Reinventing the Australian VET System: Part Two – Problematic aspects of business models


We’ve seen what can happen when we entrust a basic human right to market forces. While innovation and discovery have emerged from private enterprise, the distribution of the benefits of progress has been immorally inequitable. Steve Nelson

Guided reading extracts:

Education is a process not a consumer product – we have to ask whether a metaphor of consumerism is giving people a helpful idea of what to expect from their educational experience and I don’t think it is. Students engage in the process of education; they themselves contribute significantly to its ‘outcomes’; they share responsibility for what they ‘get’ at the end of it. Eliza Anyangwe

Terry Heick says… countless forces shape what, how, and why [we] learn. Each of those contributing forces is a living, breathing person, or has living, breathing people behind it. Each of these living, breathing people possess a unique set of experiences and biases, insights and failings, and so when these people encounter one another, there is natural resistance, friction, or some other product of their differences.

Of course, that is not to say these products have to be negative. Difference has been a force behind social progress through history, and so after identifying these “cogs” of the “machine” that educates ……., and then admitting each cog possesses a belief system, we’re at least beginning to see a fundamental pattern of cause and effect—of affectors [to act on; produce an effect or change in] and effected (the stateof being operative or functional – learners).

And this leads us to another flaw in our perspective: learners are not products, educators don’t produce, education isn’t a possession, nor a product or service. It’s all a matter of membership. And we have to guard against seeing it as one–a machine with cogs that produces learners like little widgets—that wheezes and chuffs and spits out educated things. Rather, we have to try to see the entire machine itself as society itself, where the learner has a role that is interdependent with the teacher, the teacher with curriculum vendors, and so on.

If that happens, we might be able to get our bearings again–find out which way is up, what we are, and where all of this is headed. Until this is the perspective we take, rather than the aforementioned “widget-view” where students are “products” of some non-descript and nebulous, failing system, change will only be serendipitous; keep changing things and monitoring results, and we’ll eventually get something right. The thinking here is that the machine is broken because the widgets are broken, but it’s our thinking that’s broken.

1. Product approaches to education

Tony Jeffs and Mark K. Smith contend that product approaches to education are derived from ways of thinking that are common in industry and commerce. When using product approaches we start out by trying to define closely what sort of output or product we want to make. If we were manufacturing a car, for example, we would do some market research (identify needs); make plans (of the car, its production and marketing); implement the plans; and then check whether what we have produced matches our original objectives. It seems so sensible and is a very common way of going about things. We can see the sense in it if we are trying to make something concrete like a car. We need a plan that people can have access to, so that they can go off and make their particular part so it will fit with other parts.

We can find this product approach in the way that many people talk about curriculum in schooling. A curriculum is just one way of organizing the work of educators. It is a proposal for action – something we build before the educational encounter. The figure below shows a fairly common approach to planning a product curriculum.

Planning the product curriculum

Step 1: Diagnosis of need

Step 2: Formulation of objectives

Step 3: Selection of content

Step 4: Organization of content

Step 5: Selection of learning experiences

Step 6: Organization of learning experiences

Step 7: Determination of what to evaluate + of the ways + means of doing it.

From Hilda Taba (1962) Curriculum Development: Theory and practice, New York: Harcourt Brace, page 12.

Product-based approaches tend to involve working on, not with, people. The focus is on changing individuals in ways set out by others. It entails teaching them the skills and attributes which employers, politicians and opinion leaders hold to be desirable. Sadly, this orientation has spread beyond settings such as schools and colleges.

Many of the activities that play, youth and community education workers are responsible for are now product-oriented. Programmes such as the Youth Achievement Awards, and targeted efforts to tackle crime, truancy, drug usage, under-achievement, unemployment and social exclusion are examples. They may well employ some of the techniques of informal education. They can even appear to be informal education. However, they are not. They are not driven by dialogue. Anti-conversational and anti-democratic tendencies mean that product approaches are incompatible with informal education.

Add in legislative initiatives, like that recently passed in Ohio, which allow public dollars to flow to for-profit schools, and you have the final ingredient of the end game. We might as well admit that education is no more important than any other product in our consumer culture.

Metaphorically, if a Doritos education is cost-effective and profitable, let the market forces work their magic with lots of slick marketing and lots of computer-based learning (it’s cost-effective!). Personnel costs go down, profits go up.

Eventually schools will sort themselves out just like fast food franchises and they will be just about as good. It all reminds me of the privatization of the prison industry. For-profit prisons reap compound benefits from perverse incentives. Having fewer employees with lower pay increases profits. Fewer employees and lower pay perpetuate prison dysfunction, reduce rehabilitation and increase recidivism. That’s good for profits too. It’s a grand win-win — except for the prisoners and our society.

2. Process approaches to education

Is Learning a Product or a Process?

Nina Smith observes:

The answer defines not only your personal teaching philosophy, but also the daily practices in your classroom. When learning is viewed as a product, and the same performance measure applies to all students, learning facilitation can be reduced to cookie-cutter teaching: same pieces of information and instruction are seen sufficient for all students.

This is also visible in classroom practices: providing students with a template and asking them to copy that – whether it is an “art” project, notes, homework, an essay or anything else. There is not much room for individualization or differentiation, because the products [or assessments] are seen as the measure of learning – which of course is not reality, but may satisfy administrators and policy makers….What about viewing learning as a process?

Many things will change from the previously described situations: the first premise is that because students begin their daily/weekly/yearly learning from different levels of knowledge and understanding, they also will end up in different competency levels. And that is okay, honestly. We are not clones. Students shouldn’t be treated like ones.

When learning is understood primarily as a process differentiation and individualization are natural consequences. Assessment becomes comparing your achievement to your previous level of individual proficiency or competency, not against the achievements of your peers.

Student evaluations are extremely non-punitive by nature: mistakes and second attempts are not only allowed but treasured, because they show the growth of understanding and the height of the learning curve. Isn’t this the recipe for providing the experiences of success for each and every student? And from educational research we already know how important that genuine thrill of achievement is for intrinsic motivation to learn.

3. Vocational education

To conclude, Gavin Moodie says, most agree that vocational certificates and diplomas should be related to work more closely than the bachelors and masters degrees that prepare graduates for an occupation. But the specifications for vocational qualifications can require them to cover anything from 20 to 200 job skills. They are specified too narrowly and tied too specifically to immediate job tasks.

The focus is on preparing graduates for specific jobs, but this doesn’t prepare them for the future. Vocational education should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills they need for a career and for further education, as is required by the Australian Qualifications Framework.

Another major cause of poor quality….. is governments’ construction of vocational education markets, which encourage profit-driven providers to cut costs and hence quality and standards. Currently, some 5,000 organisations are registered to offer vocational education. Many of these are also approved by state governments to receive subsidies and by the Australian government to offer fee loans to their students.

While governments have started increasing registration conditions, there are still too many providers that are too small, under-resourced or too little committed to vocational education rather than to their profits.

There is no product, only a collective “we”. It’s our thinking that’s broken.

4. Employees  as numbers and symbols

Serious problems can arise if employees are seen as no more than numbers and symbols on a screen.

Human resource management (HRM) is a term which is now widely used but very loosely defined. It faces the threat of reducing itself to a safe but narrow technical, administrative role.

Based on theoretical work in the field of organisational behaviour it appears that HRM comprises of a set of policies designed to maximise organisational integration, employee commitment, flexibility and quality of work.

HMR systems may offer efficient digital management of employee data where it is possible to monitor everything from benefits to payroll and paid time off with a few clicks on your computer. This makes HR functions efficient but not better.

5. Loss of Subjectivity

HRM systems may provide good listings of employee accomplishments, certifications and degrees.  Managers may therefore be tempted to only promote based on the objective data your system provides. They may be discouraged from taking the time to get to know employees on a personal basis as part of their evaluation of what staff members can contribute.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management points out that computerised employee evaluations can result in an impersonal assessment and narrative from managers.

Clearly, such evaluations may not be the most reliable guides for making decisions about promotions.

6. Ethics of Human Resource Management

Guided reading and extracts from: Threats to HR/IR or a productive future role?, Glenn Martin,

A harsher employer approach to employees to surface, and at the same time it has made many HR matters (e.g.,leave entitlements) more technical. In the light of this challenge, HR faces the threat of reducing itself to a safe but narrow technical, administrative role. It can advise on leave entitlements and study assistance, and it can play a merely reactive role in responding to complaints about such things as discrimination or bullying. While these are necessary and important, they will not address any deeper organisational issues such as high turnover and skills shortages.

7. Threat No. 1 – Thinking that the organisation is just a business

If you watch the TV show, “House”, there was an episode where Dr House is (typically) fighting with the hospital administration about resources. He breaks rules and has little interest in abiding by restrictions on medical resources. He would be a very difficult employee to handle. In this episode, the administrator finally loses it and makes a very lucid and animated speech about what the hospital is. He says,  “You think of this place as a team, as some kind of community. You think it’s got a vision and a mission. It’s none of those metaphors. This place is a business. That’s all.”

Has local government arrived at this point? The public sector in Australia has been told for two decades that it has to be more business-like. It has been pushed towards competition, it has been told to set targets and establish performance measures. Has this push been successful? Has it been too successful? Has this focus on business competencies led to improvements – in productivity, morale and organisational sustainability?

Or has it led to a heartless, arid environment where there is no commitment to customer service or human values? The argument between Dr House and the administrator is, of course, a pointless one. There are always limitations on resources. What is important is the values that drive the choices and the decisions about resources. The danger is that the quest to be more business-like over-reaches itself and erodes the human goals that form the purpose of the organisation.

This is particularly true in the non-commercial sector. In local government, the reason for a council to exist is to provide basic services to the local community. A good corrective for leaders in organisations threatened by the demand to be business-like is the Margerison-McCann Team Management Wheel model. It says that for a team or organisation to function and fulfil its goals effectively, a number of different roles all need to carried out. In its simplest form it talks about four types of roles:

  1. Explorers, who explore opportunities and like to create and experiment with new ideas
  2. Organisers, who implement ways of making things work and who focus on producing outputs
  3. Controllers, who monitor and audit systems
  4. Advisers, who gather and report information, plus
  5. Linkers, which describes the responsibility everyone in a team has to ensure that relationships are established and developed, and to provide leadership.

Therefore there are two conditions that are a requirement for high performance

(1) team diversity through a reasonable balance of team role preferences and,

(2) effective Linking.

This model is powerful because it immediately suggests that the administrator in “House” is a necessary part of making the whole place work. The big mistake is if people fall into the belief that this is the only perspective.

In the Margerison-McCann Team Management Wheel, the administrator is acting as a Controller. Dr House’s hospital, and local government, will not work if the Controller is not balanced by the Explorer, the Organisers, the Advisers and the Linkers.

These roles are where the core ideas and values of the organisation come from. What does this mean for HR? The people in the organisation have to understand that the organisation is a group of humans who work with one another for a particular purpose, and that it needs the input of all the roles described in the MargerisonMcCann Team Management Wheel.

Hence, the view of the administrator has to be held in balance – not conflict, but creative tension – with the perspectives of the other roles. HR has to know what views dominate in the organisation, and whether the balance is healthy or unhealthy; and it has to know how to foster movement towards a healthy appreciation of the value of the different types of contributors.

HR has to take on responsibility for fostering a positive organisational culture. The danger is that HR is not up to this task, that it does not have the skills either to assess the status of the culture, or the credibility and skills to influence things for the better.

8. Threat No. 2: Losing the values of respect, fairness and decency in industrial relations

Of course I don’t believe that most employers have jettisoned these values in the wake of the Work Choices legislation. But a review of recent IR stories shows that some employers certainly have, and they feel that they now have licence to treat employees in any way they want, with impunity. For example:

1. Work Choices means hard labour for pregnant women

2. Fairness test approves big cuts for meatworkers

3. Company, director and manager all penalised for duress

4. Fixed term contracts for core business not legitimate

5. AIRC rejects “operational reasons” for dismissal

6. No operational reasons despite end of project

Some of the main hot spots that suggest an erosion of employers’ commitment to the values of fairness and decency are: where employers have sought to force employees onto AWAs, generally accompanied by significant reductions in pay and conditions, and using the unequal “bargaining power” that the employer has  the discouragements to collective representation for employees shown by the restrictions on unions and the push towards individual agreements the use of “operational reasons” as a justification for dismissals, that is, sham redundancies, in cases where the employer’s real reasons are harsh or unfair the blanket extension of probationary periods, or qualifying periods, to six months, and the expansion of the types of employees who are excluded from applying for a remedy for unfair dismissal.

9. Threat No. 3: Failing to deal with employee engagement

The problem that is deemed to be the number one issue in organisations today is skills shortages. But when you look at the solutions being offered to address skills shortages, it is apparent that if employee engagement was addressed, organisations would be making substantial progress towards dealing with skills shortages.

Lack of employee engagement leads to two major problems – lowered productivity and higher than necessary staff turnover. Addressing these two problems will not eliminate all the pressures being created by the ageing workforce, but it will significantly alleviate them. There is a growing number of large-scale studies that are adding to our knowledge about the extent of the problem of employee engagement.

Keith Ayres, from Integro, says there are four managerial obsessions that disenchant employees:

  1. an obsession with financial performance – managers are so focused on immediate financial outcomes that they ignore human dynamics in the workplace
  2. an obsession with logic – managers create logical plans with no regard to the importance of employees understanding them and committing to them
  3. an obsession with avoiding responsibility – blaming others is a chronic organisational disease, with disastrous consequences for engagement, commitment and morale
  4. an obsession with control – managers commonly lack trust in their employees, and tend to micro-manage them.

Managers, says Ayers, are frequently oblivious to these faults and have no conception of the damage they cause. Their obsessions with numbers, plans and control mean that they simply do not notice how poor employee morale is. Nor are they aware of the strong links that apply between morale and corporate performance.

There are other managerial qualities that are important as well. Engagement is generally absent when managers are perceived as:

  • not being consistent towards their team members,
  • not respecting them,
  • not giving feedback on performance,
  • not giving recognition of effort and achievement, and
  • being overly critical.

Broader organisational factors also play a role in disengagement – absence of clear career paths or progression, and absence of recognition or rewards.

Creating engagement is neither difficult nor expensive. What it requires is the engagement of managers. If employees are to be expected to be emotionally engaged in their work, then managers need to be emotionally engaged in supporting employees, rather than staying distant and trying to “press the right buttons”.

HR managers have a responsibility to create the right conditions for employee engagement. Most of the challenge is about educating and supporting line managers about their responsibility for cultivating productive relationships with their team members.

HR managers also need to be open and accessible to both line managers and employees. With the emphasis that is currently being placed on their role as strategic partners in the business, the danger is that HR becomes remote from employees.

The impact of that remoteness may be that HR fails to foster employee engagement, and thereby fails to assist the organisation to achieve the strategic goals it seeks.

10. HR Audit

Ulrich says the audit should investigate the links between all of the organisation’s stakeholders. There are four stages:

  1. Keep your promises – do employees, and does the organisation, keep commitments to others (eg employee commitments to customers)?
  2. ƒCreate a compelling strategy – what is a convincing approach to creating value and extending that ability into the future?
  3. Build core competencies – can employees bring the firm’s value creation potential to fruition, and continue a track record of keeping promises?
  4. Build organisational capability – can the organisation keep developing its internal ability to make things happen efficiently and effectively, now and into the future?

We also have to recognise that people operate at different levels when it comes to ethics and values. It is helpful to distinguish between three broad levels:

  1. compliance with the law
  2. the quality of relationships (fairness, decency, respect)
  3. development of a deep sense of identity and purpose.

11. Steps towards positive ethics and values

1. Articulate the values that are important in the organisation, which includes a statement of vision (the end-state towards which the organisation is working) and a statement of the values the organisation and its members will live by in pursuing that vision.

2. Communicate the values around the organisation.

3. Translate the values into guidelines for behaviour and performance so that people understand what they mean in practice.

4. Leaders must lead by demonstrating the values in their own behaviour, especially in situations where it is tempting to take short-cuts.

5. Leaders need to encourage employees to participate in building a culture based on the values, and deal with violations of the values where they occur.

6. Leaders must be openly accountable for their own behaviour.

7. Leaders must be aware that some situations are ethically complex, and know when to forgive and how to learn from bad decisions.

Although it is true that people tend to operate primarily at one of the three levels, it is also true that there is an underlying human drive towards what we might call higher human values.

12. Conflict of Interest

Let us not forget the Conflict of Interest that exists for For-profit VET System business owners, promoters, advisers, providers, etc. They are in a position where anything or anyone who might cause their business profit making to be reduced will be met with derision and spin-doctoring justification, despite the hijacking of educational theories to suit their own business related purposes, despite rhetoric in marketing and promotions that include greater good for the community and individual purposes.

13. Bottom up, not top down

Extracts from: “Micro-business community responsibility – approaches, motivations and barriers” by Dr. Suzanne Campin: Public Access Scholarly, objective and well researched, IMHO.

“The then Labour Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard, indicated an ongoing expectation that businesses would contribute to their communities and be involved with their local area governance, encapsulated in her speech on 22 November 2007 at the Australian Council of Social Service Annual Conference:

We have to change the way Governments at all levels deliver services to tackle disadvantage. It’s going to be about bottom up not top-down measures to tackle disadvantage – we will be asking local governments, non-government organisations and businesses to participate in new place-based governance arrangements that bring together Commonwealth, State and local funds in the most effective way to lift up disadvantaged communities.

This expectation has not, however, been translated into a role for business in community wellbeing in the recently drafted National Compact (Australian Government 2010a, 2010b; 2010c).”

14. Social responsibility

“Bowen (1953) wrote one of the most cited seminal works on what he described as the social responsibilities of the businessman in the early 1950s. Since then, the literature on the social and environmental responsibilities of business has grown massively and forms the basis of many extensive texts (Crane & Matten 2004; Crane et al. 2008). For larger businesses this form of responsibility has been referred to as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). For small businesses this responsibility has been referred to as Small Business Social Responsibility (SBSR) (Lepoutre & Heene 2006). For micro-businesses, there is little agreement on nomenclature and this responsibility is referred to here as ‘micro-Business Community Responsibility’ (mBCR). Whatever the size of the business, whether demonstrating CSR, SBSR or mBCR, this behaviour is referred to as responsible business behaviour.”

15. Business closing everywhere

“The ubiquitous and embedded nature of micro-businesses in Australia. The lack of knowledge on micro-business involvement in community wellbeing is surprising given their socio-economic impacts and ubiquitous and locally embedded nature.”

“Micro-businesses therefore, are well placed through both their numbers and their distribution to influence community wellbeing. Recent research has shown that communities do rely on small businesses for support of local projects, but little is known specifically of micro-business involvement in their communities (Healy 2007). Scholars have recognised the embedded nature of many very small businesses within their local communities and their importance in community wellbeing. Jane Jacob’s seminal work, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, pointed to the rich and robust nature of the relationships of small businesses within their communities (Jacobs 1961). She described the central position of the shopkeeper in what she called the complex ballet of street life where all of those that are part of a place have a role that is practiced and accepted so casually that they are normally taken for granted.”

“….there is scant micro-business research that builds on this knowledge to consider roles of micro-business owner-operators. More specifically, there is virtually no academic research on the responsible business behaviour role of micro-businesses, the most common and most ubiquitous of all businesses in Australia, as is the case internationally. This gap in knowledge is addressed in this thesis at a time of urgency when local independent businesses, many micro-businesses, are closing down at dramatic rates worldwide, before their full impact on communities is understood (Baum & Palmer 2002; Beer 1998; Bromley & Thomas 1995; House of Commons 2006; New Economics Foundation 2002, 2003, 2008).”

16. Government policy neglected

“Although there is evidence of greater integration of CSR practice into larger business operations (Birch 2001; Birch & Batten 2002), a review of the Australian CSR regulatory framework concluded that it consists overwhelmingly of soft law initiatives and light touch regulatory initiatives at both the international and national level (Anderson & Landau 2006). ”

“Anderson and Landau (2006) contend that government CSR policy in Australia has been largely responsive to public outcry based on high profile examples of what can go wrong when a responsible business practice approach is lacking. The thrust of most legislative efforts towards fostering CSR in Australia have been to strengthen the accountability of directors to shareholders through measures including enhanced disclosure and improved financial reporting and auditing (Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee 2005). Further, where there have been recent reviews on what can be done to encourage responsible business behaviour in Australia, these have targeted large businesses (Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee 2005).”

“Whereas in the UK, the Compact Joint Action Plan (UK Parliament 2008) and in the United States, the recently released Social Innovation Fund (SIF) (Corporation for National and Community Service 2000), explicitly recognise business interests in community wellbeing, this is not the case in Australian Government policy. In the UK Compact, social enterprises, as trading entities, for example are recognised as having a community wellbeing role. In addition, the UK Compact has led to redesign of government support programs to open eligibility for government assistance to social enterprises (UK Parliament 2008). Further, in the UK there is clear recognition of the role of the third sector and the players involved including for-profit business entities (Business in the Community 2009; Office of the Third Sector 2008, 2010a, 2010b).”

“Although the third sector in Australia is generally described as the not-for-profit and community sectors, Lyons and Passey (2006) defined the third sector in Australia as including the not-for-profit community sectors, cooperatives and mutuals.”

17. Only codified legislative provisions

“The public policy context for CSR in Australia is consistent with the view of Crane et al. (2008), that (unlike the USA), Europe, the Far East and Australasia have always had a greater tendency to address social issues through government policies than collective action and business involvement. As Anderson and Landau (2006) found with regard to CSR policy in Australia, Crane et al. (2008) argue that, where social issues are managed by governments, business involvement in community wellbeing is allowed in codified form and enforced through mandatory legislated provisions.”

“In summary, the context of Corporate Social Responsibility, Small Business Social Responsibility and the unrecognised mBCR micro-Business Community Responsibility in Australia, is one that sees responsible business behaviour as primarily a legal obligation in compulsory areas, such as workplace health and safety provisions. This perspective has narrowed Australia’s approach to responsible business practice and appears to have exacerbated a lack of interest in the role of business in community wellbeing.”

18. The need for a new policy perspective

” The current approach of the Australian Government towards CSR, with its focus on little beyond providing an enabling legal and taxation regime, reflects a government-centric approach to achieving community wellbeing. This approach is based in a paradigm, therefore, sitting in a political or mixed economy model, seeing different and separated roles for government, business and society.”

19. Social economy co-exists with the private and public sectors

“Definitional challenges aside, theorists have found a social economy view useful in better understanding what is actually happening in the third sector as different players in public, business and the not-for-profit sectors take on intent and practice, quite removed from their former roles. Gaiger (2000) for example purports these changed roles are a result of an abandonment of the duality between social life and economic life and the market-state dichotomy, that characterise the idea of a social economy.”

“Moulaert and Ailenei (2005) explain the mixed roles in the third sector as the result of a constant process of social innovation in the redistribution of responsibilities and in the changed relationships between the public, private and not-for-profit sectors. The social economy is also described as a family of hybrids between market, state and civil society, where the features of these hybrids can be seen as alternate allocation systems targeted at improved outcomes for disadvantaged individuals and communities (Moulaert & Ailenei 2005).”

“Moulaert and Ailenei (2005) purport a social economy co-exists with the private and public sectors in many parts of the world today. Social economy theory therefore presents an alternative view of the economic system. Social economy theory recognises entities that, from the perspective of the dominant political economy normative, are seen to take on hybrid roles, mixing social and economic objectives.”

“The literature suggests such hybridity is common amongst smaller business owner-operators (Dawson et al 2002; Greenbank 2001; Spence 1999; Spence and Schmidpeter 2003; Vyakarnam et al. 1997). The idea of a social economy may then place some business hybrids within the third sector, or at least somewhere between the business and third sectors.” {An example: Neighbourhood Houses].

20. A new policy context for VET

“Despite an absence of public policy to date from the new Australian Office of the Third Sector, its recent establishment may point to a new interest in the third sector in this country. This new recognition could spur development of an Australian-centric perspective of the third sector as part of a social economy and one that may include businesses with social intent, especially micro-businesses.”

21. Conclusion and My Thoughts

What is your conclusion?

Imagine, for a moment, cooperative and integrated policy development and implementation between the Department of Education and Training and the Department of Human Services.

Imagine, for a moment, the Department of Education and Training and the Department of Human Services utilising existing community infrastructure, such as neighbourhood houses, for at least part of the delivery of vocational education and training.

22. Example – Case Study

“VET Reform” could consider using existing community assets such as Neighbourhood Houses (not-for-profit organisations) accredited as RTOs as “the norm” for delivering a range of locally relevant VTE courses – e.g., Aged Care in Upper Yarra Valley with e-learning innovation –

More examples:

More resources

Neighbourhood Houses as RTOs – surely VET Reform can include “community” not just “business” –

Australian and New Zealand Third Sector Research Inc (ANZTSR) is a network of people interested in pursuing and encouraging research into private, not-for-profit, community of voluntary organisations and the activities of volunteering and philanthropy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s