Methodological Aspects of Career Trajectories Analysis on Russian Labor Market
Abstract
The paper presents methods to assess the effects of participation in vocational training of Russian workers. The authors propose alternative to the existing methodology approach that allows researching the impact of vocational training not only on the wage level, but on the formation of the whole professional trajectory. The study is based on the data from HSE Russian longitudinal monitoring survey (RLMS-HSE)1. Based on this data were formed two samples: the group of workers that have an experience of participation in vocational training programs, as well as the control group that includes people without any experience of vocational education. Then the career trajectories in these groups are compared. However, the direct comparison of the groups may cause the bias of the results. In order to resolve this problem, the authors employ propensity score matching (PSM) technique that allows balancing the propensities to participation in vocational training in two groups. Treatment and control groups formed based on PSM algorithm were compared using sequence analysis methodology that allows analyzing the distribution dynamics of individuals across states of the system; estimate the level of diversity of career trajectories based on concentration indices. The results of the study suggest that workers with experience of vocational training have more diverse professional paths with more intense vertical and horizontal mobility. This conclusion confrms that vocational training provides flexibility of individuals on the labor market.
About the Authors
Vyacheslav P. Sirotin
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Tech.), Prof. Department of Statistics and Data Analysis, National Research University - Higher School of Economics. 20, Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow, 101000, Russia.
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Tech.), Prof. Department of Statistics and Data Analysis, National Research University - Higher School of Economics. 20, Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow, 101000, Russia.
Aleksei A. Egorov
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow
Russian Federation
Analyst, Laboratory for University Development, Institute of Education, National Research University - Higher School of Economics. 20, Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow, 101000, Russia.
Russian Federation
Analyst, Laboratory for University Development, Institute of Education, National Research University - Higher School of Economics. 20, Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow, 101000, Russia.
References
1. Schultz T.W. Capital Formation by Education. Journal of Political Economy. 1960;(68): 571-583.
2. Becker G. Human Capital. NY: Columbia University Press; 1964. 185 p.
3. Mincer J. Schooling, Experience, and Earnings (Human Behavior and Social Institutions No. 2). NY: NBER; 1974. 152 p.
4. Barro R.J. Determinants of Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Empirical Study. NBER Working Paper. 1996;(5698).
5. Hanushek E.A., Woessmann L. The High Cost of Low Educational Performance: The Long-Run Economic Impact of Improving PISA Outcomes. OECD Publ.; 2010. 56 p.
6. Hanushek E.A. Will More Higher Education Improve Economic Growth? Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 2016;32(4);538-552.
7. Gimpelson V.E., Zudina A.A., Kapelushnikov R.I., et al. Russian Labor Market: Tendencies, Institutions, Structural Changes. V.E. Gimpelson, R.I. Kapelushnikov, S.Yu Roschin. (eds.). Moscow: HSE Publ., 2017. 148 p. (In Russ)
8. Korshunov I.A., Gaponova O.S. Lifelong Learning in the Context of Economic Development and Government Effectiveness. Educational studies. 2017;(4):36-59. (In Russ.)
9. Acemoglu D. Training and Innovation in an Imperfect Labour Market. The Review of Economic Studies. 1997;(64):445-464.
10. Acemoglu D., Pischke J.S. Why Do Firms Тrain? Theory and Evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1998;(113):79-119.
11. Ballo G., Fakhfakh F., Taymaz E. Who Benefts from Training and R&D, the Firm or the Workers? British Journal of Industrial Relations. 2006;(44):473-495.
12. Bassanini A., Booth A.L., Brunello G., et al. Workplace Training in Europe. IZA Discussion Paper Series. No. 1640. Bonn: IZA; 2005. 186 p.
13. Lazareva O.V., Denisova I.A., Tsukhlo S.V. Hiring or Retraining: The Experience of Russian Enterprises. Moscow: The Gaidar Institute Publ.; 2006. 56 p. (Scientifc Papers / The Gaidar Institute, no. 98). (In Russ.)
14. Travkin P.V. The Impact of the On-the-Job Training on Russian Worker’s Salary: The Effect of Abilities Approach. Applied Econometrics. 2014;(33):51-60. (In Russ.)
15. Roschin S.Yu., Travkin P.V. Job-Related Training on Russian Enterprises. Journal of the New Economic Association. 2015;(150):150-173. (In Russ.)
16. Xu Z., Kalbfleisch J.D. Propensity Score Matching in Randomized Clinical Trials. Biometrics. 2010;66(3):813-823.
17. Rosenbaum P. R., Rubin D.B. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika. 1983;70(1):41-55.
18. Heckman J. Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations. Journal of Human Resources. 1997;32(3):441-462.
19. Abbott A., Forrest J. Optimal Matching Methods for Historical Sequences. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1986;16(3):471-494.
20. Abbott A., Tsay A. Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect. Sociological Methods & Research. 2000;29(1):3-33.
Review
For citations:
Sirotin V.P., Egorov A.A. Methodological Aspects of Career Trajectories Analysis on Russian Labor Market. Voprosy statistiki. 2018;25(9):37-47. (In Russ.)
Views:
1007
Email this article 