Overall, the workforce development network was found to be a diffuse one with an overall lack of coordination, lack of dominant actors, ease of access across functional groupings and numerous opportunities for network development. We are encouraged to see a significant degree of resilience in the network, with no single actor or groupings of them seemingly capable of network disruption. Use the controls below to further examine how different actors and groups interact in the network.
Insight 1: NGOs generally have a high level of network activity but may not be as influential overall in the network. As can be seen in the maps below, NGOs are the most common organizational type in the overall network. When the network is filtered for only those with high influence, however, there are very few NGOs left in the network. This may present an opportunity for the high level of NGO activity to be more integrated into the overall network.
Insight 2: To demonstrate this network’s potential to grow, we asked respondents to provide information on partnerships they are interested in forming in the future. After adding in desired partnerships, the network of relationships grew by approximately 30%. This represents the potential for change in the network. Interestingly, very few respondents reported a desired relationship with labor/trade unions or employment agencies, whereas donors, government organizations, business associations, and educational institutions all had a significant number of desired partnerships reported, implying significantly more social capital among the latter groups.
Insight 3: In the network as a whole, there is relatively little engagement among the “key groups” of employment agencies, private enterprise, vocational institutions, and educational institutions. The tourism sector, however, represents the most engagement among these groups compared to any other sector. Compared to the larger network, the tourism sector is almost twice as dense (5.5%), and reciprocated relationships are significantly more common (35%). The dense network graphs show us that that collaboration is very common within tourism. The tourism sector appears to represent a unique opportunity to engage key network actor groups.
Insight 4: Among all of the organization types, donors seem to be the most highly engaged and central in the network, introducing questions as to the extent to which they directly intervene in the system rather than playing more of a facilitative role.
Overall, the workforce development network was found to be a diffuse one with an overall lack of coordination, lack of dominant actors, ease of access across functional groupings and numerous opportunities for network development. We are encouraged to see a significant degree of resilience in the network, with no single actor or groupings of them seemingly capable of network disruption. Use the controls below to further examine how different actors and groups interact in the network.
Insight 1: NGOs generally have a high level of network activity but may not be as influential overall in the network. As can be seen in the maps below, NGOs are the most common organizational type in the overall network. When the network is filtered for only those with high influence, however, there are very few NGOs left in the network. This may present an opportunity for the high level of NGO activity to be more integrated into the overall network.
Insight 2: To demonstrate this network’s potential to grow, we asked respondents to provide information on partnerships they are interested in forming in the future. After adding in desired partnerships, the network of relationships grew by approximately 30%. This represents the potential for change in the network. Interestingly, very few respondents reported a desired relationship with labor/trade unions or employment agencies, whereas donors, government organizations, business associations, and educational institutions all had a significant number of desired partnerships reported, implying significantly more social capital among the latter groups.
Insight 3: In the network as a whole, there is relatively little engagement among the “key groups” of employment agencies, private enterprise, vocational institutions, and educational institutions. The tourism sector, however, represents the most engagement among these groups compared to any other sector. Compared to the larger network, the tourism sector is almost twice as dense (5.5%), and reciprocated relationships are significantly more common (35%). The dense network graphs show us that that collaboration is very common within tourism. The tourism sector appears to represent a unique opportunity to engage key network actor groups.
Insight 4: Among all of the organization types, donors seem to be the most highly engaged and central in the network, introducing questions as to the extent to which they directly intervene in the system rather than playing more of a facilitative role.