A first thought about this discussion paper relates to the concept of distance from and to the labour market.
If it means geographical distance then I cannot see how this makes sense in the context of contemporary work. But if it means the steps away from and towards participation in meaningful work for individuals, I get it. And place-based approaches, which are a highlight, don’t always mean an actual spot – it might mean a community, group, network or situation, more like a sense of belonging.
And sometimes it is about what is missing or not evident. For example, out of the 142 references in the paper of the letters ai together, not one of them means Artificial Intelligence (AI). Remarkable or deliberate, as the impact of AI must be referenced in anything workforce related, I would suggest.
On the Employment Goal Plan, you can appreciate the sentiment but, on the ground, and dealing with clients’ day to day, I think this should be a Personal and Employment Goal Plan. You can’t consider one without the other, and many Employment Services practitioners worth their weight in gold will share examples of how personal goals and employment goals go together.
For example, how would you like to spend your time and with whom, doing:
- Action planning
- Advocating
- Caring
- Coaching and mentoring
- Educating
- Exploring hobbies and passions
- Grandparenting
- Harvesting
- Motivating
- Parenting
- Sharing knowledge and wisdom
- Studying
- Subcontracting
- Training
- Travelling
- Working for an employer
- Working for yourself
- Working full time
- Working something other than full time
These activities all involve prioritising energy, time and work of some kind… and this impacts the way that employment services outcomes are measured. So why wouldn’t you go deeper and broader with your clients to understand what is really needed.
A key to leveraging all outcomes is action planning through understanding motivations, needs and outcomes. There are no matches in the discussion paper for the words transform or transformative and this is the approach that is needed, particularly in the current to future world of work, geopolitics, and digital impact.
So, I can hear you asking what to do about it and how to answer the discussion paper’s questions, as well as Amanda’s (my local Federl member) Press Club address. I see these questions as quite operational, not strategic, that is:
- What are the key factors that should place a person in online and brief intervention services versus targeted provider services versus intensive services?
- What types of support should be offered under each of the service streams?
- What factors should be considered to support the development of a new, high-quality assessment and triaging process?
- What information should be collected during the assessment process to support better identification of barriers to employment and triaging to the right service?
- What factors or circumstances should result in a participant moving between service streams?
- What elements will be important to capture in the Employment Goal Plan?
- How can the system encourage effective use of the Employment Goal Plan by participants and providers to ensure it is meaningful, timely and relevant?
- How do we change the way that providers and participants engage with mutual obligations to focus on positive engagement that helps people move towards employment?
- How can employment services best partner with industry and large employers?
- How can employment services best support small to medium enterprises?
- What is the value of having a government job matching platform? How can we increase this value?
- What supports do employers need to recruit and retain people?
- What qualifications and experience should be expected of frontline staff within each stream?
- How could the future service accommodate the needs of diverse cohorts, including better linkages to other services?
- How can a nationally consistent service respond to local circumstances?
- How should providers be incentivised to support participants into suitable, sustainable jobs, not just any job across both provider-led service streams?
- How should employment outcomes and progress towards employment be measured? How should this differ between targeted provider services and intensive services?
- What commissioning approaches will best support increased provider diversity?
- How can employment services foster continuous improvement? For example, what strategies would improve the sharing of best practice?
BTW I’m sure the authors of the discussion paper and the Minister asked, how many questions might be too many… or not enough.
So, let’s boil the 19 questions down to a manageable 5 part system that could be the structure that the new Employment Services model covers starting with:
- Personal – Position, Priorities, Profile
- And – AI, Attention, Augmentation
- Employment – Energy, Engagement, Enhancement
- Goal – Gains, Great, Growth
- Plan – Participation, LL&N, Achievements, Not on Income Support
Recommendations and Suggestions to Consider
- Rename the Employment Goal Plan to a Personal and Employment Goal Plan
The proposed Employment Goal Plan is a positive step, but it does not fully recognise the reality that employment outcomes are influenced by personal circumstances. Housing, transport, caring responsibilities, health, confidence, finances and digital capability all shape a person’s ability to participate in work. A Personal and Employment Goal Plan would better reflect the interconnected nature of people’s lives and encourage more meaningful conversations about aspirations, barriers and opportunities.
- Explicitly recognise Artificial Intelligence (AI) as both a workforce challenge and opportunity
It is remarkable that a discussion paper about the future of employment services contains virtually no discussion of Artificial Intelligence. AI is already transforming recruitment, workforce demand, career pathways and the skills required for work. Future employment services should include AI literacy for participants, capability development for practitioners, and AI-enabled tools that support career exploration, skills identification and workforce planning. Ignoring AI risks designing a system for yesterday’s labour market rather than tomorrow’s.
- Measure progress towards participation, not only employment outcomes
Employment remains an important outcome, but the system should also recognise the progress individuals make along the way. Completing training, obtaining a driver’s licence, improving literacy and numeracy, developing digital skills, addressing health issues, volunteering, building confidence, going to events with employers/industry or establishing routines are all meaningful achievements that increase employability. Recognising these milestones would encourage a more person-centred approach and better reflect the journey many participants undertake.
- Position entrepreneurship and self-employment as mainstream pathways
Not everyone will find their future through traditional employment. Increasing numbers of Australians participate in the economy through self-employment, contracting, freelancing, consulting and small business ownership. Entrepreneurship should be recognised as a legitimate employment outcome rather than a niche alternative. Future employment services should actively identify participants with entrepreneurial potential and provide pathways into business creation, self-employment and enterprise development where appropriate.
- Shift the focus from employment services to workforce participation
The future system should adopt a broader view of participation. Employment is one form of contribution, but education, training, volunteering, caring responsibilities, self-employment and community leadership can also be important pathways towards economic and social participation. A workforce participation lens would better reflect the complexity of modern work and support individuals to contribute in ways that align with their circumstances and aspirations.
- Connect employment services with Strategic Workforce Planning
Employment services should be more closely aligned with strategic workforce planning undertaken by governments, industries, regions and major projects. Participants should be prepared for emerging opportunities in areas such as renewable energy, defence, advanced manufacturing, care services, agriculture and digital industries, rather than simply being matched to current vacancies. A stronger connection between employment services and strategic foresight would help address skills shortages while creating more sustainable employment pathways.
- Invest in frontline practitioner capability
The quality of outcomes often depends on the quality of conversations. Frontline practitioners are increasingly required to navigate complex social, economic and personal, workforce challenges while supporting diverse cohorts. Future reforms should include investment in professional development across areas such as coaching, mentoring, career development, cultural capability, digital literacy, entrepreneurship, labour market intelligence and strategic workforce planning. Strengthening practitioner capability will strengthen participant outcomes.
- Build stronger local workforce ecosystems
Place-based approaches should remain a cornerstone of future reforms, but place should be understood more broadly than geography alone. Communities, industries, cultural groups and networks all play a role in creating employment opportunities. Employment services providers should be encouraged to act as connectors, bringing together employers, training providers, local government, industry groups and community organisations to create coordinated workforce solutions that reflect local realities and opportunities.
- Create a system that learns, adapts and innovates
The future employment services system should be designed to continuously learn from practice and adapt to changing labour market conditions. Australia already has examples of successful initiatives operating across employment services, entrepreneurship programs, social enterprises, local government and community organisations. The challenge is identifying what works, sharing lessons and scaling innovation. Future reforms should encourage experimentation, evidence-based decision-making and the continuous improvement of services, rather than relying solely on contractual compliance and historical models.
Throughout the discussion paper there is considerable discussion about moving people closer to the labour market. Perhaps the future challenge is not moving people towards the labour market, but ensuring the labour market moves towards people. On practical things that people could do towards securing and keeping work, the following activities could be counted, offered and valued:
- Action planning and research
- Bio
- Caring
- Dressing and styling
- Event attendance
- Interviewing
- Knowledge sharing
- LinkedIn profile
- Microcredentials
- Networking
- 1 on 1 coaching and mentoring
- Online learning
- Problem/project based learning
- Public speaking
- Recognition Awards
- Resume/CV
- Short courses
- Social interaction
- Training
- Travelling
- Volunteering
The future of employment services should not simply be about helping people fit into the labour market we have inherited. It should be about helping Australia create the labour market supply we need. One that values experience alongside qualifications, potential alongside productivity, entrepreneurship alongside employment, contribution alongside compliance, and human capability alongside technology.
As Artificial Intelligence increasingly takes on tasks, Australia’s competitive advantage will not be how quickly we move people into jobs. It will be how effectively we help people identify where they can create the greatest value.
That feels like a far more important conversation than deciding which service stream someone belongs in. If you’d like to discuss the discussion paper, please feel free to reach out via wendy@wendyperry.com.au, thank you.