In de context van de zeer dynamische en steeds krapper wordende arbeidsmarkt anno 2022 pleiten verschillende organisaties voor het centraal stellen op de arbeidsmarkt van vaardigheden ofwel ‘skills’. In Nederland zijn er verschillende initiatieven gericht op het ontwikkelen van een skillsmarkt, maar van het grootschalig samenbrengen van werkzoekenden en werkgevers aan de hand van skills is voorlopig nog geen sprake. Dat komt mede omdat werkgevers de meerwaarde van skillsbenaderingen vaak nog te onduidelijk vinden. In dit artikel bespreken wij eerst de fundamentele bouwstenen van skillsmatches om vervolgens vanuit het perspectief van de werkgever de meerwaarde en vereisten van skillsmatching door te nemen. Fundamenteel aan skillsmatching is het in beeld brengen van skills. Daarvoor is het belangrijk om skills te objectiveren, aan te tonen en te wegen. Die skills kunnen vervolgens gebruikt worden tijdens het matchingsproces om vraag en aanbod op de arbeidsmarkt op basis van skills samen te brengen. Dat kan lonen voor werkgevers omdat zij daarmee (1) een grotere groep van geschikte kandidaten, (2) een fijnmaziger zicht op de kwaliteit van kandidaten, (3) een verbetering van de arbeidsorganisatie en (4) een stimulans voor het leren op de werkvloer kunnen bereiken. Om dat mogelijk te maken is het van belang dat werkgevers en HR-managers hun vraag naar arbeid uitdrukken in skills, gestructureerd hun skillsmatches evalueren en in kaart welke skills zij in de toekomst verwachten nodig te hebben.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To predict mortality by disability in a sample of 479 Dutch community-dwelling people aged 75 years or older. Methods: A longitudinal study was carried out using a follow-up of seven years. The Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS), a self-reported questionnaire with good psychometric properties, was used for data collection about total disability, disability in activities in daily living (ADL) and disability in instrumental activities in daily living (IADL). The mortality dates were provided by the municipality of Roosendaal (a city in the Netherlands). For analyses of survival, we used Kaplan–Meier analyses and Cox regression analyses to calculate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: All three disability variables (total, ADL and IADL) predicted mortality, unadjusted and adjusted for age and gender. The unadjusted HRs for total, ADL and IADL disability were 1.054 (95%-CI: [1.039;1.069]), 1.091 (95%-CI: [1.062;1.121]) and 1.106 (95%-CI: [1.077;1.135]) with p-values <0.001, respectively. The AUCs were <0.7, ranging from 0.630 (ADL) to 0.668 (IADL). Multivariate analyses including all 18 disability items revealed that only “Do the shopping” predicted mortality. In addition, multivariate analyses focusing on 11 ADL items and 7 IADL items separately showed that only the ADL item “Get around in the house” and the IADL item “Do the shopping” significantly predicted mortality. Conclusion: Disability predicted mortality in a seven years follow-up among Dutch community-dwelling older people. It is important that healthcare professionals are aware of disability at early stages, so they can intervene swiftly, efficiently and effectively, to maintain or enhance the quality of life of older people.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To predict mortality by disability in a sample of 479 Dutch community-dwelling people aged 75 years or older. Methods: A longitudinal study was carried out using a follow-up of seven years. The Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS), a self-reported questionnaire with good psychometric properties, was used for data collection about total disability, disability in activities in daily living (ADL) and disability in instrumental activities in daily living (IADL). The mortality dates were provided by the municipality of Roosendaal (a city in the Netherlands). For analyses of survival, we used Kaplan–Meier analyses and Cox regression analyses to calculate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: All three disability variables (total, ADL and IADL) predicted mortality, unadjusted and adjusted for age and gender. The unadjusted HRs for total, ADL and IADL disability were 1.054 (95%-CI: [1.039;1.069]), 1.091 (95%-CI: [1.062;1.121]) and 1.106 (95%-CI: [1.077;1.135]) with p-values <0.001, respectively. The AUCs were <0.7, ranging from 0.630 (ADL) to 0.668 (IADL). Multivariate analyses including all 18 disability items revealed that only “Do the shopping” predicted mortality. In addition, multivariate analyses focusing on 11 ADL items and 7 IADL items separately showed that only the ADL item “Get around in the house” and the IADL item “Do the shopping” significantly predicted mortality. Conclusion: Disability predicted mortality in a seven years follow-up among Dutch community-dwelling older people. It is important that healthcare professionals are aware of disability at early stages, so they can intervene swiftly, efficiently and effectively, to maintain or enhance the quality of life of older people.
MULTIFILE
