Analyse du travail et élaboration des programmes de formation professionnelle Analysis of Work and the Development of Vocational Training Programs Análisis del trabajo y elaboración de programas de formación profesional

Résumé

Une approche historique est ici présentée comme démarche permettant de mieux comprendre les options et les enjeux de travaux récents ayant établis des liens privilégiés entre l’analyse du travail et la conception d’action de formation professionnelle. La crise du mode de régulation fordiste semble avoir été déterminante dans l’explosion des recherches et interventions développées ces dernières années dans ce registre. Mais le type de contrat social dans lequel les auteurs se sont inscrits oriente de façon décisive la finalité des projets et la portée des résultats.

Summary

This article seeks to identify the major stages in the history of vocational training and their connection with work analysis. Two hypotheses related to the economic, social and political characteristics of each of these stages provide the point of departure.

The first hypothesis, drawing on the analysis of Karl Polanyi, posits a “double movement” in the history of industrialized countries between those who respect market laws and see human labour as “human capital” and those who believe that market mechanisms interfere with the protection of vital social interests.

The second hypothesis is inspired by the “regulationist” school of economists. They argue that economic history since the 19^th century has been characterized by particular “institutional forms” that ensure, for some time at least, a steady growth while molding individual and collective behaviour. According to this approach, three different wage-ratio models and the corresponding modes of regulation have marked the evolution of the workplace until the end of the 20^th century: the competitive regulation mode; the Taylorian wage-ratio, which imposed a reinforcement of the technical and social division of work; and the phase of mass production and consumption, which entailed the application of Fordist principles. For the regulationists, the “crisis” in the Fordist mode of regulation at the end of the 20^th century has led to a search for new models of production that require different skills from production workers.

This context of the competitive reorganization of production and its effects on the organization of work have led to the re-configuration of the links between work analysis and vocational training. However, in order to better understand the emerging research trends and work interventions in recent years, it is worth examining prevailing social and scientific practices during the periods corresponding to each of the previous modes of regulation This article therefore focuses on a few key periods in the history of vocational training: that of the competitive regulation mode during which the problem of moralizing manpower was of prime importance; the period of Taylorism for which scientific work organization freed the enterprise from training most workers as qualification was restricted to the top tier of the labour force; the period in between the wars when vocational training was primarily concerned with workers’ relational integration into the firm ; and the glorious Fordist years during which time there was a clear distinction between working time and rapid learning on the one hand, and time off work and access to education on the other. This latter period is still traversed by conflicts and contradictions that have lent support to a critical conception of the training process and sparked alternative research on society as a whole.

This crisis in the Fordist mode of regulation has contributed to the development of research with special links to ergonomics. A synthesis of published work enables us to determine to what degree some of the earlier traditions were extended, enriched or even out-dated. We delineate three approaches in current research.

The first has its roots in a tradition of the educational sciences. It advances a “professional didactic” for which professional activity is never a simple application of a theoretical framework, but ever a very special fit of “pragmatic concepts”. The second approach emphasizes interventions that seek to ensure the physical and psychological integrity of the worker. It draws on another conception of the construction of knowledge in which knowledge is jointly constructed through an interactive process whereby the scientific approach of the ergonomists is confronted with that of the members of the training group who are more concrete and express other disciplines. The third approach entails an integration of professional knowledge and the wisdom of practical know-how and, in particular, defends the principle of a professional valorization of the capacity to change work.

The conclusion of this article opens up an underlying debate. At a time of growing economic globalization, which reinforces the tendency for decision-making to escape traditional partners and which does not always result in an improvement of working conditions, there emerges the question of the logic and scope for training. While the benefits of a “participatory ergonomics” are put to the fore in a context in which workers are enjoined to be responsible “actors,” the workers themselves face dysfunction and risks in their workplace.

Resumen

Un enfoque histórico es presentado como una manera de comprender mejor las opciones y las perspectivas de los trabajos recientes que han establecido vínculos privilegiados entre el análisis del trabajo y la concepción de acción en la formación profesional. La crisis del modo de regulación fordista parece haber sido determinante en la explosión de investigaciones e intervenciones que siguiendo esta orientación se han desarrollado en estos últimos años. Pero el tipo de contrato social en el cual se inscriben los autores, orienta de manera decisiva la finalidad de los proyectos y la envergadura de sus resultados.