COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ONGOING ADULT LEARNING IN PUBLIC SERVICES AND NON-PROFIT SECTOR (CASE STUDY)

The aim of this paper is to compare the diversity of lifelong learning in public administration and non-profit sector and determine whether after 2009 there have been financial changes in the field of lifelong education of economically active population in selected institutions. Introduction presents a theoretical definition of lifelong learning specifics and the comparison of life-long learning in public administration and non-profit sector according to different thematic classifications where their differences are significant. It concerns a general view of life-long learning in comparative areas, its significance, differences in legislation, reasons of motivation and, on the contrary, barriers. Practical part of the paper focuses on a sector quantitative and qualitative research carried out within a wider field survey. Conclusion of the paper demonstrates by the method of comparison differences in the need for education within public administration institutions and non-profit organizations.


Introduction
In the last few years lifelong learning has become a major trend in all developed countries.Generally, an emphasis is put on increasing investment into human capital because educated society is a principal prerequisite for economic growth and the growth of inhabitants' standard of living.Lifelong learning is to be competitive so that the inhabitants can compete with work force from abroad, which also influences economic potential of the society where they live.Professionally oriented adult learning can in some ways be an impulse for certain changes in economy as well as in the society (Mužík, 2000).Lifelong learning is a significant part of adult learning and it presents a principal change in the notion of the whole education system.Increasingly, it is being perceived as a necessity to achieve higher effectiveness and competitiveness at the labour market.The concept of lifelong learning is to provide the possibilities of education in different educational phases of life and development of man (Mužík, 2000).Lifelong learning, as its name says, is understood as an active approach to education process.We can speak about a targeted education process mediated by learning (Mužík, 2000).Sometime the two notions of lifelong education and lifelong learning are confused.This is also caused by the same translation of the English "Lifelong learning".However, by lifelong learning we understand rather non-organized learning whereas lifelong education focuses on the education of both formal and informal kind.From the viewpoint of lifelong learning, in 2007 the Government of the Czech Republic accepted one of the most important programme documents entitled the Strategy of lifelong learning in the CR for the period 2007-2015, which is supposed to serve as an initial programme document.Another document appealing to lifelong learning in terms of economic development is the Convergence programme of the CR, setting a direction which the Czech economy should follow in order to meet Maastricht criteria 1 (Lifelong learning strategy CR, 2007).The concept of public administration covers a lot of activities.Firstly, by public administration we understand the administration of a particular territory, public issues, finances, education etc.Individual activities are managed by particular ministries, and they are governed and limited by legislation concerning a particular resort or area.Public administration organisations provide services to the citizens.Public administration is primarily divided into civil service and selfgovernment.Non-profit sector can be characterised as an area whose main objective is not business and which does not make profit to be distributed among its owners.It does make a profit, but it is invested back into the company for its further development.Public administration workers take part in lifelong learning because it is an area reflecting the impact of modern technologies and progress which needs to be closely followed.In the civil service the way of lifelong learning is modified by law (Act No 312/2002 Coll., on the employees of autonomous territorial units).Individual top sub-sections of public administration appeal to lifelong learning not only for their staff but also for the public by means of various projects.Accepting the principle of lifelong learning is in this work segment anchored in legislation (Mužík, 2000).Apart from classical present-day form lectures, the learning of chief officers and office managers can also be done by e-learning.Such a form is less expensive than the participation of officers and chief officers in classical courses. 1 The height of public deficit, price stability, the stability of long-term interest rates and exchange rate.
However, not everyone finds e-learning convenient.The disadvantage of this type of learning rests in the fact that it is a non-contact type of learning.On the contrary, the advantage of e-learning is the possibility of selecting convenient time for learning which suits the course participant and the possibility to return repeatedly to the studied material.Armstrong (2007) says that e-learning programmes can relate to any usual corporate progress or process, orientation and learning programme as well as the development of skills in information technologies.However, they are not effective for developing "soft" skills such as creating teams or communication or presentation abilities based on personal contacts.It is not important how the employee trains but it is important that the training brings an expected effect to the organization.Pike (2003) stresses the fact that the objective of any learning programme is to bring constant results in the form of staff efficiency.In their study, Casagranda et al (2010) evaluate the results and experience from distance learning and the use of e-learning platform.The objective of the study is to identify a mixed model also related to the use of technological instruments which are able to support lifelong learning and define dynamics and the process concerning the facilitation of learning activity.Generally, when setting up education models, it is necessary to respect the efficiency of education, maintain a good ratio of activities (differing training methods, the lengths of activities, physical environment, and format), learn in segments and ensure the train of thoughts.For every model it is ideal to calculate costs per participant and the contributions of participants within efficient practical usage.Investments into the training of employees can be evaluated from a long-term perspective only, as the finances invested into the training of employees can return to employers in the form of more efficient work of their employees after some time distance.
In their analysis of an educational course for public sector managers, Katharaki et al (2009) state the importance of a detailed evaluation of the efficiency of the course on the basis of previously stated criteria and parameters using such methods as questionnaires, comments, observations and team discussions.Through this process, weak and strong points of the seminar were determined.Evaluation criteria can set up a certain model for course evaluation and on the basis of such evaluation they create a new approach to lifelong education and specialist preparation of other seminars and their efficiency.The evaluation criteria enabling the perception of the seminar level directly to its participants can be applied to proposing the models of future seminars.The situation in the non-profit sector is vastly different from the situation in the public sector.There is no legislative modification for lifelong learning in this sector and for the staff in nonprofit sector further learning is not compulsory.Therefore the employer cannot impose further learning on its employees with reference to superior regulations.However, it can be included in the work contract in correspondence with the Labour Code as one of the conditions of employment that the employee will further develop and increase his or her professional qualification by fulfilling partial and exactly defined, controllable tasks.It can be followed by financial benefits or pay rise and the development of non-claimable salary components.Such an approach and principle would definitely be a great contribution to the non-profit organisation.The importance of lifelong learning within non-profit sector does not reach such significance as in the above mentioned public administration.From the above mentioned description it is obvious that public administration workers have to learn because it is prescribed by the legislation.Many of them have to increase, deepen or complete their qualification if they wish to keep their work place.This fact is a significant impulse for an active approach to the matter.Non-profit sector workers do not have such regulations.Their further learning depends on financial possibilities and their will.As the name suggests, it is after all a non-profit sector.Therefore the question arises whether such organisations will dispose of financial means set aside for their employees' further learning.In case of public administration, there are set aside financial means for staff training.Projects are also financed from public means for education provided it does not concern projects endowed by European structural funds supporting education and competitiveness.However, even in this segment of labour market a higher activity of employees can be achieved by way of labour-law motivation.The objective of our paper is to find out which factors influence lifelong learning most, what significance lifelong learning has on public administration and non-profit sector and compare its practical importance in the public administration and nonprofit sector.A partial objective of the paper is to evaluate the financial situation before and after 2009 with respect to changes in lifelong learning of economically active citizens in selected institutions.The theoretical part was based on the study of documents, and the assessment from an economic impact point of view was based on a secondary analysis of the data.The research was carried out using the method of quantitative and qualitative data collection at two organisations of public administration and two organizations of non-profit sector.

Material and Methods
The public administration institutions were represented by Educational Institution and Job Centre in a selected region.With respect to the wish of the representatives of state institutions to maintain their anonymity, abbreviations will also be used for non-profit organisations -Association and Centre.The carried out quantitative research was based on the above mentioned objectives which were processed into simple research issues: Workers in the organisations of public administration study more often.From an individual perspective, money is the main impulse for lifelong learning as well as the main obstacle, especially from the viewpoint of the organisation.Due to the impact of economic crises, financial means for learning are restricted and education events subsidised by means of ESF are preferred more frequently.Higher demands for workers' learning are placed on public administration employees.The field of economics is not a sought course topic.
For qualitative research the method of a semi-structured interview was used during which the managers of individual institutions where the research was carried out were interviewed.In such an interview, open, theoretically derived and confrontational questions were asked.It is also possible to ask arbitrary, additional questions (Disman, 2009).The questions concerned the running of the institutions and the education of workers within the institution (e.g.What motivates education and qualification in your institution -laws, internal regulations and the like?; Has the economic crisis had any impact on education in your institution?If yes, how and to what extent?; Which areas of education are most frequently sought after?; Do you organize educational courses for your employees?;Is workers' education taken into account in their wages?and so on.)The outputs of the qualitative research were processed by the method of synthesis where all data obtained from the research in the institution were unified in the final output.

Results
The research took place during 2011 following on-going courses and evaluation of training within the organisations.In the Educational Institution respondents received 70 questionnaires, 67 (95.72%) were returned.In the Job Centre 50 questionnaire were distributed, 46 (92%) were returned.In the Association the respondents received 21 questionnaires, 20 were returned (95.24%).In the Centre 25 questionnaires were distributed among the respondents, out of which 21 were returned (84%).Altogether 154 respondents participated in the research.One of the first questions surveyed the participation of the respondents in educational events (Tab.1).The most frequently selected answer out of four offered answers was that their participation was optional and regular.The answer was selected by 48 (31.2%) respondents.The lowest number of respondents supported the option that their participation was obligatory and irregular.This answer was selected only by 27 (17.5%) of all respondents.Whether greater demands are placed on the education of employees in the public sector or in non-profit organisations is shown in Table 2 (taking into account first two possible answers "compulsory regular" and "compulsory irregular").The workers in non-profit organisations selected the possibility of "compulsory", "regular" and "compulsory regular" by 36.6%, the workers of public sector by 45.2%.Greater demands are placed on the employees of public sector; they are obliged to educate themselves by 8.6% more, and mandatorily.The evaluation of the question whether the institution employer contributed financially to professionally educational events (Tab.3) was confirmed by 52 (33.8%) respondents who replied that in this respect their employer financially contributed to all workers.The employer contributed selectively only to 34 (22.1%) and exceptionally to 27 (17.5%)respondents.The employer did not financially contribute to anyone in case of 41 respondents (26.6 %).To conclude, in most cases the employer does contribute financially to educational events.

2
The expression "non-state" is used in this text rather than "private" as it refers to non-profit institutions only.

Tab. 3: Financial contribution of the institution to professionally educational events
The objective of the question was to find out the most frequent reason why the respondents began to study or why they studied (Tab.4).The respondents were able to select more than one offered answer.The most frequent reason why the respondents started to study or why they studied was higher qualification.This answer was indicated by 139 (90.3 %) respondents.It was also the most frequently selected answer even in individual institutions.The second most frequent reason was their interest in studies.This answer was selected by 114 (74.0%) respondents.The third most frequent reason for beginning the studies was the idea of a higher salary, which was answered by 112 (72.7%) respondents.On the contrary, the least frequent reason was improving the position, which was selected by 99 (64.3%)respondents.The reason being admired by others was chosen by 38 (24.7%) respondents only.This answer was the least frequently selected even in individual institutions.The table reveals that the highest number of respondents supported the possibility of increasing their qualification.Of total 154 respondents, 139 (90.3%) respondents regard the increase in their qualification as the most important reason for beginning the studies.Another question was related to the previous one because it investigated the reasons why the respondents did not begin to study (Tab.6).They could choose from seven answers and again they could indicate more than one answer.The most frequent reason why the respondent did not begin to study was the lack of finance.This answer was selected by 76 (49.4 %), which was almost half of all respondents.This answer was also the most frequently indicated answer even in individual institutions.
The second most frequent reason was the impossibility to study while being employed, which was answered by 48 (31.2 %) respondents.The third most frequent reason was the fact that the employer did not require it, which was answered by 47 (30.5%) respondents.The fourth position was occupied by the threat of failure in the studies.This was answered by 39 (25.3%) respondents.The fifth and sixth position was shared by two possibilities, the first that the employer did not assess learning positively and the second that the employees did not need to study.This was answered by 38 (24.7 %) respondents.
No interest in education was the seventh possibility and it was indicated by 22 (14.3%)respondents.because as a non-profit organisation they did not take part in educational events and courses which were not held for free.
As the case may be, they had put aside a minimal number of financial means; however, from 9% it concerned free-of-charge learning.The economic crisis had rather influenced the height of sponsorship gifts from organisations that supported them because it affected their budgets.
From the interview with the manager of the Association it follows that the economic crisis affected very much not only the education itself but also other activities.Their contributions were rather reduced which reflected in the reorganisation of their activities.Unfortunately, the situation still prevails.
According to the manager of the Job centre, the economic crisis had of course affected even them and not only in the area of education.They had to dismiss several colleagues.In the area of education they appealed to the employees to find a course that would be more effective and less expensive.First, of course, they would have to look among the offered events endowed by ESF.In many courses, they used the services of their own lecturers, especially in managerial and language training.Last but not least, the interview with the manager of the Educational institution revealed that educating their workers went hand in hand with self-financing of the workplacethe work place had to make money for it or, if possible, use individual financial activity of the employee.This institution would not contribute to the training of this department staff.Based on the above mentioned answers it is apparent that 3 out of 4 addressed managers confirmed that the economic crisis had affected the staff training in their institution.

Discussion
From the carried out survey it can be assumed that the respondents of both groups of training studied voluntarily and regularly.In both cases this was supported by more than 31% respondents.The reason may also be explained by certain consciousness and effort to achieve competitive advantages because, with the impact of the economic crisis, main work positions are cancelled or combined together or, and that is the worst case, the company simply perishes.Nearly no one can be sure about his or her job and therefore further training is vital.
There exist certain preconditions that there will be an increased appeal on lifelong learning, and not only due to the fact that it is one of the EU objectives how to assimilate EU member states.
One of the possible ways how to delete significant differences on the fields of education of EU member states citizens is an operational programme.However, according to the last news and information from the media, competitiveness training has rather become a business for certain political parties and economic bodies.The training remains only a cover for their enrichment from the sources of ESF.Nevertheless, a statistical survey from 2010 revealed that it is not only thanks to the above mentioned ESF endowments that the CR lifelong learning is not able to become competitive and comparable with other EU member states."The Czech Republic is approaching the situation in which there will soon co-exist side by side weak years of young people with a high percentage of university graduates and strong years with a profound under-average university educated people.The question of increasing the qualification of today's thirty or forty -year old, either by formal or informal studies, is becoming a significant factor affecting an economic and social situation of the citizens".

Conclusion
A principal reason for providing staff training is an attempt for higher or better position and higher qualification.This is however very often prevented by the lack of finance.How can workers increase their qualification and take part in lifelong learning if their financial situation does not allow for it?Based on the above mentioned information, it is clear that there exists a tight connection between economic crisis, economic prosperity and lifelong learning.These aspects are all related and it is therefore necessary for the CR to progressively increase the level of education by means of modern, quality and flexible system of educational and professional training.This does not regard professional qualification.It is necessary to concentrate on an overall ability of the citizens to adapt to a current dynamic development and worldwide globalization.This adaptation brings demands for language skills and ability to work with information, information technologies and ability to orientate in different cultural environment.For increasing competitiveness and applicability lifelong learning is vital.
Learning in non-profit sector is conditioned by legislation; however, it is not strongly connected with a career growth and therefore the learning of workers is not taken into account financially.In public sector, learning can differ with respect to the nature of an institution, it is adjusted by the legislation and the learning of workers is taken into account financially.The obligation proceeding from legislative regulations must be respected; breaking it can result in financial penalty of the worker, reducing his or her bonuses or personal remuneration.The learning of workers for non-profit sector has its legislative regulations, too.For this purpose there are held various types of educational events initiated by the employee who, based on the survey, contributes more than the employee of the respondents from public administration.Lifelong learning definitely has a greater significance in non-profit sector whose employees or, as the case may be, volunteers engaged in non-profit organisations participate in learning events more twice or even several times a year than the public administration workers (cf.research findings in Tab. 8).
Especially modern days give meaning to lifelong learning.
There is a constant, revolutionary progress which needs to be followed.People are under the pressure caused by society, employees and, last but not least, family members.
Lifelong learning can be regarded as an efficient tool contributing to the improvement of economic conditions, it can effectively support competitiveness, regional development, the growth of economic dynamics, and it can support higher employment of inhabitants and boost their mobility.However, in the Czech Republic it still remains on a very low level.The area of lifelong learning is given a considerable attention, not only by professional society but its importance is also understood by the EU.The reason for this can be explained by an indisputable significance of lifelong learning for socioeconomic development of the society.
(Czech Statistical Office, Lifelong learning in the CR lags way behind the European Union http://www.czso.cz).In 2011, in agreement with the Act No 89/1995 Coll., on state statistical service, as amended in later regulations, the Czech Statistical Office held a tender on adult learning in the CR -AES Adult Learning 2011, following a pilot survey from 2007 -2008.The idea of the survey was to map the situation in adult learning in the CR with focus on the participation of individuals in different types of training.Thanks to international nature of the survey, it will be possible to compare the situation in the CR with a situation worldwide once the survey is completed.The employers of business enterprises and private sphere invest in fewer financial means determined for training.The reasons may be of economic nature (caused by the economic crisis).However, even they should realize that the investments in their staff training will return in the form of higher competitiveness, work productivity growth and improved image of the company.Lifelong learning and "trained human capital" have a considerable impact on one's position on the labour market.In her study, Arapovics (2008) offers a complete survey of adult training in non-profit organisations.The study provides a lot of data about organisations registered in the education registry besides institutional accredited training.The survey was carried out in 139 non-profit educational organisations which differed in their character from budget and business sector.It takes into account two basic types of training in non-profit organisations, with respect to the subject area of the course (civil values, i.e. voluntary courses, and courses of economic competition, i.e. economic, financial, public relations and fundraising courses).The training of employees in non-profit sector is modified very generally in the Act No. 262/2006 Coll., Labour Code.It does not concern regulation specifics for this area only, but the regulation generally intended for all employees and employers.If we want to find out how training in non-profit sector works, we can do so only on the basis of internal regulations of individual organisations.There is a gradual development of Quality Standards in individual areas which are beginning to deal with training in various fields.The system of staff training in non-profit sector can vary with respect to the provider of social services.Act No 108/2006 Coll., on social services, as amended in later regulations, determines a minimum range of further compulsory training.Based on § 111 of this act, the employer is obligated to provide his or her social worker with further training in his or her qualification in the range of at least 24 hours per calendar year.The training may be provided by universities or schools of higher education, participation in accredited courses, professional training in social service institutions or participation in training events (6, § 111).Moreover, in some specialized or professional organisations there exist associations imposing minimum range of training in specific courses.Since there is no unified legal regulation which would prescribe specific compulsory training for the staff of the non-profit sector, non-profit organisations do not automatically receive endowments for staff training.Finding sources for training thus remains on the shoulders of the employee or volunteer who, depending on his or her fundraising abilities, tries to find means for staff training.ISSN: 1803-1617, doi: 10.7160/eriesj.2012.050406Volume 5, Issue 4

Participation in seminars, courses, educational programmes
Table 1 reveals that workers of nonprofit organisations are more interested in studies than public administration workers.

: Interest in learning in non-state and state sector
At first sight, this fact does not reveal any significant difference, nonetheless, it is necessary to stress that non-profit organisations are based on voluntary basis and almost all training is more or less voluntary (except for some compulsory training following certain legal regulations, especially when engaged in the area of social services).
study and learning" were used.The table below (Tab.5) contains the survey of answers to the above-mentioned question and the sum of the answers per individual respondents.From the table it is fairly obvious that there is a higher interest in studies among the workers of non-profit institutions, and that is by 3.6%.

Reason for not taking part in learning
Table 6 reveals that the greatest reason for not studying was the lack of finance.Of total 154 respondents, 76 (49.4%) respondents regarded the lack of finance as the most important reason for not initiating the studies or no studies.

Tab. 7: Reasons for not participating in learning
Table7contains the answers to the question which was finding out how many times a year the respondents took part in learning programmes.The respondents were given the choice of four answers; once, which was selected by 51 (33.1%), twice, which was selected by 32 (20.8%) and, last but not least, 62 (40.3%) respondents took part several times 3 .The last possible answer, never, was selected by 9 (5.8%) respondents only.
Table8below presents the issue for the perspective of individual groups of respondents.The table (see Tab. 8) illustrates how often the institutions take part in educational events.There were 14.6% respondents from non-profit institutions taking part once, 19.5% twice and 65.9% several times.On average, there were 36.67%respondents taking part in some educational event.As regards public administration, there were 39.8% respondents taking part once, 21.2% twice and 31.0%several times.On Volume 5, Issue 4