CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe · baseline criteria to ensure that the volume and the quality ... that the individual should look to ... CEPIS Survey of Professional

CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe Page 1 of 39

CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe

Latvia Report


Contents:

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 3

2 Methodology and Survey Approach ............................................................... 5

2.1 Personal Information .................................................................................. 5 2.2 Competence Questionnaire ....................................................................... 5 2.3 Criteria for Inclusion ................................................................................... 6 2.4 Personal Results ........................................................................................ 7

3 Respondent Demographics ............................................................................ 8

3.1 Respondents by Country............................................................................ 8 3.2 Respondents by Age .................................................................................. 9 3.3 Respondents by Gender ............................................................................ 9 3.4 Respondents by Education Level ............................................................. 10 3.5 Respondents by Educational Field ........................................................... 11 3.6 Respondents by Industry Sector .............................................................. 11 3.7 Respondents by Enterprise Size .............................................................. 12 3.8 Respondents by Professional Status ....................................................... 13 3.9 Respondents by ICT Profile (based on declared profile) .......................... 13

4 Proximity Profiles and Skills Evaluation ...................................................... 15

4.1 Respondents by Proximity Profile ............................................................ 15 4.2 Comparison between Professional Profile and Proximity Profile .............. 16 4.3 Analysis of Skills Diffusion ....................................................................... 18

5 Analysis.......................................................................................................... 19

5.1 IT Systems Analyst .................................................................................. 19 5.2 IT Trainer ................................................................................................. 20

6 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 22

7 Annex ............................................................................................................. 24

7.1 Description of Additional Segmentation .................................................... 24 7.2 ICT Competence – Knowledge Index ....................................................... 26 7.3 Proximity Profiles – Details ...................................................................... 29 7.4 Profile Segmentation ................................................................................ 34


1 Introduction

The following report outlines the results from Latvia of a recent pan-European survey to identify the digital competencies held by European ICT professionals. The survey offered a unique opportunity to explore the status of professional e-competence in Europe through an online tool that provided the individual respondents with a snapshot of their competences against an agreed European framework (the European e-Competence Framework). The benefits for the individuals who participated in this survey included the ability to compare their competences against required competences for typical ICT job profiles throughout Europe, to help identify individual strengths and weaknesses, and to assist in identifying training and professional development opportunities. In addition, the survey results provide an insight into the status of national level professional competences in various countries in Europe. The ability to determine what competencies are underdeveloped in a country can assist in developing focused training to further educate the workforce. The ability to compare and contrast different countries’ results also provides a useful competence benchmarking tool for each individual country.

The research was conducted via a web questionnaire based on the European e-Competence Framework (e-CF), developed by the CEN (European Committee for Standardization) Workshop on ICT Skills and supported by the European Commission. This framework identifies 36 ICT competences all of which are used in this tool. The survey expert team, based on CEPIS experiences in defining IT competences and jobs, identified 18 typical professional profiles and an expanded set of skills to describe such profiles. The increased set of 44 skills, includes all 36 competences from the e-CF, five of which have been further split into a few sub-cases in order to allow a more precise description of different technical contents. Annex 7.1 describes the additional e-CF segmentation in detail. The work of the survey has been carried out by the Council of European Professional Informatics Societies (CEPIS) in association with the Latvian Information Technology & Telecommunications Association (LIKTA), who led the research in Latvia. Since the sample of respondents to the survey may not be thoroughly representative of the overall situation in each country, this country report has been assessed and validated by national experts from LIKTA before publication. Any contributions from national experts about the Latvian survey results have been included in this report. Key points stemming from the survey data gathered by LIKTA include:

The limited number of respondents does not allow for an in-depth analysis.

The respondents show an average age clearly lower than their colleagues in the rest of Europe (Latvians resulted as the youngest IT Professionals).

There was a broad spread of professionals working in micro and small organisations.

http://www.ecompetences.eu/

http://www.ecompetences.eu/


Latvian IT professionals responding to the questionnaire in general show a level of education comparable with that of the European average, but with more of a focus on IT.

The Knowledge Indexes of Latvian respondents are overall lower than their colleagues in Europe.


2 Methodology and Survey Approach

The research has been conducted across 28 countries in Europe and across greater Europe using a web-based survey tool. The European survey results have been compiled by respondents coming from these 28 countries. Sixteen of the countries had a total number of responses higher than 30 and of this 10 had more than 50 respondents and at least one cluster of a minimum of 10 respondents with the same calculated profile; the minimum amount required to create some elements of an individual country report. Latvia had 92 respondents to the survey, which resulted in two IT profiles having more than 10 respondents. It is important to note that the results presented in this report represent only the respondents who participated to the survey. It is not a general statistical reference for the country. The survey was completed by individual respondents who consider themselves to be IT practitioners and was divided into three sections. The survey was based on the enhanced e-CF segmentation, which is described in section 7.1. The three sections are described below.

2.1 Personal Information

Each respondent enters personal information including education background, employment status, organisation size, industry and selecting the IT profile which matches their current role. The respondent chooses from the following common IT roles:

IT Manager IT Project Manager

Database Manager

IT Quality Manager

IT System Analyst

Network Manager

IT Client Manager

Software Developer

IT Administrator

IT Sales and Marketing Consultant

Integration and Testing Engineer

IT Systems Engineer

IT Applications Consultant IT Systems Architect

Service Support Manager

Business Analyst

IT Security Manager

IT Trainer

2.2 Competence Questionnaire

In the next phase the respondent completes the competence questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of 44 competences. For each competence the respondent selects their competence level choosing from “None”, “Basic”, “Intermediate” and “Advanced” options. Additional information is also available for each competence to assist the respondent in choosing an appropriate level:


2.3 Criteria for Inclusion

Although 28 countries participated in this study, it was necessary to decide upon the baseline criteria to ensure that the volume and the quality of responses were suitable for country level analysis. The following criteria were adopted: 1. A competence profile per country is analysed when there are 10 or more valid

questionnaires completed. 2. A country profile would be generated if there are more than 50 valid

questionnaires completed and at least one competence profile with 10 or more valid cases.

On completion of this round of the survey, the following countries met these criteria:

Belgium Finland Latvia Romania Bosnia-Herzegovina Ireland Malta Spain Italy* Norway*

*Italy and Norway participated in the survey, but data from these countries was collected using a separate tool which was already in use locally. The function of the tools was exactly the same, but some differences exist in terms of demographic data collected and – especially – in terms of granularity of competences described in the questionnaire. The Italian-Norwegian tool used a self-assessment against 156 categories instead of 44 e-CF based competences. The research team carried out a separate analysis task to map the Italian and Norwegian results back to the results gained from the e-CF based survey. In order to convert the data collected through the Italian-Norwegian tool for use for this survey, the following steps were taken:

1) cross reference between slightly different ways of collecting personal information in the preliminary pages of the questionnaire;

2) cross reference between profiles – 13 profiles map 1 to 1, the remaining five survey profiles were expressed as a linear combination of two different profiles;

3) expert check on the compatibility of metrics used in both tools; each profile is described through an array of weighting factors that indicate the relevance of


each competence to the single profile, but the consistency between the different descriptions was deemed very good;

4) identification of an optimized and controlled algorithm that minimizes the maximum distance between calculated proximity scores in both questionnaires1.

2.4 Personal Results

On completion of the survey, the respondent is presented with their personal results. The personal results are displayed on a graphical “radar” split into segments (one for each competence) as illustrated in the image to the right. The profile that is closest to the competences chosen by the respondent (their “proximity profile”) is shown along with a proximity index “88.56%” in this case. Below the “radar” is a list of the competences that the individual should look to improve, and competences which are held at levels over and above what is required for the profile. The respondent can also review their proximity to the other profiles and export any of the reports in PDF format to review.

1The algorithm is based on the simplex method for discrete linear optimization, constrained to

4 integer numbers. This scientific part of the work was carried out through a project associated with a university exam of “Optimization” at the SUPSI (Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana, www.supsi.ch); further details available in a dedicated document edited by Giovanni Franza to be published in “biblioteca AICA” (online library service for members of AICA, www.aicanet.it).

http://www.supsi.ch/


3 Respondent Demographics

The following section provides an overview of the demographic of the respondents from Latvia. Again we underline that those results are based on the following conditions:

The survey sample was dependent on the available contact database used to promote the survey in each country; there may be some variance between the membership of this contact database and the full population of ICT professionals in the country.

The sample composition reflects the participation of mostly LIKTA members.

The two criteria above also apply to the samples of all other countries who took part in the survey. Therefore the comparisons between the Latvian results and the European average should be considered as very important but also as a preliminary indication which may require more extensive validation.

3.1 Respondents by Country

The CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe was conducted from September 2010 until March 2011 across 28 countries in Europe and beyond. Overall 1918 IT Practitioners participated in the survey. The percentage of participants by country is represented in the graphic below.

15%

13%

10%

10%

10%

9%

5%

5%

5%

3%

15%

Italy

Finland

Ireland

Belgium

Malta

Spain

Norway

Latvia

Bosnia-Herz.

Romania

Other

Total: 1918

Figure 1 – Respondents by Country Latvia had limited participation in this survey, 92 cases, which allows us to analyse the Latvian situation quite thoroughly but only at a top-level, and therefore only a few IT profiles can be examined in depth.


3.2 Respondents by Age

The Latvian respondents to the survey represented various age groups as highlighted in the figure below2. The average age of respondents in Latvia is around 31.8 years old; Latvians are the youngest IT professionals across Europe, about nine years younger than the European average age which is 41 years. A large number (55%) of respondents fall in the “under 30” segment, which is more than three times the rate at European level. The “31-40” age group shows only a slight difference compared to the European average and the number of Latvian respondents that are “over 40” is significantly smaller than the proportion across Europe: 13% in Latvia versus a European. average of 49%.

5.4%

16.8%

34.3%30.1%

18.8%

55.4%

7.6%

31.5%

< 30 yr 31 .. 40 yr 41 .. 50 yr > 50 yr

LatviaEurope

Figure 2 – Respondents by Age

The same kind of distribution by age classes has been found for the two IT Profiles analysed (IT Systems Analyst and IT Trainer) even if with a lower proportion of “under 30” compared to the Latvian rate (35% and 45% respectively) and a little bit higher than the “over 40” segment (8% for IT Systems Analysts and 9% IT Trainer). National Expert Comment: These results show that overall a younger proportion of the population in Latvia have responded. This factor has greatly influenced the outcome of the rest of the results of this survey.

3.3 Respondents by Gender

The gender results show a percentage of female IT professionals in Latvia in line with the European average.

2 Note: as “<24 yr” and “>60 yr” classes count for a low % of total assessments (about 3% each), they have been

grouped into the adjacent class, as a result only four age classes are shown: “<30 yr”, “31-40 yr”, “41-40 yr”, “>50 yr”


85%

84%

15%

16%

Latvia

Europe

Female

Male

Figure 3 – Respondents by Gender

The two profiles analysed for Latvia show a higher rate of female IT professionals (31% for IT Systems Analyst and 45% for IT Trainer). Whereas the IT Trainer female proportion is equal to the European rate, the IT Systems Analyst rate shows a remarkable gap with European colleagues, where the average female rate is 15%.

3.4 Respondents by Education Level

The respondents were asked to select the highest education level they had achieved. A large majority (78%) of the respondents for Latvia have achieved at least a degree level qualification, showing the importance of third level qualifications in gaining employment in the sector. The survey results show that the Latvian rate is in line with the European one, where the average rate is 79%. Even if the investment in 4th level education in Latvia is clearly visible with 43% of respondents having either a Masters or a PhD qualification, Latvian results are slightly lower than the European average (51%).

35.9%

7.6%

2.8%

17.9%

28.2%

45.4%

5.7%6.5%

34.8%

15.2%

None of the

above

Secondary

School

Diploma

University

Bachelors

Degree

University

Masters

Degree

Doctorate

(Phd.)

Latvia

Europe

Figure 4 – Respondents by Education Level

In Latvia two IT profiles have been analysed; for both, the level of education is significantly higher than the overall Latvian average; for IT Trainer (91% are graduates) and IT Systems Analyst (85%). In particular, the IT Trainer profile shows 55% of 4th level qualifications which is higher than the Latvian average (43%) and in line with the European average for this profile (57%). A different situation appears for IT Systems Analyst profile, which shows that 38% of respondents have a 4th level


qualification. This is slightly lower than the Latvian general average (43%) and also lower than the European average for this profile (56%).

3.5 Respondents by Educational Field

The broad spread of educational backgrounds of the IT practitioners points to the fact that the IT profession is both attractive and accessible to graduates from different faculties. The ever present demand for IT practitioners have lead to IT roles being filled through the hiring and retraining of workers from non-informatics backgrounds. In Latvia we can see that 34% of respondents come from an educational background where IT was a side subject or not significant in their studies. This result is in line with European figures and suggests that there may be some difficulties for Latvian companies to source candidates with IT qualifications for their advertised roles. The e-Skills Foresights eSkills In Europe report (CEPIS, 2007) suggested that “…the ICT industry could be facing shortages of up to 70,000 IT practitioners per year in Europe, as supply falls short of demand”. It is clear that the IT industry still does not only rely on IT practitioners from IT educational backgrounds to meet their needs.

26%

25%

8%

12%63%

66%Latvia

Europe

Main focusSide subjectNot significant

Figure 5 – Respondents by Educational Field

As regard the Latvian analysed IT profiles, only the IT Systems Analyst profile shows a predominance of IT-focused education (77%), slightly higher than the respective European rate (73%), while IT Trainer is a profile for which a non IT-focused education is more common; in fact the proportion of Latvian IT Trainers with an IT background is 45%, clearly lower than the European proportion at 57% for the same profile.

3.6 Respondents by Industry Sector

Latvia has a lower number of respondents coming from the IT supply side compared to the European average, with 40% of respondents in Latvia focused on supply side activities compared to 49% across Europe. Latvian data show that both analysed profiles are focused mainly on the IT demand side:

IT Systems Analysts come from the demand side of IT industry for 54% of respondents, while at European level they are only 44%.


40%

49%

60%

51%

Latvia

Europe

IT demand side

IT supply side

y

IT Trainers come from the demand side with 73% of respondents, a proportion significantly higher than the European proportion of 49%.

3.7 Respondents by Enterprise Size

The comparison between the Latvian distribution of respondents by enterprise size and the European one shows a clear shift towards smaller enterprises. In fact, in Latvia 28% of the 92 respondents work in micro organisations (1-10 employees), a larger proportion than the European one (11%); while only 16% of Latvian respondents work in large organisations with 1000+ employees, compared to a significantly higher proportion for Europe (34%).

24.1%

15.7%

11.2% 11.9%

22.2%20.8%

33.9%

13.3%

19.3%

27.7%

1 - 10 11 - 50 51 - 250 251 - 1000 1000+

Latvia

Europe

Figure 7 – Respondents by Enterprise Size

The trend towards micro organisations is even more prominent when looking at the IT profiles: in fact there is a much more significant number of respondents working in micro organisations (1-10 employees): 42% for IT Systems Analyst and 44% for IT Trainer (the European rate for these profiles is 15% and 11% respectively); moreover the proportion of respondents in large organisations is clearly lower: 0% for IT Systems Analyst and 11% for the IT Trainer profile (the European rate for the profiles is 36% and 29% respectively).

Figure 6 – Respondents by Industry Sector


3.8 Respondents by Professional Status

The majority of Latvian respondents hold full time positions3 (77%), which is lower than the European average. Both of the analysed IT profiles have a slightly lower rate: 69% for IT Systems Analyst and 73% for IT Trainer.

3.6%

77.2%

10.9%12.0%9.0%

87.4%

Full time employee Part time employee /

Self-employed

Student /

Unemployed /

Retired

Latvia

Europe

Figure 8 – Respondents by Professional Status

3.9 Respondents by ICT Profile (based on declared profile)

The figure below shows the distribution of the IT profiles chosen by the respondents during the survey registration (before starting the assessment). This subjective point of view is based on their gained experience and the actual work role they are doing. It differs from “Proximity Profile” as explained in paragraph 4.1. Almost all of the 18 IT profiles from which the respondents were asked to choose their role (during the registration phase) had some level of response. Three of the Latvian self-declared profiles had a notable difference with the respondent rate of their European colleagues; the IT Manager profile has been chosen by 10.9% of the Latvian respondents, while across Europe the rate of this choice is 23.6%; the Software Developer profile has been chosen by 20.7% of the Latvian respondents, while across Europe the rate of this choice is 12.9%; the third clear difference resulted for the IT Administrator responses, where 13.0% of Latvian respondents take up this role (second highest rate in Europe) against 5.3% of their European colleagues. From the 18 proposed profiles, only two profiles have not been chosen by anyone in Latvia: Integration & Testing Engineer and Network Manager.

3 Note: as “Full time employee” choice counts more than 85% of total assessments, the other items were grouped as

follow: “Part time employee / Self-employed” and “Student / Unemployed / Retired”


10.9%

7.6%

2.2%

1.1%

3.3%

4.3%

7.6%

8.7%

20.7%

0.0%

5.4%

5.4%

2.2%

0.0%

13.0%

4.3%

1.1%

2.2%

23.6%

2.8%

1.6%

2.1%

5.4%

5.7%

12.9%

3.6%

12.9%

1.2%

4.8%

2.6%

1.4%

2.0%

5.3%

4.2%

2.7%

5.4%

IT Manager P01

IT Quality Manager & Auditor P02

IT Client Manager P03

IT Sales & Mktg Consultant P04

IT Applications Consultant P05

Business Analyst P06

IT Project Manager P07

IT Systems Analyst P08

Software Developer P09

Integr. & Testing Engineer P10

IT Systems Architect P11

IT Security Manager P12

Database Administrator P13

Network Manager P14

IT Administrator P15

IT Systems Engineer P16

Service Support Manager P17

IT Trainer P18

Latvia

Europe

Figure 9 – Respondents by ICT Profile


4 Proximity Profiles and Skills Evaluation

Each respondent evaluates their own competence against the 44 competences provided, using the following scale: None: none or almost no knowledge on the topic, confused ideas Basic: knowledge of major concepts, but not exhaustive Medium: knowledge of concepts and applicative capability, some direct experiences High: in-depth and thorough knowledge of concepts and applicative capability with comprehensive experience in complex context A Knowledge Index (KI) has been computed for each competence, using a scale of 0 to 3: KI = ( # of answers “none” * 0 + # of answers “basic” * 1 + # of answers “medium” * 2 + # of answers “high” * 3) / (# of answers) The proximity profile for each respondent is the profile that best fits with the competences that he/she has declared. The proximity is represented as a percentage.

4.1 Respondents by Proximity Profile

Based on the outcome of the calculated proximity profiles we can see a picture of IT profiles emerge from the competences declared by the Latvian respondents.

Latvia Europe

7 154

4 80

5 51

1 52

0 41

1 45

0 153

13 127

7 231

6 126

8 85

4 60

4 68

2 64

8 165

6 96

5 163

11 157

# of respondents

7.6%

4.3%

5.4%

1.1%

0.0%

1.1%

0.0%

14.1%

7.6%

6.5%

8.7%

4.3%

4.3%

2.2%

8.7%

6.5%

5.4%

12.0%

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

Figure 10 – Respondents by Proximity Profile

A high rate of respondents has competences for the roles of IT Systems Analyst, IT Trainer, IT Systems Architect and IT Administrator. The IT Systems Analyst profile


shows the highest rate (14.1%) in Europe (the European average is 6.6%). For the IT Trainer role, Latvia scores the second highest rate in Europe (12.0% versus a European average of 8.2%). Even for the IT Systems Architect role, Latvia scores the highest rate in Europe (more than twice the European average – 8.7% versus 4.4%). The fourth profile is the IT Administrator: the Latvian rate is 8.7% and equal to the European average of 8.6%.

The main differences compared to European results are found for:

IT Systems Analyst (14.1% of Latvian respondents had competences for this profile while the proportion among European colleagues is 6.6%).

IT Project Manager (none of the Latvian IT professionals declared they had the required competences while across Europe the rate is 8.0%).

Even if the difference is small compared to the European average, we report that none of the Latvian IT professionals have the competences to act as an IT Applications Consultant.

4.2 Comparison between Professional Profile and Proximity Profile

The analysis of the original profile selection made by the IT practitioners and the proximity profile i.e. the profile that best fits with the competences that he/she has declared shows a large variance for many of the profiles. As we can see from Figure 11, the profile Software Developer is a declared profile for 21% of the respondents from Latvia, but an analysis of their competences leads to only 8% of these practitioners having the necessary competence for that particular role. This trend cannot be found at European level where the gap, even if present, cannot be considered significant. In Latvia, this issue is also notable with IT Project Manager. This is a declared profile for 8% of the Latvian respondents, but none of them have the necessary competences for that profile. This trend, even if with a smaller gap, is replicated across Europe, as seen in Figure 12, where 13% of European respondents declared they were IT

Project Managers, but only 8% of these practitioners had the required competences. In general, the difference between the declared and the calculated professional profile highlights the importance of the level of competence granularity to build up each profile. Work experience after the education curriculum contributes in a

Figure 11 – Software Developer: declared and calculated profile

Figure 12 – IT Project Manager: declared and calculated profile

21%

13%

8%

12%

Latvia

Europe

Declared profile

Calculated profileSoftware Developer P09

8%

13%

0%

8%

Latvia

Europe

Declared profile

Calculated profileIT Project Manager P07


substantial way to competence enrichment; often not related with the official role inside the organisation. This is the reason why in general the perceived declared profiles highly differ from the calculated profile based specifically on competence level: only 25% of declared profiles of Latvian respondents in the European survey match with the calculated profile (21% is the European average). Please note that the other roles represented a percentage that was too small for an in-depth analysis.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

Declared profile

Calculated profileLatvia

Figure 13 – Comparison between chosen (declared) professional profile and proximity

profile (calculated)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

Declared profile

Calculated profileEurope

Figure 14 – Europe – Comparison between chosen (declared) professional profile and

proximity profile (calculated)


For the reasons outlined above, we will only use the calculated profiles data for the analysis.

4.3 Analysis of Skills Diffusion

Figure 15 below provides a comparison for Latvia and Europe of the ICT competence Knowledge Index for the five competence areas: Plan, Build, Run, Enable, Manage.

1.56

1.61

1.73

1.17

1.23

1.66

1.67

1.68

1.38

1.51

Plan (A)

Build (B)

Run (C)

Enable (D)

Manage (E)

LatviaEurope

Figure 15 – Knowledge index by competence areas

In Latvia it appears that the Knowledge Index (KI) is lower overall than the equivalent for Europe. The full value of each KI is 3.0. In particular it appears that the only area with a Knowledge Index higher than the European average is in the Run area (1.73). All the remaining areas show some weaknesses, especially in the Enable and Manage areas. As regard the analysed IT profiles, the IT Systems Analyst scores better KI than IT Trainer, but both score lower KI than the corresponding European average. A more in-depth analysis of the Knowledge Indexes of each competence area is fundamental in order to design detailed training paths to cover the competence gaps for each proximity profile of each respondent.


5 Analysis

The 92 generated proximity profiles referred to 18 IT professional profiles (Figure 10). The eligibility criteria for the analysis of these profiles are as follows:

10 or more cases per country for each profile;

A proximity profile score higher than 40%. Following these criteria the following two profiles for Latvia were analysed:

1. IT Systems Analyst 2. IT Trainer

In this chapter a deeper analysis of the data for each of these two profiles is presented.

5.1 IT Systems Analyst

The following analysis is related to the content of section 7.3.1. 85% of Latvian IT Systems Analysts have attained a university degree or higher, which is slightly higher than the 80% of IT Systems Analysts in Europe. Only 38% of Latvian IT Systems Analysts have attained a 4th level qualification (Masters or PhD), which is lower than the European average of 56%. In Latvia 77% of IT Systems Analysts come from an education background where IT is the main focus, clearly higher than the 66% of all Latvian respondents and slightly higher than the 73% of European IT Systems Analysts.

1.80

1.98

1.60

1.11

1.14

1.85

2.08

1.73

1.34

1.42

Plan (A)

Build (B)

Run (C)

Enable (D)

Manage (E)

LatviaEurope

IT Systems Analyst

Figure 16 - IT Systems Analyst

Latvian IT Systems Analysts are 35.1 years old, the youngest across Europe, 6.6 years younger than their European colleagues, who are 41.7.


Quite a majority of the IT Systems Analysts who responded are female (31% - the highest rate in Europe), which is twice the 15% female proportion for all Latvian respondents and twice the 15% European average also. Latvian IT Systems Analysts work in the IT supply side of IT industry with 46%, with a clear difference to the 56% for the IT supply side across Europe. Latvian IT Systems Analysts show a lower Knowledge Index than the European average for the profile in all five areas (1.80 Plan area versus 1.85, 1.98 Build area versus 2.08, 1.60 Run area versus 1.73, 1.11 Enable area versus 1.34 and 1.14 Manage area versus 1.42).

5.2 IT Trainer

The following analysis is related to the content of section 7.3.2. 91% of Latvian IT Trainers have attained a university degree or higher, which is slightly higher than the 85% of IT Trainers in Europe. Moreover, 55% of Latvian IT Trainers have attained a 4th level qualification (Masters or PhD), which is only slightly lower than the European average of 57%. A large proportion (55%) of Latvian IT Trainers have come from an education background where IT was either a side subject or not significant in the curriculum, compared to 34% of all Latvian respondents and with 43% of the European average. Latvian IT Trainers are 33.8 years old, about 7 years younger than their European colleagues, who are 41.1 years old. Quite a large number of the IT Trainers who responded were female (45%), which is markedly higher than the 15% female proportion for all Latvian respondents. IT Trainer is the professional profile in which women are most represented across Europe (41%).

1.27

0.94

1.11

1.27

1.33

1.36

1.30

1.20

1.35

1.46

Plan (A)

Build (B)

Run (C)

Enable (D)

Manage (E)

LatviaEurope

IT Trainer

Figure 17 - IT Trainer


Latvian IT Trainers were mainly drawn from the IT demand side (73%), significantly higher than the 49% of IT supply side across Europe. The majority of Latvian IT Trainers work in micro organisations (44%), a high rate compared to European colleagues (11%), and higher too than the overall domestic rate (28%). However we have to consider that the source of these figures is a small sample: 11 cases. Latvian IT Trainers show a lower Knowledge Index than the European average for the profile in all five areas: 1.27 Plan area versus 1.36; 0.95 Build area (the worst across Europe) versus 1.30; 1.11 Run area versus 1.20, 1.27 Enable area versus 1.35, 1.33 Manage area versus 1.46).


6 Conclusions

The following section draws conclusions based on the analysis of the segmentation of two profiles that arose from the 92 respondents from Latvia. The data gathered in this first round of the CEPIS Survey prove a high level of interest from professionals in reflecting about their own competences and their profile. However, from a statistical point of view, the results need to be treated with some degree of caution, as the sample of voluntary respondents who accepted the invitation from their CEPIS Member Society could prove to be biased and not fully representative of the total community of national IT professionals. Figure 18 below shows one dimension of the labour market represented by the distribution of profiles in respect of the size of organisations in which each single IT professional profile works. The distribution of profiles has been segmented on the basis of the dimension of the organisation in which respondents have declared that they work. There is some evidence that the majority of Latvian respondents work in micro organisations. In particular, for the two IT profiles analysed, the proportions are both greater than 40%. As regard IT Systems Analyst there is a limited impact in medium-large organisations: 84% work in organisations with 250 employees or less. However we have to consider that the source of these figures is a relatively small sample: 24 cases spread across three profiles.

28%

42%

44%

33%

42%

11%

40%

17%

44%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

1 .. 10 11 .. 250 251 +

Figure 18 – Profile distribution by enterprise size


The analysis of profile segmentation per profile by distribution of age (section 7.4.1) shows that the general average is around 38 years in Latvia against a European average age of 41. As in other countries, for Latvia there is no need to attract younger people to the IT Profession. Latvia has the second lowest amount of IT professionals “over 50” years of age (5%). As regard the IT profiles analysed, the distribution by age is quite similar to the overall one, that is, a very low amount of “over 50” IT professionals. The segmentation of the profiles by gender (section 7.4.3) provides evidence that the female representation in Latvia is really centred on the two IT profiles analysed; in fact in both profiles the representation of women is among the top two largest in Europe, while overall, the proportion of women in Latvia is 15%, that is very similar to the European average (16%). The results of the education level (section 7.4.4 and 7.4.5) survey questions suggest that there is a high level of attainment of degrees. For the two analysed profiles Latvia’s rate is higher than the European rate. In respect of the profile distribution by IT education background, there is probably some evidence to suggest an insufficient IT education level for the IT Trainer profile: only 45% have an IT background while at European level the rate is 57%. The majority of the Latvian IT Professionals work in the demand side of the IT industry: the same for each IT profile analysed, while, at European level, results indicate that there is a predominance of the supply side for both profiles (IT Systems Analyst and IT Trainer). For the level of Knowledge Index (section 4.3) for Latvian respondents, it appears there are quite low results for four out of five areas, in comparison to the European level. A deeper analysis of the Knowledge Indexes compared to each profile requirement is fundamental in order to design detailed training paths to cover the competence gaps for each proximity profile of each respondent. For further information on this study please see www.cepis.org or www.likta.lv.

http://www.cepis.org/


7 Annex

7.1 Description of Additional Segmentation

The research has been conducted via an e-CF based web questionnaire. To enhance the differentiation of the 18 profiles gathered: an additional segmentation of eight more ICT competencies have been introduced on the basic nucleus of 36 as outlined here below.

European e-Competence Framework 2.0 CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe

B.1. Design and Development B.1a. Design and Development (Infrastructure and Software Environment)

B.1b. Design and Development (Data Model and Application Logics)

B.1c. Design and Development (User Interfaces)

B.2. Systems Integration B.2a. Systems Integration (Configuration and Performance Control)

B.2b. Systems Integration (Package Selection and Customization)

C.4. Problem Management C.4a. Problem Management (Process)

C.4b. Problem Management (Network Operation)

C.4c. Problem Management (Computer System Operation)

C.4d. Problem Management (Database Administration)

C.4e. Problem Management (Application Maintenance)

D.9. Personnel Development D.9a. Personnel Development (Competence Analysis)

D.9b. Personnel Development (Resource Management)

This additional segmentation has proven valuable in improving the uniqueness of each job profile.

For instance, all CEPIS Survey responses till 11/2/2011 were analysed, and in this sample only 20 respondents had identified themselves as Network Managers in initial pages (before entering the detailed questionnaire): 17 of them got a proximity value to the same profile in the range 51% to 100%, whilst the remaining three got values between 0 and 18% (maybe they didn't complete the questionnaire); therefore, these three respondents were discarded from mean value calculation.


Self-declared

Network Network Mgr DB Admin Network Mgr DB Admin

Managers 80.81% 78.08% 80.65% 50.47%

1 4% 3% 6% 4%

2 97% 94% 98% 60%

3 83% 87% 88% 79%

4 77% 55% 81% 33%

5 75% 70% 84% 74%

6 100% 98% 100% 89%

7 95% 84% 95% 76%

8 99% 98% 100% 89%

9 98% 78% 99% 45%

10 92% 89% 99% 77%

11 64% 65% 18% 19%

12 65% 74% 62% 12%

13 70% 64% 63% 18%

14 88% 84% 83% 45%

15 0% 0% 0% 0%

16 86% 74% 81% 12%

17 58% 81% 54% 35%

18 61% 70% 58% 25%

19 54% 67% 51% 21%

20 76% 60% 75% 69%

E-CF 2.0 (pure) enhanced e-CF

Results with the “Additional e-CF Segmentation” are shown in columns 4 & 5 in the above table:

80.65% average proximity to the Network Manager profile,

50.47% average proximity to the Database Administrator profile; this means that a Network Manager normally does not have all detailed competences to act as a good Database Administrator. Columns 2 & 3 show simulated results of data processing with the original set of 36 e-CF competences:

80.81% proximity to the Network Manager profile (similar to the previous result),

78.08% proximity to the Database Administrator profile. In this case, the Database Administrator profile can hardly be distinguished from the Network Manager profile (as it appears that they require nearly the same set of "pure" e-CF competences). This shows that if we do not split different technology contents of the various competences, we are not able to differentiate between some technical profiles.


7.2 ICT Competence – Knowledge Index

1.59

1.46

1.21

1.74

1.78

1.68

1.91

1.13

1.67

1.59

1.55

1.94

1.72

1.81

1.83

1.19

IS & Business Strategy Alignment A01

Service Level Management A02

Business Plan Development A03

Product or Project Planning A04

Architecture Design A05

Application Design A06

Technology Watching A07

Sustainable development A08

LatviaEurope

Figure A1 – ICT Competence – Knowledge index – Plan

1.73

1.65

1.63

1.64

1.49

1.61

1.52

1.60

1.62

1.67

1.65

1.70

1.55

1.72

1.66

1.75

Design & Development (infrastructure &

sw environment) B01a

Design & Development (data model &

application logics) B01b

Design & Development (user interface)

B01c

Systems Integration (configuration &

performance control) B02a

Systems Integration (package selection &

customization) B02b

Testing B03

Solution Deployment B04

Documentation Production B05

LatviaEurope

Figure A2 – ICT Competence – Knowledge index – Build


2.21

1.85

1.68

2.05

1.45

1.63

1.37

1.59

2.03

1.83

1.74

1.87

1.37

1.57

1.35

1.66

User Support C01

Change Support C02

Service Delivery C03

Problem Management (process) C04a

Problem Management (network

operation) C04b

Problem Management (computer system

operation) C04c

Problem Management (database

administration) C04d

Problem Management (application

maintenance) C04e

LatviaEurope

Figure A3 – ICT Competence – Knowledge index – Run

1.40

1.30

1.42

1.25

1.18

0.79

0.95

1.00

1.21

1.11

1.30

1.44

1.50

1.55

1.41

1.28

0.94

0.99

1.25

1.57

1.66

1.55

Information Security Strategy

Development D01

ICT Quality Strategy Development D02

Education & Training Provision D03

Purchasing D04

Sales Proposal Development D05

Channel Management D06

Sales Management D07

Contract Management D08

Personnel Development (competence

analysis) D09aPersonnel Development (resource

management) D09bInformation & Knowledge Management

D10

LatviaEurope

Figure A4 – ICT Competence – Knowledge index – Enable


1.09

1.20

1.29

1.24

1.33

1.18

1.20

1.30

1.23

1.26

1.62

1.47

1.61

1.63

1.49

1.55

1.41

1.55

Forecast Development E01

Project & Portfolio Management E02

Risk Management E03

Relationship Management E04

Process Improvement E05

ICT Quality Management E06

Business Change Management E07

Information Security Management E08

IT Governance E09

LatviaEurope

Figure A5 – ICT Competence – Knowledge index – Manage


7.3 Proximity Profiles – Details

7.3.1 IT Systems Analyst

Latvia

IT Systems Analyst

Base: 13 respondents

Professional status

Gender IT EducationEnterprise size

Age Industry sector Educational level

69.2%

0.0%

15.4%

15.4%

Full time

employee

Part time

employee

Self-employed

Student/

Unemployed/

Retired

7.7% 7.7%

46.2%

23.1%

15.4%

None of the

above

Secondary

School

Diploma

University

Bachelors

Degree

University

Masters

Degree

Doctorate

(Phd.)

76.9%

15.4%

7.7%

IT was the

main focus of

my education

IT was a side

subject

IT was not

significant in my

curriculum

41.7%

16.7%

25.0%

16.7%

0.0%

1 - 10 11 - 50 51 - 250 251 - 1000 1000+

53.8%

46.2%

Mainly on IT

demand side

Mainly on IT

supply side

38.5% 38.5%

15.4%

7.7%

..-30 yr 31-40 yr 41-50 yr 51-.. yr

Mean: 35.1

30.8%

69.2%

FemaleMale


Latvia Europe

Cases 13 127

Age

Mean 35.1 41.7

GenderFemale 31% 15%

Male 69% 85%

EducationSecondary & other 15% 20%University (Masters/Bachelors/Phd) 85% 80%

IT EducationalIT was the main focus of my education 77% 73%

IT was a side subject 15% 19%

IT was not significant in my curriculum 8% 8%

Current professional statusFull time employee 69% 85%

Part time employee 0% 4%

Self-employed 15% 7%

Student / Unemployed / Retired 15% 4%

Number of employees1 - 10 42% 15%

11 - 50 17% 15%

51 - 250 25% 16%

251 - 1000 17% 19%

1000+ 0% 36%

IndustryMy focus is mainly on IT demand side 54% 44%

My focus is mainly on IT supply side organizations 46% 56%

Proximity index 87.8 88.5

IT Systems Analyst


Latvia Europe

Proximity index 87.8 88.5Min 62 41Max 100 100

Knowledge index

A- Plan 1.80 1.85A01) IS & Business Strategy Alignment 2.00 1.74A02) Service Level Management 1.54 1.43A03) Business Plan Development 1.15 1.56A04) Product or Project Planning 2.00 2.03A05) Architecture Design 2.23 2.06A06) Application Design 2.54 2.72A07) Technology Watching 1.92 2.02A08) Sustainable development 1.00 1.21

B- Build 1.98 2.08B01a) Design & Development (infrastructure & sw environment) 2.15 1.95B01b) Design & Development (data model & application logics) 2.31 2.33B01c) Design & Development (user interface) 2.23 2.23B02a) Systems Integration (configuration & performance control) 1.77 2.07B02b) Systems Integration (package selection & customization) 2.08 2.13B03) Testing 2.08 2.17B04) Solution Deployment 1.54 1.80B05) Documentation Production 1.69 1.95

C- Run 1.60 1.73C01) User Support 2.23 2.10C02) Change Support 2.00 2.06C03) Service Delivery 1.54 1.72C04a) Problem Management (process) 1.85 1.87C04b) Problem Management (network operation) 1.08 1.25C04c) Problem Management (computer system operation) 1.15 1.47C04d) Problem Management (database administration) 1.38 1.57C04e) Problem Management (application maintenance) 1.54 1.76

D- Enable 1.11 1.34D01) Information Security Strategy Development 0.85 1.37D02) ICT Quality Strategy Development 1.15 1.58D03) Education & Training Provision 1.46 1.68D04) Purchasing 1.08 1.21D05) Sales Proposal Development 1.54 1.27D06) Channel Management 0.69 0.79D07) Sales Management 0.77 0.83D08) Contract Management 0.69 1.07D09a) Personnel Development (competence analysis) 1.38 1.64D09b) Personnel Development (resource management) 1.15 1.70D10) Information & Knowledge Management 1.46 1.65

E- Manage 1.14 1.42E01) Forecast Development 1.08 1.07E02) Project & Portfolio Management 1.15 1.62E03) Risk Management 1.23 1.29E04) Relationship Management 1.23 1.45E05) Process Improvement 1.23 1.69E06) ICT Quality Management 1.23 1.40E07) Business Change Management 1.15 1.34E08) Information Security Management 0.92 1.39E09) IT Governance 1.00 1.50

IT Systems Analyst


7.3.2 IT Trainer

Latvia

IT Trainer

Base: 11 respondents

Professional status

Gender IT EducationEnterprise size

Age Industry sector Educational level

72.7%

0.0%

9.1%

18.2%

Full time

employee

Part time

employee

Self-employed

Student/

Unemployed/

Retired

0.0%

9.1%

36.4% 36.4%

18.2%

None of the

above

Secondary

School

Diploma

University

Bachelors

Degree

University

Masters

Degree

Doctorate

(Phd.)

45.5%

54.5%

0.0%

IT was the

main focus of

my education

IT was a side

subject

IT was not

significant in my

curriculum

44.4%

0.0%

11.1%

33.3%

11.1%

1 - 10 11 - 50 51 - 250 251 - 1000 1000+

72.7%

27.3%

Mainly on IT

demand side

Mainly on IT

supply side

45.5%

36.4%

9.1% 9.1%

..-30 yr 31-40 yr 41-50 yr 51-.. yr

Mean: 33.8

45.5%

54.5%

FemaleMale

Latvia Europe

Cases 11 157

Age

Mean 33.8 41.1

GenderFemale 45% 41%

Male 55% 59%

EducationSecondary & other 9% 15%University (Masters/Bachelors/Phd) 91% 85%

IT EducationalIT was the main focus of my education 45% 57%

IT was a side subject 55% 30%

IT was not significant in my curriculum 0% 13%

Current professional statusFull time employee 73% 87%

Part time employee 0% 1%

Self-employed 9% 7%

Student / Unemployed / Retired 18% 5%

Number of employees1 - 10 44% 11%

11 - 50 0% 13%

51 - 250 11% 21%

251 - 1000 33% 25%

1000+ 11% 29%

IndustryMy focus is mainly on IT demand side 73% 49%

My focus is mainly on IT supply side organizations 27% 51%

Proximity index 66.8 72.9

IT Trainer


Latvia Europe

Proximity index 66.8 72.9Min 40 40Max 84 100

Knowledge index

A- Plan 1.27 1.36A01) IS & Business Strategy Alignment 1.73 1.44A02) Service Level Management 1.09 1.31A03) Business Plan Development 1.45 1.44A04) Product or Project Planning 1.55 1.83A05) Architecture Design 1.09 1.17A06) Application Design 0.91 1.39A07) Technology Watching 1.09 1.35A08) Sustainable development 1.27 0.96

B- Build 0.94 1.30B01a) Design & Development (infrastructure & sw environment) 0.64 1.04B01b) Design & Development (data model & application logics) 0.64 1.17B01c) Design & Development (user interface) 0.82 1.18B02a) Systems Integration (configuration & performance control) 0.55 0.99B02b) Systems Integration (package selection & customization) 0.55 0.91B03) Testing 1.55 1.57B04) Solution Deployment 0.73 1.18B05) Documentation Production 2.09 2.34

C- Run 1.11 1.20C01) User Support 1.82 1.81C02) Change Support 1.09 1.32C03) Service Delivery 1.09 1.31C04a) Problem Management (process) 1.64 1.46C04b) Problem Management (network operation) 0.82 0.83C04c) Problem Management (computer system operation) 0.73 0.89C04d) Problem Management (database administration) 0.82 0.85C04e) Problem Management (application maintenance) 0.91 1.11

D- Enable 1.27 1.35D01) Information Security Strategy Development 1.64 1.16D02) ICT Quality Strategy Development 1.55 1.36D03) Education & Training Provision 2.09 1.97D04) Purchasing 1.09 1.25D05) Sales Proposal Development 1.09 1.22D06) Channel Management 0.64 0.82D07) Sales Management 0.91 0.96D08) Contract Management 1.09 1.14D09a) Personnel Development (competence analysis) 1.36 1.73D09b) Personnel Development (resource management) 1.00 1.62D10) Information & Knowledge Management 1.55 1.66

E- Manage 1.33 1.46E01) Forecast Development 1.00 1.12E02) Project & Portfolio Management 1.36 1.46E03) Risk Management 1.64 1.39E04) Relationship Management 1.27 1.68E05) Process Improvement 1.36 1.68E06) ICT Quality Management 1.27 1.62E07) Business Change Management 1.36 1.62E08) Information Security Management 1.18 1.14E09) IT Governance 1.55 1.46

IT Trainer


7.4 Profile Segmentation

7.4.1 Profile Distribution by Age

55%

38%

45%

39%

54%

45%

5%

8%

9%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

<30yr 31..50 >50yr

Total Total

P01 IT Manager 8% 8%

P02 IT Quality Manager & Auditor 4% 4%

P03 IT Client Manager 5% 3%

P04 IT Sales & Mktg Consultant 1% 3%

P05 IT Applications Consultant 0% 2%

P06 Business Analyst 1% 2%

P07 IT Project Manager 0% 8%

P08 IT Systems Analyst 14% 7%

P09 Software Developer 8% 12%

P10 Integration & Testing Engineer 7% 7%

P11 IT Systems Architect 9% 4%

P12 IT Security Manager 4% 3%

P13 Database Administrator 4% 4%

P14 Network Manager 2% 3%

P15 IT Administrator 9% 9%

P16 IT Systems Engineer 7% 5%

P17 Service Support Manager 5% 9%

P18 IT Trainer 12% 8%

Total cases 92 1913

8%

51 5 322 1232

8% 8%20%

36 359

7% 5% 3%

10% 8% 9%

0%

0%

2% 4% 3%

11% 9% 5%

4% 3%

1% 4% 3%

2%

6% 4%

8% 4% 4%

11%

7% 8%

13% 13% 8%

6%

2% 3%

4% 9% 9%

1%

3% 1%

1% 2% 3%

2%

3% 6%

2% 3% 2%

5%

31-50 yr 51-.. yr

3% 6% 18%

..-30 yr

0%

0%

0%

0%

20%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

20%

0%

51-.. yr

40%

0%

0%

11%

8%

0%

14%

3%

11%

8%

3%

0%

19%

6%

0%

6%

10%

10%

31-50 yr

8%

6%

0%

3%

0%

0%

0%

2%

2%

8%

10%

10%

12%

14%

by Age ..-30 yr

4%

4%

10%

0%

0%

0%

0%

EuropeLatvia

(note: the profiles to be analyzed are those satisfying the condition of having 10 respondents or more)


7.4.2 Profile Distribution by Enterprise Size

28%

42%

44%

33%

42%

11%

40%

17%

44%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

1 .. 10 11 .. 250 251 +

Total Total



















Total cases 83 1455

10%0% 11% 9% 8%

Latvia Europe

251 +

15% 7%

11%

4%

163

1 .. 10 11 .. 250

8%

496

2%

6%

4%

5%

10%

796

17% 4% 12% 9% 9% 9%

23 27 33

9% 7% 3% 6%

4% 7% 9% 3%

10%

4% 4%

6% 6%

2%

4% 7%

4% 7% 0% 1%

0% 0% 6%

9% 15% 6% 5%

0% 7% 6% 2%

3%

3% 5%

9% 6%

5%

4% 7% 6% 6%

9% 4% 6% 7%

0% 0% 0% 10%

22% 19% 6% 9%

11%

6% 7%

1% 3%

8%

0% 0% 3% 3%

0% 0% 0% 4%

3% 1%

0% 0% 3% 3%

2% 2%

3% 2%

4% 5%

13% 4%

4% 0% 9% 6%

0% 7%

by Enterprise size 1 .. 10 11 .. 250 251 +



7.4.3 Profile Distribution by Gender

15%

31%

45%

85%

69%

55%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

Female Male

Total Total



















Total cases 92 1918

Maleby Gender Female Male Female

7% 4% 8%

0%

7% 8% 9% 8%

3%

0% 6% 2% 3%

1% 1% 3%

0% 0% 1% 2%

7% 0% 2% 2%

0% 0% 8% 8%

29% 12% 6% 7%

0% 9% 12% 12%

0% 8% 8% 6%

0% 10% 4% 5%

7% 4% 2% 3%

0% 5% 1% 4%

0% 3% 1% 4%

0% 10% 4% 10%

14 78 314 1604

36% 8% 21% 6%

Latvia Europe

0% 6% 9% 8%

2% 6%7% 6%



7.4.4 Profile Distribution by Educational Level

78%

85%

91%

22%

15%

9%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

University degree Diploma or less

Total Total



















Total cases 92 1907

Universityby Education LevelSecondary &

other

Secondary &

otherUniversity

5%

0%

8%

6%

3% 9%

3% 4%

15%

0%

0%

0%

0%

10%

10%

5%

10%

0%

0%

5%

20%

0%

15%

5%

3%

1%

0%

1%

0%

15%

7%

7%

8%

6%

6%

1%

6%

8%

3%

14%

6% 2%

3% 3%

3% 2%

1% 3%

5% 9%

6% 7%

13% 12%

6% 7%

4% 4%

2% 4%

4% 3%

5% 3%

15% 7%

9% 4%

8% 9%

6% 9%

Latvia Europe

20 72 395 1512 (note: the profiles to be analyzed are those satisfying the condition of having 10 respondents or more)


7.4.5 Profile Distribution by IT Education

66%

77%

45%

34%

23%

55%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

Main focus Secondary subjet

Total Total



















Total cases 92 1907

by IT Education Main focusSide/Not

significantMain focus

Side/Not

significant5% 13% 6% 11%

7% 0% 4% 5%

2% 13% 2% 3%

0% 3% 3% 3%

0% 0% 2% 2%

2% 0% 2% 3%

0% 0% 8% 8%

16% 10% 8% 5%

8% 6% 13% 10%

10% 0% 8% 4%

8% 10% 5% 3%

5% 3% 3% 3%

5% 3% 4% 3%

2% 3% 3% 5%

11% 3% 9% 7%

7% 6% 4% 6%

7% 9%

5% 6% 8% 9%

8% 19%

61 31 1201 706

Latvia Europe



7.4.6 Profile Distribution by IT Industry

60%

54%

73%

40%

46%

27%

Latvia (average)

IT Manager P01













Network Manager P14




IT Trainer P18

IT Demand side IT Supply side

Total Total



















Total cases 92 1637

by IT Industry Demand side Supply side Demand side Supply side

5% 11% 9% 9%

2% 8% 5% 5%

7% 3% 3% 3%

2% 0% 3% 3%

0% 0% 2% 2%

2% 0% 3% 2%

0% 0% 8% 8%

13% 16% 6% 8%

9% 5% 8% 13%

7% 5% 8% 6%

4% 16% 5% 5%

7% 0% 4% 3%

4% 5% 3% 4%

4% 0% 3% 3%

7% 11% 9% 5%

5% 8% 4% 3%

7% 3% 10% 9%

15% 8% 9% 9%

55 37 829 808

Latvia Europe

(Note: the profiles to be analyzed are those satisfying the condition of having 10 respondents or more.)

CEPIS Survey of Professional e-Competence in Europe · baseline criteria to ensure that the volume and the quality ... that the individual should look to ... CEPIS Survey of Professional

Documents