Individualisation without personalisation? The paradoxical logic of the quasi-market based employment services in the Lombardy Region

In the framework of a steady continuity in the political orientation, the Lombardy Region has developed a specific quasi-market oriented approach to welfare policies. This approach, initially promoted within health services, has progressively been extended to training and, more recently, labour policies, the latter accompanied by an increasing rhetoric about activation. The Dote system (literally: dowry or endowment) is the latest instrument identified both to deliver various services to the beneficiaries and to finance public and private bodies, accredited to provide them. Based on recent research results, the paper aims at disentangling the underlying logic of the Dote mechanism, as well at highlighting the implications for the territorial system of service provision, with particular regard to governance processes, roles of actors and activation approaches. In the Dote system, the persons who fulfil given requirements “choose” among the accredited bodies the one they will submit the application with. The application must be submitted directly to the Region within strictly defined time spells. If the procedure is successful, applicants are entitled to individual monetary contributions to finance the services that the chosen body will provide them. In the last years the Dote has become the almost only way to get public resources to deliver training, orientation and employment services. This means that local authorities and accredited bodies are almost excluded from the planning processes, and cannot project really different, integrated and tailor-made interventions. Above all, the capability to embed the activation logic within the complex interplay of the individual trajectory and the socio-economic context has become rather trifling. In this sense, individualization does not identify a qualified approach anymore, insofar it does not concern specific contents and methods of the individual paths, but a mere level of administrative, financial and relational regulation. As the paper discusses, the Dote system settles down a paradoxical combination of individualization without personalization, implying a loss of quality, appropriateness and continuity of services, an increase of financial and organizational stress of bodies, and a strengthening of the centralized and authoritarian power of the regional government.