1 / 14
Download Presentation

INTERFACE Competence Gap Analysis: Synthesis of Survey Results in Fragile Communities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INTERFACE Competence Gap Analysis Synthesis of Survey Results

  2. Fragile communities, included in INTERFACE • A total of 18 Fragile communities were selected for participation in INTERFACE project: • 5 in Iceland; • 3 in Bulgaria; • 3 in Greece; • 3 in Ireland; • 4 in Italy.

  3. INTERFACE Gap Analysis Survey –Total sample • INTERFACE Gap Analysis Survey: • Total sample: 210 respondents (Iceland – 42, Bulgaria – 52, Greece – 41, Ireland – 47, Italy – 28); • Territorial distribution: in each INTERFACE country, all selected fragile communities were represented in the survey sample.

  4. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: personal characteristics (1/2) • Gender Ratio: 53% Male / 47% Female – highest male-to-female ratio in Greece (68% / 32%), lowest in Ireland (26% / 74%). • Age: the upper age groups: 40-49, 50-59 and 60+ years of age were predominant among the respondents in most INTERFACE countries, while some of the other age groups were also significantly represented (30-39 age range in Greece /34% of the total number/ and 30-39 /46%/together with 20-29 age group /29%/ in Italy). • The majority of respondents possessed education below university level – either “secondary” or “vocational education and training”, with the exception of Italy, where 61% of the respondents have finished university studies.

  5. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: personal characteristics (2/2) • Regarding affiliation, varying groups were most significantly represented in the sample of respondents in different countries: • Iceland and Greece – business organisations; • Bulgaria – community members; • Ireland and Italy – non-profit (incl. voluntary and civil society) organisations. • Most of the respondents have been living/working in the respective community for more than 20 years (most in Bulgaria: 77%, least in Ireland: 58%), with the exception of Italy, where the largest group of respondents (47%) was those, who have lived/worked in the community for less than 5 years.

  6. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: community problems and perceived competence needs (1/2) • Among the various categories, mentioned in the Survey Questionnaire, “infrastructure facilities”, “business sector and jobs” and “human resources” were generally considered problematic in all INTERFACE countries. • Most of the respondents indicated that they have already been involved in one or more activities, addressing the problematic areas above. • Predominantly, the initiative for theses activities, came from within the community, the main actors being “local administration”, “business organisations”, “voluntary/civil society organisations”, and in the case of Bulgaria and Greece – the “respondents themselves”.

  7. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: community problems and perceived competence needs (2/2) • Respondents were generally satisfied with their participation in the activities above, claiming this was due to level of “own competences” and/or of “people the respondent worked with”. • Respondents in all countries, were predominantly of the opinion, that the results of the initiatives, they have participated in, would be better: • if the level of their own initiative and the initiative of those they worked/lived with were higher; and especially • if the level of initiative within the entire community were higher.

  8. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: utilisation, significance and adequacy of selected skills (1/4) • Rating of selected skills (on a 1-to-5 scale), based on how frequently they were applied by respondents and those they worked/lived with:

  9. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: utilisation, significance and adequacy of selected skills (2/4) • Rating of selected skills (on a 1-to-5 scale), based on how important they were considered for the community:

  10. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: utilisation, significance and adequacy of selected skills (3/4) • Rating of selected skills (on a 1-to-5 scale), based on how adequately developed they were considered to be within the community:

  11. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: utilisation, significance and adequacy of selected skills (4/4) • Usage, importance and adequacy of selected skills for the community – comparative rating on a 1-to-5 scale for the total sample of respondents:

  12. INTERFACE Survey – Main results: expressed interest in capacity building for self-initiative • Generally, respondents were of the opinion that a training programme, packaging the above skills would benefit their communities. • In all INTERFACE countries, “face-to-face training sessions”, “blended learning” (with the exception of Italy) and “experience sharing” were most preferred by respondents as ways of delivering such a training programme. • The majority of respondents indicated that they would be generally interested in taking part in a training programme of that sort, mostly as trainees.

More Related