Figures you can cite when proposing training inside your organisation. All from primary public sources, each with source, survey year, base and retrieval date.
A number alone says nothing. Seen together with who asked, when and whom, it becomes evidence you can use in an internal discussion. Each card stands alone — take only the ones you need.
Figure 80.1%
How to read Check how “problem” is defined and the size of responding establishments. If there is a breakdown for your size, cite that.
Figure 59.5%
How to read “Shortage” is a self-reported answer. Its meaning shifts with who answered — HR or the frontline.
Figure 45.5% (no spending) / 54.4% (spending) / average OFF-JT spend per worker 20,000 yen
How to read Per person, or per establishment? Confirm the denominator before comparing.
Figure 62.1% (severely lacking); severely plus somewhat lacking: 85.7% in total
How to read The definition of “DX talent” differs by survey. Quote it together with the definition sentence.
Figure 35.5% (all workers) / regular employees 43.3% / non-regular employees 15.9%
How to read Company-supported or self-funded learning? Check the questionnaire wording.
Each card stands alone and can be removed individually.
A percentage means different things depending on what it is a share of: establishments, employees or respondents.
Publication year and survey year can differ. Align survey years when comparing.
Statistics describe a situation. They do not show that training causes an improvement. Use them internally to share the current picture.