For a full version of the Project Plan see appendix 1. For explanation provided to employers see appendix 2.

The aims and objectives of the Project were:

• To work directly with employers to determine how IAG can best add   value to their workforce development activity and
• To develop business arguments for involvement with IAG

This would be achieved by:

• Engaging four employers including a healthcare trust, a local authority, a large private sector organisation and an SME, with IAG focusing on the business benefit to the organisations with the main focus on reaching the most vulnerable employees in the workforce
• Providing promotional, signposting and resource materials for employers on IAG services

Some additional aims were to:

• Make recommendations on the appropriate implementation of part of the matrix standard with employers who are unable or unwilling to engage with the full matrix accreditation process
• Create a model of how to support employers who wish to engage with the matrix standards integrated with IiP standards

Drafting the project plan

The original bid was heavily influenced by the Moser report and later, The Demand for Information, Advice & Guidance produced by MORI for the Guidance Council. The Project planning document expands the bid’s aims and objectives based on added dimensions from discussions with partners and from other reports. Highly influential at this stage were the Guidance Council, “Straight Talking”, a report by NICEC and Business Link South West

Modifications to aims and objectives

The Project's timescales were clearly tight and the objectives ambitious. This report will cover what has been achieved so far and a further report, towards the end of July 2003, will assess to what extent the Project has achieved its objectives.

In this respect this report may be regarded as an interim report. This does not, however, simply that the report is incomplete.

It covers the footholds gained, the methodologies already proven and adopted, some of the arguments established and the models proposed as far as they go at this time.

Outcomes within participating organisations, however, will have to wait until the participants have had time to establish the services, which are currently being embedded.

Defining IAG in the Workplace

The first step in implementing the Project's aims was to try to reach a clear understanding of what constitutes information, advice and guidance on learning and work in the working environment. 

Throughout the Project, perceptions of what constitutes IAG in the Workplace have been subject to continuous change, shaped by the views of the Guidance Council, the Business Link team, participating employers and Partnership managers.

The question of how it might fit in organisations in relation to their differing aims and employee development activities needed to be addressed. The key issues and tensions identified revolved around the confidentiality and impartiality of advice.

Our approach to the subject now leans towards engaging employers in discussion about employee development and guiding them towards the idea of providing an information and advice service for employees of the shape and scope which best suits them.

With experience of the role and benefits of IAG within their staff development activities employers may wish to broaden their IAG service by making it more comprehensive and impartial.

Confidentiality and impartiality

The West of England IAG Partnership delivers information and advice largely through community-based membership. 

This service is confidential for users and covers as many occupational areas as possible. Transplanting this service, in tact, to an employer’s place of business is clearly fraught with a number of difficulties and it was important to remain clear about who the Project was aiming to reach. 

Despite strong arguments for supplying information and advice about all occupational choices and thereby providing an impartial service, it became clear that employers might find this a difficult leap of faith. 

For larger organisations such as Healthcare Trusts, Local Authorities and larger private sector employers, impartiality should not be such a big issue since a wide range of occupational roles exists within those organisations.  Even here however it was perceived that Human Resources departments would find it difficult to square issues of retention with a fully confidential and impartial IAG service.

The key issue for the Project was seen as reaching and helping those most vulnerable in the workforce. Accordingly, it was decided that employers should decide on the shape and nature of the service they wished to provide with the proviso that arguments for greater impartiality would be pursued wherever appropriate.  The arguments for impartiality and confidentiality were developed as the Project proceeded.