Le 19 mars dernier, l’IAE de Paris a organisé une journée d’études centrée sur la GPEC, ses intérêts, mais également ses limites. Bilan et retours d’expérience avec Patrick Gilbert, expert RH et professeur à l’IAE de Paris.
Que révèlent vos recherches sur la GPEC?
Nous avons audité 12 entreprises et mené près de 200 entretiens avec des dirigeants, des représentants syndicaux, des managers et des collaborateurs, pour évaluer les effets des accords de GPEC. Premier constat, les démarches portent moins sur la prévision que la prévention. Cela s’explique en grande partie par le manque de visibilité des entreprises à moyen et long terme. La GPEC, élaborée à l’origine sur les bases de la planification stratégique, est davantage présente dans les discours que dans les pratiques. Les entreprises préfèrent accompagner les salariés, en termes d’information et d’orientation (sur de nouveaux métiers, des compétences émergentes, etc.), pour préparer l’avenir des ressources humaines.
Ce constat signe-t-il l’échec de la GPEC?
Si l’on s’en tient aux ambitions affichées, les résultats ne sont effectivement pas à la hauteur. Mais il n’est sans doute pas possible de faire beaucoup mieux avec la GPEC, qui propose un cadre à la GRH. Ce n’est pas une solution miracle, mais un élément qui renforce et encadre des initiatives RH prises par l’entreprise, comme le DIF, la VAE, le bilan de compétences ou les cartographies métiers. A elle seule, la GPEC ne produit pas d’innovations. Suite de l'article...

Par Didier Pitelet. Les bonnes nouvelles existent en France: malgré l’écrasement fiscal qu’elles subissent, beaucoup d’entreprises continuent de recruter. En dépit de l’approche des 11% de chômeurs, beaucoup plus de patrons se focalisent sur la préservation de l’emploi de leurs équipes, nombres de salariés aiment leur job, leur entreprise, leur patron. Tous les jeunes, diplômés ou non, ne s’exilent pas hors de France...
Bref, loin de toute euphorie du verre à moitié plein face aux hordes de défaitistes populistes et loin d’occulter l’hymne au cynisme et à la lâcheté qu’incarnent nombre d’entreprises aujourd’hui, assujetties à un dogme financier qui fait prendre à des êtres humains « sains d’esprit » des décisions qu’ils rejetteraient dans leur vie privée, il s’agit ici de raison garder.
Le courage de l’action et le devoir de l’éthique républicain ne sont pas censés être de gauche ou de droite, mais relèvent d’un idéal sociétal qui passe par l’exemple et l’engagement. Notre société civile a, osons le dire, un problème majeur d’intégration de par les défaillances d’un système scolaire inadapté au monde d’aujourd’hui, de par un communautarisme que personne ne qualifie de tel au nom d’un égalitarisme électoraliste, de par la dérive du civisme et de la valeur travail qui ne font plus référence dans les règles de transmission intergénérationnelle. Suite de l'article...

Les nouvelles technologies ont envahi le domaine de la formation. Même si certains l’avaient déjà anticipé, les nouvelles technologies apparaissent comme la réponse au besoin d’individualisation des programmes de formation.
Certes, les nouvelles technologies ne sauraient être la panacée, mais elles offrent une réelle souplesse aux utilisateurs (formateurs et formés) et, à condition d’être judicieusement utilisées, permettent aux entreprises qui les utilisent de réaliser de substantielles économies. Là est effectivement le point clé, car mal utilisées, les nouvelles technologies peuvent être ruineuses et constituer une sorte de tonneau sans fond qu’on s’épuise à remplir avec de l’eau sans cesse renouvelée.
Certains éditeurs de logiciels de formation linguistiques ont vu leurs ventes exploser. Toutefois, après quelques années d’exploitation, l’expérience a montré ses limites dans bon nombre d’entreprises et il apparaît clairement que des aménagements doivent être apportés. Article entier...

By Robert McGuire. It’s bedtime Sunday and my phone is buzzing to alert me to incoming messages. A lot of this is regular communication about the numerous MOOC courses I’m signed up for. Assignments are usually due at the end of the week and for new material goes live at 12 a.m. Mondays, so the automated announcements about scheduled items beginning or ending tend to arrive at this hour of the week.
The last few weeks, though, the phone rattles across the nightstand more than usual. Mixed in with the usual traffic is an increasing volume of panicky sounding dispatches from a professor in one particular course which seems to have been infested by tech gremlins and cascading miscommunications. Students have apparently been emailing her, anxious that particular features of the course — some of them tied to mandatory assignments — aren’t working properly. As with many of life’s tech/communication mishaps, there is a quality of un-reproducible fiasco to the back story  (In this case, it seems a forum set up explicitly to discuss tech problems didn’t itself function properly and became a vector of bad information.) Read more...

MOOCs are one of the hot topics in e-learning and Higher Education at the moment. The number of institutions designing their own MOOCs is growing exponentially and, thus, collective, academic reflection upon this new meme is required to guarantee we understand each other and we agree on some key issues concerning MOOCs. The following manifesto is our contribution to that discussion. To see a Spanish version of this manifesto, please visit EducaconTIC.
MOOC Manifesto
1- In every teaching design, the learner is the centre. The same happens with MOOCs.
2- Taking into consideration the community of practice and the learning community the MOOC is aimed at is helpful for the MOOC design and for the MOOC institution itself. For instance, the digital competence of the learning community is one of the basic premises for the design of a MOOC. Read more...

By Lorna. I’m currently at the OER13 conference where yesterday Toni Pearce, NUS Vice President (Further Education) presented an genuinely insightful and thought provoking keynote based on the results of a wide ranging survey of student attitudes and online behaviour, which will be published later in the year. The keynote was very well received and generated considerable positive discussion at the conference and on the twitter backchannel. This is a brief summary of the points Toni raised. The NUS is a political organisation interested in the expansion of educational opportunities, social justice and social cohesion. What are the benefits of open education for groups that are excluded from traditional education? Students are not a homogenous group and some are better positioned to gain advantage from open education than others. Read more...

Collaboration is where two or more people work together to achieve a common objective. In education, the common objective is usually to learn specific content, skills or competencies within defined areas. Ostensibly, learning is an individual goal, and each student does tend to learn in their own way, using their own favoured approaches and tools. We refer to this as personalised learning (a video explains). However, as we become increasingly connected to each other through technology, and our social ties strengthen, so there is greater scope for students to learn together, sharing their resources and ideas, and approaching their study collaboratively. Collaborative learning does not undermine or contradict personalised learning. It simply amplifies it.
When it comes to learning with others, space is usually required. There is plenty to say about collaborative spaces. I can think of at least three kinds. There are the formal, classroom based collaborative spaces and there are the informal, non classroom spaces where we learn most of what we know in interaction with others. Then there are the virtual, online spaces where many of us are increasingly spending our time collaborating, conversing and sharing with our personal learning networks. I guess I could represent these three kinds of space in a simple Venn diagram below, which would then indicate that there is a lot of crossover, fuzziness, and boundary incursion between the three. You could see where we might place formal learning using a VLE, or where students might meet to chat using Facebook, for example. But it's far from perfect. Ultimately such a diagram serves one purpose - it reveals that where there were once very real boundaries, now they are many false frontiers. Read more...

By Laurie Essig. The future is upon us. It is time to hyper-monetize professors’ teaching labor—oh wait, I mean open up education to all, for free—and create Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). As my colleague Jason Mittell wrote here at The Chronicle,
MOOC mania has gained momentum … because it entails opening up the previously noncommercial realm of teaching, at both public and nonprofit private institutions, to venture capitalists and start-ups looking to build company value.
According to one of many pro-MOOC op-eds by Thomas Friedman in The New York Times,
the MOOCs revolution, which will go through many growing pains, is here and is real. …  Today’s traditional university has [much] in common with General Motors of the 1960s, just before Toyota used a technology breakthrough to come from nowhere and topple G.M...
So if we could find a way to put administration online, to create Massive Online Open Administrations or MOOAs, we could really cut some fat and reap some serious rewards. Think about it: MOOAs are the perfect solution to the rising cost of higher education. We take superstar administrators and let them administer tens, maybe even hundreds, of thousands of faculty at a time. The Ivy League and Nescac colleges could pool their upper management as could, say, Midwestern state colleges that start with “I” or “O.” Read more...