A combined European and regional approach to methodological quality assurance
The validation of the WatchTower survey constituted a central element of the methodological development process. A skills-monitoring instrument can only generate meaningful intelligence if the concepts, terminology and response categories used in the questionnaire correspond to the operational realities of the organisations expected to use it. For this reason, the validation process was designed not only to review the scientific coherence of the survey but also to assess its relevance, clarity and usability from the perspective of employers, vocational education and training organisations and sectoral stakeholders.
The original Description of Action envisaged a focus group in each participating country, involving sector representatives, VET experts and other relevant actors. The purpose of these sessions was to validate and fine-tune the methodology, with particular attention to topics such as digital and green skills. During project implementation, however, this approach was adapted to a combined European and regional validation model.
The final validation methodology consisted of several complementary layers. The instrument first underwent structured peer review within the TOUR-X consortium. This internal process was followed by a consolidated multi-stakeholder focus-group session involving participants connected to TOUR-X, the Pact for Skills and PANTOUR. The European-level consultation was then complemented by targeted regional consultations in Attica and Veneto and by additional partner feedback during the Potsdam Transnational Project Meeting. The Final Technical Report explains that this adaptation was introduced because of the available implementation timeframe and the need to avoid unnecessary duplication with related tourism-skills initiatives.
From a methodological perspective, the adapted model offered an important advantage. Rather than relying solely on a set of parallel national consultations, it combined cross-country and regional perspectives within the same validation framework. This allowed the project to draw simultaneously on the experience of VET providers, employers, regional actors and stakeholders working at European sectoral level. The resulting feedback therefore addressed both the comparability of the instrument across countries and its relevance to the specific realities faced by tourism enterprises.
The validation process generated concrete revisions to the survey. According to the Final Technical Report, stakeholder feedback led to modifications concerning terminology, question logic, thematic priorities, response options, relevance to SMEs and technical usability. The partner web copy additionally records examples of how the content was refined, including broader treatment of sustainability and resilience and stronger consideration of emerging technologies and automation. These changes illustrate that validation was used as an iterative design mechanism rather than as a formal approval exercise conducted only after the questionnaire had already been finalised.
The validated instrument therefore reflects an attempt to balance methodological consistency with practical applicability. A common structure is necessary if information is to be compared across participating regions, but excessive standardisation can reduce the relevance of a survey to individual enterprises and local tourism contexts. The combined validation approach helped the project address this tension by maintaining a shared core instrument while refining terminology and content in response to regional and sectoral feedback.
A Focus Group Report was prepared as part of the evidence package documenting the validation process. The existence of this documentary trail is significant because it enables the evolution of the instrument to be traced from initial methodological design through stakeholder consultation to its final implementation. This transparency is particularly important for transferability, since future users of the WatchTower can distinguish between the stable methodological core of the instrument and those elements that may require contextual adaptation when the tool is used in another region or institutional environment.
Source basis: TOUR-X Final Technical Report; TOUR-X Description of Action; WatchTower Results/Methodology web copy.