to discuss key
themes identifying where such partnerships currently add value and
highlights some of the challenges they face.  The research included desk based
research and interviews with 23 key representatives across all nine regions to
explore current arrangements. Case study research was then conducted with
34 representatives across the South East and North West to explore issues in
more depth. The findings presented provide messages for consideration across
all regions.
Current arrangements
3 Employment and Skills Boards have significant support as partnerships that
have the potential to be influential in the promotion of economic prosperity at
local and sub‐regional levels, feeding into wider regional and national
agendas.  Evidence shows that where ESBs have been established, and are
operating effectively, they have worked successfully with current programmes
such as Train to Gain, the Skills Pledge, Local Employment Partnerships and
Work Trials, as well as linking to the current Regional Economic Strategy
(RES), Local Area Agreements (LAA), the development of Multi‐Area
Agreements (MAA) and City Strategy.
4 There is evidence to show that when ESBs have buy‐in from key stakeholders
across an area, they provide the opportunity to streamline current
arrangements within an area, promoting a unified, integrated approach to
employment and skills, merging with or linking into existing arrangements
such as Employer Coalitions, Local Strategic Partnerships and other existing
economic partnerships.  This has enabled these partnerships to successfully
influence and target relevant funding, such as Deprived Area Funding (DAF)
and Local Authority Business Growth Initiative (LABGI) directed to their area
to focus on meeting local employment and skills needs.
5 However, employment and skills partnership arrangements differ both within
and between regions.  Partnership arrangements are well established in some

CFE Employment and Skills Boards - Current and potential role
4 Findings Paper
May 2008
areas, whilst in very early development stages in others.  Arrangements differ
in their: governance and models of regional coordination and planning;
streamlining and links to other policy developments and activity (such as
LAA/MAAs and City Strategy); membership including employer engagement
and the role of public sector representatives; focus on different ends of the
strategy‐delivery spectrum; and funding arrangements.  The diversity in
arrangements provides many benefits in allowing areas to determine what is
best to meet local needs.  However, the current variation and perceived lack of
direction and guidance raises questions regarding quality and accountability in
some areas.
6 There is evidence to show that many areas face challenges and frustrations in
moving forward with their employment and skills partnership arrangements.
Many regions and sub‐regions feel uncertain about the direction of national
policy and seek guidance or a framework from the national level on what
works in establishing and operating an ESB, and in gaining effective buy‐in
from stakeholders from both the public and private sector.
Effective Employment and Skills Boards
7 Evidence suggests that five key factors are required to promote successful
development and operation of ESBs, and to facilitate them in streamlining the
current landscape, an in linking with new and planned developments such as
the Flexible New Deal, Skills Health Checks, development of Integrated
Regional Economic Strategies and the proposed Local Authority Economic
Assessment Duty.  These include:
1. The sub‐regional level taking responsibility for identifying issues and
needs within their area and having the confidence to make any necessary
changes, building upon and streamlining current arrangements.
2. A strong independent partnership manager to drive forward the agenda
and ensure the partnership maintains momentum and is successful in
gaining buy‐in from both public and private sector representatives.
3. Coordination and support at the regional level most often lead by the
Regional Development Agency (RDA) (or the Regional Skills Partnership
(RSP)), to reduce duplication and facilitate communication across the
region, share good practice and drive quality and accountability, and
ensure a clear link to the RES.
4. A figure head championing the achievements of the ESB, promoting their
role across the local community.  This role was most effectively played by a
well known local employer, but could also be taken on by an elected
member.
5. A clear framework for ESBs to operate within and championing at national
level which many saw as an important role for the UK Commission for
Employment and Skills, supported by DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG to
ensure a joined‐up approach and single ‘voice’ from the national level.

Findings Paper 5
May 2008
Landscape
8 The employment and skills landscape is rapidly changing at all levels of
governance, particularly at sub‐regional and local level where current
partnership arrangements aimed at integrating the employment and skills
agenda vary widely both within and between regions.
9 Across England, most demand‐led employment and skills partnership
arrangements can be categorised into one of five ‘types’ of demand‐led
models.  These include Employment and Skills Boards, Employer Coalitions
(including Fair Cities Board), City Growth, Skills and Productivity Alliances,
and the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) employment and skills sub‐groups
(or 4th block/theme groups) established to feed directly into LAAs.
10 Where new arrangements, or the streamlining of current arrangements, are
seen as necessary at regional, sub‐regional or local level, the development of
ESBs has allowed areas, irrespective of the funding they receive and the
initiatives targeted at their area, to establish a demand‐led employment and
skills partnership, focused on meeting local needs with clear links to the
regional and national level.
11 The nine regions have taken very different approaches to developing
employment and skills partnerships at sub‐regional and local level with
arrangements in different stages of development, achieving varying levels of
impact.  There are patterns across urban and rural areas – ESBs are most likely
to have been developed in cities or city regions, and are least prominent within
rural areas.  This flexibility is essential to ensure arrangements are fit for
purpose and meet local needs.  However, there are lessons that can be learnt
from successful approaches currently in place to allow all areas to progress
with this agenda particularly in preventing patchy coverage and driving
quality and accountability in partnership arrangements.
12 There is evidence of good practice where ESBs have successfully streamlined
current arrangements. Many regions are keen to learn from this good practice
to strategically plan the way forward: to reduce duplication and overlap of
different employment and skills partnerships through merging a number of
partnerships and other sub‐regional activity into ESBs.
Governance
13 Many stakeholders welcomed the progress made nationally on the
employment and skills agenda particularly in publications such as the Leitch
Review of Skills and the following implementation plan and the Sub‐National
Review.  However, it was clear that progress in terms of establishing ESBs has
been tentative as regions and sub‐regions await guidance from the national
level signalling support (or otherwise) for ESBs and providing a steer on the
role they should play.  Many also called for the UK Commission for
Employment and Skills (UKCES) to take on the role of a national champion,
supported by DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG providing: a single voice; a

6 Findings Paper
May 2008
framework within which ESBs are expected to operate; and drive quality in
partnership arrangements.
14 The regional role appears important in the establishment and operation of
ESBs.  In regions where there was strong coordination of partnerships offering
advice, sharing good practice, creating space for discussion and supporting the
development of a Terms of Reference, employment and skills partnerships
were stronger and more effective with overlaps and duplication reduced.  This
role was most effective when taken on by the RDA.  A local or regional
champion may be useful in promoting the work of ESBs and raising their
profile.  Within local areas this role was often taken on effectively by a well
known local employer but suggestions were also made that this role could be
taken on by elected members or the Regional Minister.  The most effective
model is likely to depend on the region and local area however evidence
indicates that thought needs to be given to governance and current
performance management arrangements.
Membership
15 ESBs and other sub‐regional and local employment and skills partnerships
varied greatly in their membership.  Those ESBs or partnerships which were
most effective had secured strong buy‐in from senior public sector
representatives, had the support of a dynamic and enthusiastic local business
representative as Chair and were managed by an independent partnership
manager who provided dedicated support to the partnership.
16 Most partnerships found it challenging to engage employers in their work and
strived for greater employer representation on their Board.  Those who had
successfully engaged with employers worked on: achieving the right balance
between discussions on strategy and delivery, making the language
meaningful to employers, and used innovative techniques to secure private
sector buy‐in, such as work place visits, virtual memberships, newsletters and
forums.  Having an independent partnership manager to drive forward this
activity appeared key to achieving this success.
17 Gaining senior public sector buy‐in was also a challenge in several areas.
Those who had senior public sector representatives who were able to make
decisions regarding funding and priorities for their organisation were able to
move forward at a faster pace and deliver results for the area.  This also
facilitated the buy‐in of private sector employers who saw the impact of their
involvement on the Board.
Strategy and delivery
18 ESBs and similar partnerships focused on different parts of the delivery‐
strategy spectrum with some partnerships exclusively focused on delivery
issues, and others involved mainly in the development of strategy within their
area.  Those who were most successful tended to have a balance between
strategy and delivery and some had established different mechanisms for

Findings Paper 7
May 2008
consultation and debate depending on where issues fell on the delivery‐
strategy spectrum.  This technique appeared to maximise engagement and
maintain the important balance between senior public sector and employer
buy‐in.
19 Many stakeholders, both at regional and sub‐regional level felt there was a
need for greater clarity over the remit of ESBs from Central Government.  They
sought clarity on where ESBs responsibilities lie with regard to strategy and
delivery to inform where their efforts should be most effectively targeted.  The
development of targets or performance management arrangements may help
here.
Funding
20 Funding for ESBs and other employment and skills partnerships again varied
greatly.  In some areas the ESB was supported by sub‐regional or regional
partners who pooled together funds to support a partnership manager and
sometimes additional administrative support.  However, funding was often
short‐term and not guaranteed, presenting challenges in what the partnership
could commit to deliver in the long‐term.
21 Most ESB and similar partnerships members (both public and private sector)
felt that having influence over funding directed to their area, and being able to
‘bend the spend’ was more important than securing a separate funding pot for
the ESB to deliver against.  However, some called for a small allocation of
funds to secure long‐term commitment for the partnership manager’s post,
payment of expenses to the Chair and possibly other private sector members.
A discretionary funding pot had enabled some partnerships to gain some
‘quick wins’, encouraging the support of its members by achieving direct
action on the ground.  This suggests a role for the regions in allocating funds
where ESBs (or similar) are adding value to the employment and skills agenda.

8 Findings Paper
May 2008
1 Introduction
1.1 The purpose of this paper is to present findings from research exploring the
current and potential future role of Employment and Skills Boards. The
research was designed in consultation with DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG to
enable them to better understand the current landscape, and inform decisions
regarding Employment and Skills Boards and any role they may play in the
integration of the employment and skills agenda.
1.2 The paper provides an insight into where ESBs and similar partnerships
currently exist, and what model/s they follow.  It then goes on to discuss key
themes identifying where such partnerships currently add value and
highlighting some of the challenges they face.  In particular, focusing on the
current landscape, governance issues, membership and employer engagement
and funding issues. The paper concludes by summarising some issues for
future consideration based on the evidence presented.
1.3 The findings are based on a wide ranging mapping exercise involving desk
based research of websites and key documents as well as 23 qualitative
interviews with key stakeholders, and consultation with RSP leads in each
region.  It also draws on in‐depth case study research carried out within two
regions (North West and South East) involving 34 interviews with
stakeholders from the public and private sector.
Background
1.4 The Leitch Review of Skills (December 2006)1 analysed and made policy
recommendations to address the UK’s long term skills needs. The Review
advocated a ‘new Employment and Skills Service’ influenced by a ‘network of
employer‐led Employment and Skills Boards’. Leitch recommended that ESBs
would inform how ‘training [can] be more relevant to the needs of the local labour
market’ and ‘scrutinise the functioning of local careers and employment information
to ensure that it better reflects employer needs’2 bringing together the skills and
employment agendas within an area.
1.5 Government felt that a structured network of boards responsible for reporting
to the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES) was overly
prescriptive in meeting local economic development needs. However, there
was support for the concept of ESBs to function at a sub‐regional level ‐
promoting economic prosperity, bringing together the employment and skills
1 Leitch Review of Skills, Prosperity for all in the Global Economy (December 2006) HM‐
Treasury: London
2 Leitch Review of Skills (December 2006) p. 24

Findings Paper 9
May 2008
agendas and strengthening the employer voice in identifying priorities,
particularly within Core Cities.3
1.6 The Sub‐National Review (July 2007)4 supported ESBs and stated ‘it is at this
[sub‐national] level that local employer‐led Employment and Skills boards should
operate’.  There is recognition that these boards need to work flexibly to meet
different needs in different areas. The Leitch Implementation Plan (July 20075)
states ESBs ‘will rationalise and build on successful city, employer coalitions and
other regional models’. It also calls for the development of ESBs to be based on
the sharing of ‘good practice’ rather than prescribing specific models and
processes. The report also recognises that ESBs may not be an appropriate
mechanism within some areas and leaves it to ‘local partners to decide’ if they are
appropriate within their area.  The Lyons Inquiry (March 2007)6 also supported
the concept of ESBs and called for ‘local authorities to play an appropriate role’.
1.7 Despite significant support for ESBs, and many areas having already
established some type of ESB (or in the process of doing so) examples of ‘good
practice’ and accounts of ‘what works’ are surprisingly lacking.  There is little
pooled knowledge of where ESBs currently exist, what their main roles are,
what lessons have been learnt about what works, how they can be used to
streamline current arrangements and where they have achieved real results.
Informing these knowledge and information gaps is essential in moving
forward the debate and informing the future of ESBs and the wider integration
of the employment and skills agenda.
3 Strong and Prosperous Communities: Local Government White Paper (October 2006)
Department for Communities and Local Government, London also supports this and
‘encourage Employment and Skills Boards to be formed in core cities’ to support
economic development
4 Review of Sub‐National Economic Development and Regeneration (July 2007) HM‐Treasury:
London
5 World Class Skills: Implementing the Leitch Review of Skills in England (July 2007), HM‐
Treasury: London
6 Lyons Inquiry into Local Government ‐ Place‐Shaping: A shared ambition for the future of
local government (March 2007) HM‐Treasury: London

10 Findings Paper
May 2008
2 Aims and objectives
2.1 The aims of the project were:
To identify current practice through conducting a mapping exercise of
demand‐led employment and skills partnerships (including but not
restricted to those called Employment and Skills Boards).
To compare and contrast current models exploring what works in
establishing and operating an ESB (or similar partnership) to effectively
promote economic prosperity at a sub‐regional level – exploring the
roles of the public and private sector.
To learn lessons and identify good practice about how ESBs can build
upon and streamline current arrangements, identify where they add
value particularly in strengthening the employers voice and promoting
economic prosperity at the sub‐regional level.
3 Methodology
Definitions
3.1 For the purpose of this work we have used the following broad definition to
identify an ESB or similar partnership:
A partnership integrating the employment and skills agenda at the sub‐regional level,
promoting shared responsibility through a demand‐led approach.
3.2 Demand‐led is defined as:
Market driven, identifying employers’ needs through private and public sector joint
working.
Within this report we use the generic term ‘partnerships’ or ‘employment and
skills partnerships’ to refer to all models identified within this research who
meet with the definition above. We use ESBs to refer specifically to those
partnerships termed as such.
Approach
3.3 The research was undertaken in two phases:
(a) A mapping exercise
(b) Case study research

Findings Paper 11
May 2008
3.4 The mapping exercise was conducted to populate a bespoke grid and
undertaken using desk based research drawing on both published and grey
literature – including websites, action/business plans, annual
reports/newsletters and Terms of Reference. This was supplemented by
primary research to ensure information was as up‐to‐date as possible and that
all relevant partnerships were captured.  This involved specific enquiries and
23 interviews with key stakeholders including the RSP in all nine regions.  The
mapping grid is a live document and can be viewed at www.cfe.org.uk.
3.5 In addition to the 23 interviews across the nine regions, case studies were
conducted focusing on the North West and South East. The regions were
selected in consultation with DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG and were chosen to
ensure the research provided maximum learning opportunities.  The regions
had adopted very different approaches to developing employment and skills
partnerships, with contrasting arrangements in terms of the regional role,
current landscape, role of public and private sector at the sub‐regional level
and funding arrangements.
3.6 A total of 34 interviews were conducted across the two regions with a range of
stakeholders including representatives from the RSP, Jobcentre Plus (JCP),
Learning and Skills Council (LSC), Sector Skills Councils (SSC), Chamber of
Commerce, Local Authorities (LAs), Regional Development Agencies (RDAs),
Private Sector representatives (both partnership members and non‐members)
and partnership managers.
3.7 Key documents were also reviewed including the Regional Economic Strategy
(RES), available Terms of Reference (TOR), Business Plans and partnership
meeting papers and minutes.
3.8 This report draws on the findings from both the initial 23 interviews across the
nine regions, and the case study research. This approach has enabled us to
provide detailed information on the current arrangements regarding local and
sub‐regional employment and skills partnerships and enabled us to identify
examples of good practice and make suggestions for future consideration,
drawing on the available evidence.  It is important to note that this work is
based upon desk based research and qualitative methods therefore there are
limitations to the breadth of this study.  This report provides a contribution to
the current policy debate and development of policy regarding integration of
the employment and skills agenda.

12 Findings Paper
May 2008
Findings
4 Current landscape
Overview
4.1 The employment and skills landscape is rapidly changing at all levels of
governance, particularly at the local and sub‐regional level where current
partnership arrangements aimed at integrating the employment and skills
agenda vary widely both within, and between, regions. This section
summarises the current landscape in relation to demand‐led employment and
skills partnerships.
Demand-led employment and skills partnerships
4.2 Across England, most sub‐regional employment and skills partnership
arrangements can be categorised into one of five main types.7  These include: 8
(a) Employment and Skills Boards;
(b) Employer Coalitions and Fair Cities Boards;
(c) City Growth;
(d) Skills and Productivity Alliances; and
(e) Local Strategic Partnership employment and skills sub‐groups (or 4th
block/theme groups) established to feed directly into Local Area
Agreements.
4.3 Other initiatives which bring together employment and skills at the local level,
but without a demand‐led focus include City Strategy, economic partnerships
and community‐led models (these models were not within the scope of this
project).
4.4 Those partnerships formally calling themselves ESBs exist to some extent
within all regions. Some have been established for two or three years, for
example, the partnerships in Nottingham and Manchester.  However, most are
more recent developments, often established in response to the publication of
the Leitch Review and are still in the early stages of development, for example,
Cheshire and Warrington ESB.
4.5 ESBs offer a mechanism for integrating the employment and skills agenda at
the sub‐regional level, focusing on meeting local needs with clear links to the
7 A comparative chart of the five models is included at Appendix A
8 This work focused on partnerships following these five models, however the landscape
is constantly evolving and there are likely to be other partnerships which were not
within the scope of this review.

Findings Paper 13
May 2008
regional and national level. The map below shows where ESBs and similar
demand‐led employment and skills partnerships are in operation.

Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO.
© Crown Copyright 2008. All rights reserved, Ordnance Survey Licence number 100048026
ESBs Established
ESBs Proposed
Employer Coalitions
City Growth
LSPAs
SW Partnership
Sub-Groups
East Partnership Employment
and Skills Forum
Community Partnerships (East of
England) Learning Partnerships (Y&H)
Map of demand-led employment and skills partnerships

14 Findings Paper
May 2008
Regional approaches
4.6 The nine regions have taken very different approaches to developing
employment and skills partnerships at sub‐regional level.  This flexibility has
been important in allowing sub‐regions to develop arrangements that are fit
for purpose within their locality. However, most regions are in discussion
regarding plans for developing effective ESB arrangements across their area
and were keen to receive guidance from the national level to confirm the
planned role of ESBs before moving forward.
4.7 Regions had tended to follow one of three approaches.  Within some regions
the RSP or RDA had taken on a ‘coordinating’ role, proactively supporting the
development of ESBs across their region, others had liaised with local
partnerships to gain a sense of developments within their region by taking a
‘monitoring’ approach, whilst others were ‘waiting’ for further guidance
before taking any action.
Coordinating approach
4.8 Those regions that had taken a lead in the coordination of arrangements across
their area appeared to have been most successful in ensuring the development
of ESBs (or similar partnerships) were based on good practice from other
models in the area and promoted the streamlining of arrangements, for
example, merging with the Employer Coalition or the LAA 4th block sub‐
group. They had also ensured that there were clear links between local
partnerships and the development of the RES. Some regions had pooled
together funding for local partnership managers, for example, the
development of the Local Skills and Productivity Alliance partnerships across
the South East. Regions taking this approach had also often implemented
mechanisms for sharing good practice and facilitating communication among
the partnerships within their region.
Monitoring approach
4.9 Those regions that had taken a monitoring approach had developed a clear
picture of the partnerships established within their region. However, there
was no active role undertaken at the regional level to influence partnership
arrangements across the region.
Waiting approach
4.10 Some regions had not taken an active coordinating or monitoring role.  These
regions were most likely to feel that a bottom‐up approach was required which
had to come from the sub‐regional level, or felt that there was insufficient
clarity from the national level to advise on the partnership arrangements in
their region.
4.11 Where there was little regional coordination there was more likely to be
evidence of duplication or overlap of arrangements and a lack of a clear link
between the sub‐regional arrangements and the RES. This appeared most
likely in regions where there were one or two dominating large cities or city

Findings Paper 15
May 2008
regions attracting significant national funding through various initiatives.
These partnerships as a result were more likely to look to the national level
than look for regional direction or support.  Within these regions coverage of
employment and skills partnerships was more likely to be patchy, but there
were examples of individual partnerships which were well established and
achieving results.
4.12 All regions irrespective of the role that they played, called for clarity or
direction on ESBs from the national level to facilitate them in making progress
at the regional and sub‐regional level.
Urban/rural differences
4.13 ESBs and other employment and skills partnerships were most prominent in
urban areas, particularly within cities and city regions, which often attract
various funding streams and require arrangements (such as an ESB) to ensure
successful integration of the employment and skills agenda at a sub‐regional
level, focusing on local needs.  The development of some ESBs has been closely
aligned with the Core Cities agenda as supported by the Local Government
White Paper (2006), where cities, notably Manchester and Nottingham, have
developed ESBs to meet their local employment and skills objectives and
achieve wider economic development.  It was within these areas, where there
are multiple funding streams and initiatives that there was greatest potential
for overlap and duplication:
The landscape is so complicated.  There are so many
strategies in development in the City Region.
NE Public Sector
In [a NW city region] many initiatives exist around
business support, finance and the [city‐region] vision.
They need to work together more effectively.
NW Public Sector
There has been difficulty in fitting together arrangements;
Leitch has added another level.
East Mids Public Sector
4.14 However, there are many examples of good practice where partnerships have
achieved effective collaborative working with organisations across their area
and successfully streamlined the landscape. ESBs have been shown to add
particular value here and offer the opportunity for local areas to review and
streamline arrangements in their locality.

16 Findings Paper
May 2008

Streamlining the landscape
Tyne and Wear and Merseyside
In the sub-regions of Tyne and Wear and Merseyside, the City Region Employment
Consortiums work closely with the Employer Coalitions in their areas to learn lessons
from, and build upon, their success in engaging with employers to promote a demand-led
approach. This has allowed them to deliver the City Strategy and targets agreed with
DWP.
South Yorkshire Employer Coalition
The South Yorkshire Employer Coalition has been fully streamlined into City Strategy
activity. The ESBs [Work and Skills Board] set up to support the South Yorkshire
Employment Consortium, are led by the previous South Yorkshire Employer Coalition
employees and employer members. The involvement of the Coalition has facilitated
employer enrolment onto the boards and aided set up of project support. The boards are
charged with influencing a wide agenda from Deprived Area Funding (DAF) to LAAs:
I have taken good practice from the Employer Coalition
initiatives and have had experience in supporting similar
initiatives. We had already engaged with many of the
employers before and it was just a case of getting them on
board… The Employers provide strategic leadership, a
sounding board and employer champions… Their
influence on strategy keeps them involved.
South Yorkshire Employment Consortium Representative
Collaborative working (Links to LAA/MAA’s)
Within the Merseyside City Employment Strategy, LSP sub-groups feed into the LAAs
economic development targets. There are employment and skills sub-groups to the Local
Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) in Liverpool, St Helen’s, Sefton, Wirral, Halton and
Knowsley.
In some instances, the sub-groups are described as having an ‘operational arm’ to
oversee the delivery of targets. The LSP sub-groups have been described as ‘achieving
successful coordination of the economic development network’ with the ‘ability and buy-in
from the appropriate partners to direct funding’ (NW Public Sector). The arrangements
are linked closely to the City Employment Strategy, which they have had considerable
opportunity to influence.
Within the North West there are discussions taking place about the potential for MAAs to
be delivered via ESBs.

Findings Paper 17
May 2008
4.15 ESBs and other partnerships tend to be most sparse in rural areas where often
the economic unit is not so clearly defined, less funding streams are attracted
regarding employment and skills and it may not be seen as a key priority for
the area.  Where ESBs are successful in rural areas, it is often dependent on a
clear economic unit and a drive from the local area to focus on employment
and skills issues.  The Alliance, spanning North Nottinghamshire and North
Derbyshire, have been particularly successful in establishing an ESB across a
largely rural sub‐region to promote employment and skills issues at the local
level, identifying local needs and raising these issues up the agenda within the
area.
4.16 ESBs may not be relevant in all areas and therefore it is important for sub‐
regions to decide whether an ESB will benefit their area.  However, sharing of
good practice, particularly showing where ESBs can add value in rural areas as
well as urban areas is essential to ensure arrangements are fit for purpose and
build on what works.
Conclusion
4.17 Where ESBs have shown to add the greatest value to the current landscape,
they have proved an important mechanism to effectively streamline and
engage with other similar initiatives to simplify the range of employment and
skills activity based at sub‐regional level.  The need for an ESB or similar was
most often decided at the sub‐regional level.
4.18 Where the region had taken an active role in coordinating employment and
skills partnerships within their sub‐regions, partnerships appeared more
effective, had clear links to the RES, with the risk of overlaps and duplication
less prominent than in regions which had not provided this support.

18 Findings Paper
May 2008
Policy Considerations ‐ Landscape
To promote streamlining and ensure ESBs add value to the current landscape, future
policy development could consider:
1. The national level to play a championing role – supporting ESBs and clarifying
the links to national policy.  This will provide regions and local areas with the
confidence to move forward with plans for ESBs. This role could be taken on
by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills.
2. The regional level to play an active coordination role – having an overview of
what exists in the region and advising local areas on potential gaps and
overlaps as well as facilitating communication and the sharing of good
practice to drive quality and accountability.  This role could be taken on by the
RDA.  Consideration should also be given to appointing independent sub‐
regional partnership managers.
3. The local ESB partnership manager or Chair to take a lead role in looking
across their sub‐region to ensure they are joining‐up effectively with other
partnerships in their area.  In particular ensuring links with the local LSC, JCP
and the LA.
4. The sub‐regional level to identify local priorities and needs, working with the
Local Authority to ensure a fit with the LAA/MAA and the proposed new
economic duty to undertake an economic assessment of their area.

Findings Paper 19
May 2008
5 Governance
Overview
5.1 Evidence suggests that Employment and Skills Boards function most
effectively at sub regional level.  Nevertheless, the national and regional levels
have important roles to play to ensure a joined‐up approach to the
employment and skills agenda across all spatial levels, and to drive quality in
partnership arrangements. However, these roles and responsibilities need to be
clear and defined. This section covers governance issues in relation to demand‐
led employment and skills partnerships
National role
5.2 Many areas welcomed the progress made nationally on the employment and
skills agenda particularly in publications such as the Leitch Review of Skills
and the following Implementation Plan.  However, it was clear that progress in
terms of establishing ESBs has been slow as regions and sub‐regions await
guidance from the national level signalling support (or otherwise) for ESBs,
and providing a steer on the role they should play, with many calling for a
national champion.
Guidance
5.3 There was overwhelming agreement that the national level could do more to
provide clarity and direction on the role ESBs should have within the
employment and skills agenda:
There needs to be clear messages about the links between policy
and the role of ESBs i.e., LEPs and ESBs; BERR and
Enterprise; DIUS and Leitch, CLG and City Prospectus… the
Sub‐national Review discussed the future role of the sub‐
regions however where powers are devolved to the region and
sub‐region, the national level will need to provide a strong
steer; we need parameters.
NW LSC Representatives
There is no steer on what a demand‐led model [ESB] should
look like. Is it where employers are engaged through focus
groups? Or events? Or sitting on the board? We need a
greater steer on this before we go out and present what we have
to offer to employers… You need to have this to ensure
credibility and encourage greater involvement.
SE Partnership Manager

20 Findings Paper
May 2008
5.4 Both public and private sector stakeholders found matters relating to
governance confusing.
The biggest problem is I donʹt think that there is any one
department whose remit covers this position. Whose remit
covers the interaction of public and private sector? Or is it
about enterprise? Social cohesion? Is it employability? Is it
skills? This agenda is not black and white in terms of
responsibility.
NW City Growth Employer
National champion
5.5 There was general agreement that the UKCES should play an important role in
directing and championing the employment and skills agenda and
development of partnership arrangements from the centre gaining buy‐in and
support from the public and private sector throughout each tier of governance:
There needs to be a champion within the Commission ‐
someone who is passionate about employment and skills.
SEEDA Representative
We need to have some higher level support from the
Commission… to support the dissemination of some good
practice.
Central government
5.6 Most felt that the four government departments – DWP, BERR, DIUS and CLG
had an important role to play in working with the UKCES to promote the
employment and skills agenda and ensure a joined up strategy with a single
message from the national level – driving quality and accountability.
It is a positive that all the key departments are signed
up…It will be important to provide an infrastructure for the
departments to work within.
NW LSC Representative
Sharing good practice
5.7 There were many calls for the UKCES to be responsible for sharing good
practice on what works in establishing and operating an ESB. Examples
suggested within this research include where demand or employer‐led
employment and skills models have worked effectively in aiding Local
Employment Partnerships, supporting enterprise, effectively engaging with
employers, addressing the issues raised by Leitch and ensuring a joined up

Findings Paper 21
May 2008
approach and effective structures for key public sector players to feed into
LAAs and proposed MAAs. Some examples include:

Merseyside Coalition
Employer Coalitions are linked closely with JCP and the welfare to work agenda. They
support JCP to promote Local Employer Partnerships through the Coalition’s network of
employers. They are tasked with referring suitable employer candidates to the
appropriate contact within JCP. The Coalition has also worked with the LSC to promote
Skills Pledges and hosted an event for 200 employers in the area.
Alliance Employment and Skills Board
The Alliance ESB has aligned itself with the local Alliance for Enterprise Programmes
which is funded by the first round of LEGI allocated to Ashfield, Bolsover and Mansfield.
The board highlights its work to support Making the Connection which is responsible for
the projects in the LEGI programme concerned with getting ‘economically inactive
individuals connected to training and employment opportunities generated by inward
investing and local expanding businesses.’
Licensing and inspection
5.8 Views were split regarding licensing and inspection, with a majority of
stakeholders seeking a flexible approach with clarity and direction on the role
of ESBs. Many strongly rejected any prescribed elements related to licensing or
inspection:
It would be completely inappropriate for these bodies to be
inspected. [Employers] are volunteers, who are giving up
their time to contribute to this section.... It is about
facilitation at the national level... [Employers] should be
allowed to challenge, inform and influence... like a lobby.
You wouldnʹt get the dynamics that you have now if
inspection was the case.
SE LSC Representative
[The region] do not want to be forced along as it is
important to be flexible concerning the very local level.
RSP Director
5.9 However, there were a few stakeholders who believed there might be a case
for considering licensing and inspection if ESBs were to have responsibility
over budgets and priority setting. This was particularly apparent within those
sub‐regions with a strong city focus such as Merseyside where there are
multiple funding streams to support initiatives to tackle levels of deprivation
and promote attainment of skills. The sub‐region has been charged with
supporting these developments to promote effective strategy development:

22 Findings Paper
May 2008
There has been much suggestion about the devolution of
powers to the sub‐regional level. I would not agree that this
should be to the extent seen in London, but where the sub‐
region will be accountable for decisions, licensing will be
important to uphold this.
5.10 Some employers also supported the idea of licensing or ‘reporting of some sort.’
They felt that some formal monitoring arrangements would ‘be important to
show how effective the model is and to ensure it is not just another body in the
landscape’ (SE Employer). A few employers also commented that it would be
helpful for them to assess how effectively they spend their time working
within these partnerships.
Regional role
5.11 The regional role appears important in the establishment and operation of
ESBs.  In regions where there was a strong coordination of local partnerships
offering advice, sharing good practice, creating space for discussion and
supporting the development of a Terms of Reference , employment and skills
partnerships appeared stronger and more effective with overlaps and
duplication reduced.
5.12 This role appears most effective when taken on by the RDA. The RSP played a
useful role here however; several RSP representatives felt that they could add
more value if utilised effectively.
RSPs can support the articulation of [skills and
employment] needs… National departments need to use
the RSP better. With these initiatives, we have had to blag
our way in.
RSP Director
5.13 It was suggested that where the RSP was based within the RDA, they were
able to take an objective perspective in integrating the employment and skills
arrangements across the region, particularly in joining together LSC and JCP
and ensuring clear links to the RES.  Where the RSP was based within one of
the key employment and skills partners, such as LSC or JCP, RSPs reported
some difficultly in separating the priorities of their organisation from
establishing an effective partnership which represented and integrated the
views of all partners and their initiatives within the employment and skills
landscape. There was also some difficulty experienced in aligning each
organisation’s priorities to the RES.
Links to Regional Economic Strategy
5.14 ESBs added particular value where there were clear links to the regional level
and they were able to feed into the RES.  This link allowed regions to represent
the employment and skills needs of the sub‐region.

Findings Paper 23
May 2008
5.15 Where regions had taken an active coordination role, they were also able to
ensure there were clear links between the sub‐regional partnerships within
their region. This allowed sub‐regions to understand both regional and sub‐
regional priorities and target their activity accordingly. The arrangements in
the South East were particularly effective in promoting this alignment.

Alignment with the Regional Economic Strategy
The Regional Skills for Productivity Alliance (RSPA) in the South East has successfully
supported the Local Skills for Productivity Alliances (LSPAs) based at the sub-regional
level. The links between the regional and sub-regional level have benefited both tiers of
governance equally.
For the regional level, ‘skills priorities have been set through work with the LSPAs. These
bodies are important in the RES and [the RSP] has worked hard to align them with it.’ For
the sub-regions, ‘the support of the region has been important to access funding streams
where priorities are different to those expressed at the national level’ (SE Partnership
Manager). The region is described as a ‘lobbyist’ to ‘reflect the broader policy picture’ at
the national level and represent the sub-regional cause (SEEDA Representative):
The RES has set the priorities and states what this region needs to make
the economy grow. We know our priorities lie with level 3 and 4 skills… and
against national priorities, we appear to perform poorly… It is important for
us to lobby at the national level to represent our priorities.
SEEDA Representative
The effective links between the sub-region and the region in the South East have been
observed by employers who sit on the board. One employer commented that he ‘was
able to influence SEEDA objectives for 2012’ and was ‘grateful for this opportunity.’

Sharing good practice
Many stakeholders identified an important role for the regions in identifying and
facilitating the sharing of good practice. As one local partnership manager mentions, ‘the
RSP plays an important role to share good practice for us to apply within our own model.’
The South East RSP held regular regional meetings for the sub-regional employment and
skills partnerships managers. These were particularly welcomed, and involved facilitating
the sharing of ideas, discussing challenges and sharing good practice:
I have five other colleagues that work in my area that are
linked to the regional level. This enables us to share good
practice with the other [partnerships].

24 Findings Paper
May 2008

ESB champion
5.16 Stakeholders found that a champion at the regional or sub regional level to
promote the work of ESBs was valuable.  This role could be taken on by a local
employer or public sector representative.  An RSP representative suggested an
important role for the Regional Minister to play in relation to ESBs ‐
championing their cause, promoting their role, and providing a link between
the national level and ESBs. In support of the idea of a champion based at this
level, one SE employer mentioned that the enthusiasm of his local MP worked
well in promoting and identifying with the needs of the private sector:
He is particularly effective in championing the cause of
business and skills. He appears passionate about this area,
and this works well.
SE Employer
Sub-region
5.17 The success of local partnerships appears to be driven by:
(a) an effective partnership manager responsible for gaining buy‐in from, and
facilitating discussions between, the private and public sector, providing
the partnership with momentum to achieve results;
(b) the engagement of employers, particularly securing a dynamic and
committed Chair; and
(c) the strength of the regional tier promoting the sharing of good practice and
reducing duplication across the region.
5.18 A majority of stakeholders agreed that ESBs work most effectively at the sub‐
regional level, supporting the recommendations made by the Sub‐National
Review (2007)9. As a sub‐regional partnership manager mentions, ‘on a more
local basis… you bring too many people in’, complicating the landscape for
employers to engage with.
5.19 The sub‐region is seen as important to ‘engage with the local level’ (SE
Partnership Manager), ‘feed into LAAs and MAAs,’ (NW LSC representative)
and ‘facilitate effective partnership working’ (Employer Coalition representative)
for initiatives such as Local Employment Partnerships, Train to Gain, and
enterprise initiatives.
Links to other initiatives
5.20 Some sub‐regions are more advanced than others in setting up employment
and skills arrangements.  Those sub‐regions that are more advanced appear to
9 Review of Sub‐National Economic Development and Regeneration (July 2007) HM‐Treasury:
London

Findings Paper 25
May 2008
have a strong city focus, such as those boards based within Core Cities. A
North West City Growth member discussed how ‘so much of the policy and
strategy development is based at the City‐Region’ rather than at local or regional
level.
5.21 ESBs have effectively fed into LAAs, and the proposed MAAs. This has been
particularly evident in the North West where the LSP sub‐groups are aligned
against LAA and MAA boundaries. These arrangements are currently under
consultation in terms of their transfer to ESBs. In any move to ESBs, it is
essential to maintain these links to the LAA/MAA and build further links with
other initiatives to drive quality in the partnership arrangements and ensure
streamlining of activity. The Merseyside sub‐region is keen to build links
between the key partners involved with the City Employment Strategy.
Different solutions may be appropriate in different areas – from the ESB being
the key partnership feeding into and agreeing the design of the LAA/MAA, to
the ESB being represented on the LAA/MAA partnership and vice versa.
5.22 Boundaries of the sub‐regions remain a challenge for ESBs to work effectively.
This has proved particularly difficult in areas such as Kent and Medway and
the Alliance based across North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire.
Where there are difficulties in effectively linking ESBs and similar partnerships
to LAAs it is hoped that proposed MAAs can contribute to clarity on
boundaries and therefore enable such arrangements to add value.
Local level
5.23 There was broad consensus that ESBs were not as effective at the very local
level.  In these areas, several stakeholders argued that there was scope for local
initiatives and progress that link into the sub‐regional ESB:

Links with local initiatives
Hampshire and Isle of Wight are focusing efforts to build links with initiatives based at the
local level to make sure their needs and priorities are represented at the sub-regional
level. What the partnership hopes to do is to engage with initiatives such as those driven
by LAs or local business forums to support future ESB arrangements.

5.24 Most employment and skills partnerships have shown effective working to
deliver local priorities through supporting initiatives such as: skills
programmes, for example the UB50 project supported by JCP and the
University of Surrey; and the Liverpool City Growth ‘Grot Spots’ strategy to
regenerate pockets of deprivation seen in ‘travel to work areas.’  The support for
this delivery focus has been from employers where they are ‘able to see the
benefits of their involvement’ both for their business and their communities:

26 Findings Paper
May 2008
At this level, you are able to discuss business and local
needs more which will attract greater support from
employers.

UB50 Leadership & Management Projects
Within the area of Surrey, figures released in October 2006 stated there were 2000
former managers signed up to JCP services despite the high demand for these skills.
These managers had obtained ‘higher level qualifications and therefore sat outside the
national priorities’ (Surrey JCP Representative) and were often excluded from
mainstream employment and skills agendas.
The Surrey partnership promoted and facilitated the collaboration of work between the
University of Surrey, Surrey Economic Partnership, JCP and Surrey County Council to
research and develop programmes specifically for this target group. The partners
involved have joined with SEEDA to fund a pilot programme of Leadership and
Management training courses, based on existing successful projects by the University of
Surrey
The UB50 project is in its early days, but one of its achievements so far has been to
promote closer working between the partners by building on previously successful
training programmes: ‘[The partnership] had successfully brought together organisations
that normally work with quite different employment agendas’ to effectively meet local
needs (Partnership Manager).

Conclusion
5.25 The flexibility within existing governance arrangements regarding ESBs has
allowed the sub‐regional level in many areas to effectively identify where ESBs
can add value to exiting arrangements. Where the need for ESBs have been
identified or explored, they have been seen as a valuable partnership to
complement and oversee funding and initiatives directed at the sub‐region,
such as City Strategy.
5.26 However, to support this activity, important roles were also identified for
national and regional levels to ensure that where an ESB is established, it is
accountable and governed effectively to meet the needs of wider sub‐regional
and regional economic development when articulating local employment and
skills needs.

Findings Paper 27
May 2008
Policy Considerations ‐ Governance
To ensure a transparent and joined‐up approach to governance we would suggest:
1. The UK Commission for Employment and Skills to provide clarity on the role of
ESBs particularly regarding their expected remit, linking effectively with DWP,
DIUS, BERR and CLG to promote a joined‐up strategy and single voice from the
national level.
2. As part of the RDA’s regional coordination role (linking with JCP and LSC), the
RDA should in particular provide advice on the development of ESBs, share
good practice, create opportunities for discussions between partnerships at the
sub‐regional level and ensure a clear and transparent link between the RES and
ESBs.  Consideration should also be given to performance management
arrangements.
3. The sub‐region to ensure clear links to policy developments including the RES
and the LAA/MAA covering their area and to scrutinise services provided by
agencies such as the LSC and JCP to facilitate them in delivering local priorities.
This would ensure local initiatives met local needs and were delivered
effectively.  This role could be undertaken by the partnership manger.

28 Findings Paper
May 2008
6 Membership
Overview
6.1 ESBs and other demand‐led employment and skills partnerships varied greatly
in their membership.  Most strived for greater employer engagement, having
encountered challenges in recruiting employers. However, those ESBs or
similar partnerships who were most effective had secured strong buy‐in from
senior public sector representatives, had the support of a dynamic and
enthusiastic private sector chair, and were managed by an independent
partnership manager who provided dedicated support to the partnership
ensuring the Terms of Reference and remit of the group were clear and
supported by all members.  The most successful partnerships used innovative
techniques to secure private sector buy‐in, such as work place visits, virtual
memberships, newsletters and forums. This section discusses membership
issues in relation to ESBs and similar partnerships.
Current membership
6.2 The membership of ESBs varied greatly depending on the partnership.  Leitch
promoted demand‐led boards to be achieved through leadership of a private
sector chair.  In reality a range of approaches have developed among ESBs. The
approach will necessarily differ depending on the area and the circumstances.
Some boards have engaged a private sector chair and strong private sector
involvement from the outset, for example, Enterprising Doncaster, others have
moved forward with a predominantly public sector presence, for example, the
Manchester Skills Board (as part of the Core Cities agenda).
Private sector
6.3 Partnerships appear most successful when a private sector representative takes
on the role of Chair and ‘advocate’ of the board, with a small number of
additional private sector representatives.  However, there is also evidence of
other models of private sector engagement designed to promote a demand‐led
model, often used to complement the role of a private sector Chair.
Senior level
6.4 The role of the employer is most effective when individuals are at a senior
level within their organisation, with a broad understanding of their sector and
current and future recruitment and training needs:

Findings Paper 29
May 2008
There is a high quality of debate drawing on all the range of
skills in the room. We didn’t agree on everything, but we did
have a good debate, drawing on our experiences, to come to a
common and strong conclusion.
NW Employer
Enthusiasm
6.5 Many of the public sector respondents mentioned that working with
enthusiastic employers adds great value to arrangements.  ‘Personality’ and a
‘passion for policy’ were identified as important attributes of employers
involved in ESBs to effectively ‘challenge’ and ‘scrutinise’ public services, feeling
able to express their thoughts and ‘confidently say’ where they ‘feel an issue has
slipped’ (SE Employer):
We had so many ideas that we wanted to put forward and
work towards within our strategy.
Leadership skills
6.6 Both public and private sector stakeholders were in agreement that in order to
be a successful private sector Chair an employer needs strong leadership skills
matched with their enthusiasm to provide the board with ‘momentum’ and
‘drive’:
[The partnership] had a proactive leader... a dynamic,
entrepreneurial leader. He was very different to a normal
committee‐like Chairman that you will get in the public
sector… The messages you need to give about these
initiatives are what value you feel employers can make, a
clear definition, and good leadership.
NW Employer
6.7 One North West employer described the role of the Chair as an ‘advocate of their
vision’ at events to share with other businesses.  This appeared important to
raise the profile of the work of the board, highlighting to employers that their
involvement in such initiatives was making a difference:
[The private sector Chair] should be tasked more directly
to engage with other employers. We are missing a trick
where we should be using them as advocates.
LSC Representative
Business size
6.8 The size of business did not appear to make a difference to the contribution
that an employer could make, however as one RSP manager argued ‘the

30 Findings Paper
May 2008
involvement of the ‘big players’ could be important to raise the profile of the
employment and skills agenda amongst those ‘hard‐to reach’ employers’. This
inspiration needs to come from establishing a role and vision that ‘business
champions will want to be part of.’ Large companies also allow for greater
flexibilities for individuals to take on the commitment of a Chair. They are also
most likely to be able to participate in any initiatives or partnerships set up to
meet local needs, such as an ESB.
Business sector
6.9 Some demand‐led partnerships have focused on key sectors in establishing the
membership of their boards. The Merseyside Coalition has representatives
covering 12 different sectors. ‘Sector champions’ represent ‘key growth sectors’ in
the area the Coalition covers. They look to deliver sector‐focussed projects to
promote employment amongst disadvantaged people such as ex‐offenders and
Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) communities. The sector approach has
proved effective in some areas, particularly in delivering sector specific
delivery projects. However, this does not appear necessary to achieve a
successful ESB.
Defined roles
6.10 Evidence suggests that where members have clearly defined roles, the board is
more likely to have ‘enthusiasm’ and ‘drive’ to achieve agreed actions.  Without
these defined roles and a strong leader employers can become ‘disillusioned’
with their involvement:
The original board had a lot of energy and drive. The change
of leadership made the original board members lose
enthusiasm for the board.
NW Employer
The change of leadership changes the direction of the
board… many employers became disillusioned.
NW Employer
6.11 Where employers felt that their role was not clearly defined or that they were
not making a difference, the boards were often described as ‘talking shops’.  One
employer mentioned ‘there were fruitless discussions where the public sector had
already made their mind up.’ Another employer said, ‘the meetings were very
political, and long… not really producing any results… people were rolling their eyes
as meetings took so long.’
Benefits to the partnership
6.12 Involving private sector representatives provides a number of benefits to the
ESB. Their presence promotes a demand‐led approach ensuring local needs
are articulated, they allow the partnership to gain influence over funding
directed to the private sector, they provide an important critique of current

Findings Paper 31
May 2008
arrangements and they allow the partnership to tailor programmes to the
individual area for the benefit of local employers and the wider community:
ESH Group and the North East Employer Coalition
Fit for Employment works with young people, providing meaningful work experience to
Year 10 and 11 students at a school in the North East. The ESH Group have guaranteed
to offer a full time job to 20% of the participants if they achieve 5 GCSEs or more.
The Tyneside Cyrenians: Self Builders project provided real work experience to a group
of 13 homeless men with the aim to achieve core units of NVQ in construction, and a
foundation course in Health and Safety. The training was delivered in partnership with
local training providers, such as Newcastle College. The Employer Coalition facilitated
key partners to work effectively together in delivering and supporting these initiatives.

Benefits to the employer
6.13 Where ESBs or similar partnerships are operating effectively, and have good
representation from the private sector, employers feel able to influence the
strategy and delivery of the employment and skills agenda across their area:
I work in the security industry where you need level 2 to
enter it. So we are actually excluded from Train to Gain. It
is difficult to get funding for level 3 and [Continuous
Professional Development] programmes. On the
[partnership], we are saying this to the key players… Over
50 per cent of the representatives on the [partnership] are
employers and you are able to challenge the partners to
address employer needs on a local basis. This is what skills
and employment is all about.
SE Employer
My involvement goes back 15 years. I have always had a
passion about education and skills. I had just built up a
company during a time of high unemployment. I had a lot of
tradesmen who were formerly unemployed so I got involved
with various organisations and sub‐groups to help me.”
SE Employer
Defined roles
6.14 Employers felt most satisfaction when it was clear what their role was, and
what expertise they could offer to add value. Lessons could be learnt from the
City Growth initiatives made up of a ‘board of experts’ with each employer
looking at a specific area to promote regeneration in their sub‐region:

32 Findings Paper
May 2008
I was brought in as I had an awareness of corporate social
responsibility and how to engage with employers… My
skills were a part of why I was approached. Each employer
brought something different to the table…
Engaging the private sector
6.15 There is little pooled knowledge to guide successful employer engagement
methods and many partnerships encountered challenges in successfully
engaging employers.  However, there are examples of good practice that can
be learnt from.
6.16 Employer engagement at different levels is important to achieve a demand‐led
approach which extends beyond the views and opinions of the members of the
board. This aspect of employer engagement has been particularly important to
engage with those hard‐to reach employers:
A wide range of methods should be used… through our
research we carried out, we managed to engage with 1000
employers and raise issues of work‐ready skills needs, and
sector clusters with them.
6.17 Methods such as focus groups, forums and employer networking events were
found to be important to gain an understanding of the wider employer voice
beyond the board members.  Within the SE one partnership had successfully
recruited virtual members identified through websites, who were included in
the dissemination of newsletters and event details, etc.  They found that this
method raised interest with employers becoming more involved in the
partnership.  Learning can also be taken from the work of Employer Coalitions
and the work now being undertaken by Working Ventures UK.
6.18 Both the public and private sector respondents also suggested the importance
of ‘one to one’ contact between the ESB and an employer. As one partnership
manager explained ‘through direct engagement with employers’, they had
identified ‘a shopping list of skills needs’ asking individual employers what they
needed for their business and taking the list away to see what support was
available for them.  It was through one to one discussions that private sector
chairs were most often recruited.  The independent partnership manager was
key to achieving this, being able to identify with employers, speaking their
language and explaining the benefits of their involvements. This has been
achieved through partnership managers undertaking site visits and discussing
issues on a one to one basis.

Findings Paper 33
May 2008
6.19 Examples of engaging wider numbers of employers include:

City Growth Luton
The key to City Growth lies in the idea of developing geographic industry clusters. On the
website, links are included to promote businesses to join a cluster network, stating the
benefits of their involvement for their business. Although City Growth agendas are based
around a wider economic development agenda, there are benefits for employers to get
involved where the sharing of training is encouraged, particularly amongst SMEs.
North East Employer Coalition
In partnership with key agencies working within the employment and skills agenda,
Passionate about Employment: North East (April 2007) has published a 12 page guide to
employability in the North East aimed at regional employers to highlight the potential of
the North East’s vast labour market pool of 250,000 jobless residents. It highlights key
issues for employers, such as skills shortages and the importance of training for future
demands, but also explains some of the initiatives that are taking place to support
employers with contact details given to find out more.
Hampshire and Isle of Wight LSPA
An example of a recent event held in the area was Revitalise your Training Plans this
New Year in December 2007, which supported ‘[local authority managers] in getting the
most from [their] training budget and improving the skills of [their] people.’ In order to fit in
with employers, a session was held between 7:30 – 9:30am and also for lunch between
1:00 – 3:00pm. The event attracted 30 local authority managers.
We have organised events, and we have been getting a good
attendance at these meetings... These were organised
through the [local partnership’s]… contacts from Business
Link has played an important part in engaging with SMEs.
SE Employer
Public sector
6.20 The influence that ESBs can have on sub‐regional strategy appears determined
by the level of senior public sector buy‐in. Those boards that have achieved
greater public‐sector buy in have greater impact on LAAs and the proposed
MAAs; can influence spending of funding initiatives such as LEGI and ESF;
and have the seniority to make decisions quickly and agree actions at meetings
without having to consult colleagues:
If you don’t get senior‐buy in from the outset, it will be
difficult to get buy‐in from below in the organisation. It will
be important to get this aspect right from the start.
6.21 A clear Terms of Reference is essential to outline the importance of senior
public sector buy‐in and define their role on the board within the context of
their own priorities. It is important to involve senior public sector

34 Findings Paper
May 2008
representatives from the outset in defining the Board’s remit to gain genuine
buy‐in:
The employers on board are very sector driven… LAA
targets keep them driven…senior buy‐in is important.
South Yorkshire Public Sector

Nottingham Skills & Employment Board
The membership consists of significant senior public-sector buy-in which influences a
varied agenda. Their remit covers initiatives such as the methods to:
…maximise demand within the employment and skills
agenda; influencing their City Strategy as a pathfinder;
feed into LAAs, promoting the welfare to work initiatives;
and representing the employer voice.
LSC Representative
The partners involved include the LSP, LSC, JCP, Local Authorities and the Federation
of Small Businesses (FSB), all whom have a great commitment to the board. Regional
bodies such as the RSP, the RDA and Government Office are observers on the board to
oversee developments in the sub-region.
6.22 The presence of public sector representatives as significant employers within
many sub‐regions was also seen as important for the memberships of ESBs or
similar partnerships.
Partnership manager
6.23 ESBs that have managerial and administrative support are able to undertake
tasks on behalf of the board members and ensure agreed actions are completed
between meetings. The managerial support has a wider role to play to ensure a
successful demand‐led model by engaging with employers and senior public
sector representatives and representing the partnership at events within the
area, as well as at the regional level linking directly into the RES:
The Partnership manager has real passion – that is what’s
got the employers really locked in.
SE Public Sector Partner
6.24 The independent status of a partnership manager is important in facilitating
joined‐up working. The partnership manager’s role is placed between the
public and private sector as one respondent discussed: ‘when I’m out engaging
with employers it is good to be independent from the [public sector partners].’
However, to make progress and achieve results ‘it is useful to have [public sector
partners] backing me.’ The Partnership manager is also most effective where
they have ‘a good understanding of who the companies are in the area.’ (Yorkshire
and Humber Partnership Manager)

Findings Paper 35
May 2008
6.25 This role is well established within several of the South East partnerships:

South East Partnership Managers
The key responsibilities of the SE Partnership Managers are:
• ‘Development of the partnership/Board’- to include developing the strategic
vision, ‘supporting’ the leadership and members, ‘build strong working
relations’ with members and to ‘map and engage with the appropriate
business forums’ in the area;
• ‘Coordination of the partnership/board meetings’ - to include planning and
organisation of the meetings and ‘to ensure papers are produced;’
• ‘Development of the Delivery Framework’ - through consultation with the board
members and advisors. The partnership manager must ‘ensure actions from
the Delivery Framework are implemented;’
• ‘Communications strategy’ – to ensure the ‘Chair, Vice Chair and Key Partners
are will briefed and their feedback shapes further development of the
partnership/board and its strategy’. They are also tasked to ‘ensure good
communications between the local and regional level, and externally; and
• Provide ‘links to the [RSP] and other local partnerships/boards’ – to ‘contribute
to the development of the Regional Alliance’ and to ‘network and share best
practice with the other partnership/board leads.’
Partnership Manager Job Description
The [Partnership] Managers in these arrangements add great
value to the structures in place for both the public and the
private sector.
SE Employer
I was visited by the [Partnership Manager] who informed me
of their work. I came along to the meeting and I liked what I
saw.
SE Employer
[The Partnership Manager] is very personable, not ‘salesy’
at all.
SE Public Sector Representative

6.26 The partnership managers appear most successful where they have senior
level experience and a good understanding of the public and private sector, as
well as local skills and employment policy and issues:
I have worked in the locality for a long time. I grew up here,
and I know the issues well. I have had a background in
business so have a good understanding of how employers
work.

36 Findings Paper
May 2008
6.27 A dedicated partnership manager is able to provide the ‘customer service’ that
employers demand.  Their role is solely dedicated to the success of the board
and ensuring it works effectively. The wider role they play in employer
engagement and trying to raise the profile of skills and employment needs is
important across all partners involved with this agenda.
Conclusion
6.28 This chapter has presented ways in which membership can add value to
established and emerging ESBs. The contribution of the private sector has
been important to highlight areas outside of national priorities and challenge
the agendas of partners, such as the LSC and JCP. The private sector
membership does not necessarily have to represent the sector make‐up within
a region as it appears that individual characteristics such as enthusiasm and
strong leadership add the greatest value to the boards.
6.29 Strong private sector representation also helped raise the profile of an ESB
when engaging with employers more widely.  There were examples of ESBs
and similar partnerships that had successfully gained a representative view of
employer needs.
6.30 Where there was strong senior public sector buy‐in and support (in particular,
from LSC and JCP) ESBs were found to be effective in influencing strategy at a
sub‐regional level.
6.31 For the Boards’ wider role in economic development and linking in with other
initiatives, an independent partnership manager was found to be a valuable
way to raise awareness of the ESB’s vision as well as supporting the members
and their roles both within and outside of the Board.

Findings Paper 37
May 2008

Policy Considerations – Membership
To achieve a balanced membership and buy‐in from public and private sector, the
following could be considered in future policy developments:
1. Senior public sector posts responsible for employment and skills within
JCP, LSC and LAs to include a requirement to engage in ESBs and ensure
links to current initiatives.
2. Clear Terms of Reference for the partnership, with defined roles for its
members.
3. LAAs and MAAs to collaborate with ESBs in identifying local needs and
priorities.
4. Independent partnership managers to be put in place for all ESBs,
coordinated by RDAs.
5. To supplement the role of the private sector chair, ESBs should look to
broaden employer engagement through innovative techniques such as
virtual membership, focus groups and forums.
6. Regional Ministers to raise the profile of ESBs to encourage public and
private sector buy‐in and engagement.

38 Findings Paper
May 2008
7 Strategy and delivery
Overview
7.1 ESBs and similar partnerships focus on different parts of the strategy‐delivery
spectrum with some partnerships exclusively focused on delivery issues, and
others involved mainly in the development of strategy within their area.  To be
successful these partnerships need to have a balance between strategy and
delivery and potentially different mechanisms for consulting on each, in order
to maximise interest and maintain senior public sector and private sector buy‐
in and engagement.  This section summarises current activity on the strategy‐
delivery spectrum.
Current practice
7.2 Employers identified the benefits they gained from informing delivery issues
but also in influencing the wider employment and skills strategy at sub‐
regional level:
[The Board had] drive and energy, particularly in the
brainstorming stage. We had so many ideas that we wanted
to put forward from our area of expertise and work towards
within our strategy.
NW Employer
7.3 Nevertheless, without a clear responsibility over strategy, one employer
described the board as ‘a solution looking for a problem.’
7.4 Balancing the role that employers have in influencing strategy and delivery is
important to keep a range of employers engaged and maintain interest in the
work of the boards.  One partnership described themselves as a strategic body
‘with a delivery arm for the local level’ (Partnership Manager):
It will be important for future ESBs to consult with us on
strategy. We have wide areas of expertise that are not being
used... Employers like to comment when strategy affects
them.
NW Employer
We are largely delivery focused, but it is important to have
the strategic vision…  change takes a long time happen, and
where employers are saying ʺI have 40 vacancies, I need to
fill them now. What are you going to do about it?” Itʹs
important for me to tell employers “why donʹt you sponsor

Findings Paper 39
May 2008
some graduates or offer apprenticeships?” Itʹs important for
me to challenge views to get them thinking about strategy
7.5 However, it is important to note that not all employers have such a wide
ranging interest in strategy, and a majority of employers interests lay in
influencing delivery within their area:
It is a certain type of employer who is interested in
strategy… those that are enthusiastic about getting
involved… those that are frustrated by policy.
Partnership Manager
7.6 There was evidence of Employer Coalitions adapting their approach to
strategy and delivery to meet this need, allowing the employers who have a
broader interest to influence the strategic agenda at the sub‐regional and
regional level, whilst a wider employer voice is engaged at the local level
within delivery projects:10
We are strategic at the sub‐regional and regional level.
However, we deliver local projects targeting specific groups
of people or sectors, such as our construction skills project
for ex‐offenders.
Employer Coalition Project Staff
7.7 The use of delivery groups attached to the ESB or partnership such as
employer forums may help to bridge the gap between strategy and delivery
within employment and skills arrangements.
7.8 There was evidence of other partnerships bridging the gap between strategy
and delivery in different ways:
The LSP sub‐groups work closely with the Coalition to
deliver our priorities; developing the strategy is the duty of
the LSP sub‐group outcomes and the Coalition has the
delivery aspects about it… As the Coalition engages with
employers, we are able to use this resource.
We see that there will be an employer group of some sort of
which we will consult with on delivery. Strategic discussion
may stay within the public sector.
NE LA Representative
10 Working Ventures UK have good practice examples of this work available on their
website

Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role

Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role

Similar to Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role (20)

Employment and Skills Boards- Current and potential role