Aspects Influencing the Provision of Internships by Czech Firms to Future Economists during Their Studies

Abstract

Internships have an irreplaceable place in professional education. Theoretical and practical education is being more interconnected and strengthened with emphasis placed on high-quality preparation of graduates for internships. From a scientific point of view, there are contradictions between companies’ attitudes towards the employability of future graduates. Therefore, the main aim of the article is to investigate the interest of Czech companies in providing internships to university students studying economic programs as well as the companies’ willingness to employ these students after graduation. The primary data were obtained from 83 valid questionnaires answered by companies experienced in providing internships to these students. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to determine the differences in the attitudes of companies towards the provision of internships in terms of size and duration of the company’s existence on the market. Correlation relationships between variables were determined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. It was found that large firms will take on students after graduation for a certain period of time, and this is contrary to small businesses. Students must possess work and soft skills when entering internships. In the given context, there was no connection found between the evaluation of the student’s work performance and the required competencies by the company. Therefore, students can also be assigned to internships in order to meet the setting of the study program or the needs of employers. Moreover, internships need constant care, especially in the area of relationships between a university and an application sphere.

1. Introduction

One of the goals of high-quality higher education is to prepare students from the stage of preparation for future occupations to entering the labor market and the professional world. It is clear that for the fulfillment of this goal, internships are completely irreplaceable. The authors of this study are in agreement [1] that the internship is a highly relevant tool for assessing the performance of students and is an identifier for determining whether the education they have received is actually relevant to the requirements of the labor market. Despite the large amount of research on internships, there are still no convincing results evaluating the link between learning outcomes and the achieved level of competences usable in the working environment and companies’ interest in employing graduates. Based on the monitoring of students’ activities by supervisors, the studies conducted suggest strengthening competencies through the completion of internships. At the same time, the authors have reached similar findings as study [2] in the sense that employability is a dynamic concept in which contextual factors such as economics, politics, social factors and education intervene and that there is a direct link between occupational competencies and soft skills (system competencies) and employability. In terms of effective education, systemic competences need to be developed during the course of studies. This is the reason for paying attention to the motivation for internships during university studies and placing such importance on external internships where students can have an authentic experience of their future profession and develop a relationship with it. According to our findings, employers, similarly to what the analyses of [3] show, demand—and highly value—critical and independent thinking, underpinned by graduates’ cognitive competences and ability to integrate knowledge from different disciplines, in addition to their motivation and relationship to the chosen field.

The article is divided into standard sections corresponding to the research study. Thematically, the study relates to career-oriented economic education in the context of the cooperative relationship between universities and companies that provide students with long-term internships or placements of at least one semester. The central topic of this study is to examine the interest and requirements of Czech firms in providing internships to students of economics undergraduate programs depending on their historical market existence and size. Another important part of the study is the investigation of the relationships between the assessment of the required competences for the performance of a given internship in the context of the future employment of students in the firm where they performed their internship.

The aim of this study is to identify, analyze and evaluate the interest of Czech companies in providing internships to university students of economics study programs during their studies in relation to the conditions under which these internships take place. In our survey, which was carried out in 2022, internships have the status of a compulsory one-semester course, which is listed in the curriculum of a given study program. Such focused research is absolutely necessary to find ways of systematic and effective planning, implementation and sustainability of the cooperation between universities and the application sphere in the field of student internships.

The investigation was focused on aspects that, according to our findings, have the biggest impact for establishing cooperation on student internships with companies and its sustainability, specifically in Czech conditions. These factors included the reason for choosing the internship from the company’s point of view, the requirements placed on the student internship, the evaluation of the student’s work performance by the company and the companies’ willingness to provide internships and subsequently employ those students. The relevance of the research stems from the growing demand for accreditation, especially in professionally-oriented study programs in synergy with the dynamic development of the labor market’s requirements for university graduates of economics programs. Such targeted research is necessary for systematic and effective planning, implementation and sustainability of cooperation between universities and the application sphere (firms) in the field of students’ internships. Therefore, the survey was also profiled to identify the differences in the attitudes of companies towards internships according to size and duration of the companies’ existence on the market. The dependence between the evaluation of the student’s work performance and the companies’ willingness to provide internships, the evaluation of the students’ work performance and the companies’ willingness to employ students, as well as the dependence between the companies’ willingness to provide internships and subsequently employ students were also investigated.

The following research questions emerged from the research objectives:

RQ1: Do firms’ attitudes towards the aspects studied in relation to the provision of student internships differ according to the size of the firm?

RQ2: Do firms’ attitudes towards the aspects studied in relation to the provision of student internships differ according to the length of time they have been in the market?

RQ3: Is there a relationship between the evaluation of student job performance and firms’ willingness to provide internships?

RQ4: Is there a relationship between the evaluation of student job performance and firms’ willingness to employ students?

RQ5: Is there a relationship between the willingness of firms to provide internships and the willingness of firms to employ students?

RQ6: Is there a relationship between firms’ attitudes towards evaluating student job performance and the competencies required for student internships?

2. Theoretical Background

Empirical study [4] demonstrates the relevance of the basic framework of our research, namely, that the completion of work experience strengthens the theoretical and practical teaching at universities and allows students to develop the knowledge system acquired during their studies, to strengthen professional and key competences according to the current needs and requirements of the labor market. It emphasizes the benefits for the development of work skills and soft skills such as autonomy, independent thinking, innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. Traineeships and internships are also the first step towards motivating students to gain experience in their respective chosen field of study, which will help them to kick-start their careers, already at the university training stage. The diversity of the integration of internships into the curriculum is evident. There are different forms of internships, ranging from optional but interesting ones in the form of Ministry of Education projects [5] to compulsory internships implemented in the study programs. In the polytechnic undergraduate environment of a Czech university [6], the length of the internship and its integration into a particular year depends on the study programs. Very specific are the medical study programs such as general nursing. The total length of the internship is 46 weeks and is evenly dispersed throughout the studies. The situation is different for technical programs. The length of the internship is up to 17 weeks and students usually carry it out from the fifth semester onwards. The way in which internships are conducted in economics programs is similar to the style used in engineering programs.

Analysis of the results [7] demonstrates the fact that practical experience is increasingly sought after and valued among students, which the authors find to be an important competitive advantage for finding a job in the chosen field and for future career success. The theoretical basis is complemented and enriched by practical experience and students anticipate the importance of this approach. The authors found that industrial companies met the expectations of students studying towards a master of science degree who completed internships; 61.6% of respondents were offered jobs, and more than half of them accepted the offered jobs in the companies. Similarly, the authors in their research [8] found that 67% of companies where students successfully completed internships considered retaining them further as full-time contract employees. The proportion of students who reported feeling confident or very confident after a successful internship, according to the research [9], increased from 58% to 86% and the number who said they were still considering a range of potential careers after their placement decreased from 45% to 14%. The research carried out in [10] has shown that deficiencies in the professional competences of technical students and their inability to creatively apply the theoretical knowledge acquired during their studies in practice lead to problems after entering the labor market, and to additional investment in practice-oriented further education. This idea promotes closer cooperation between universities and their partners among firms in the form of work placements and internships as a “learning factory”. Especially in economic education, we agree with the research of the authors [11] who emphasize the importance of both determinants of graduates’ job performance, hard skills and soft skills, with all the academic and practical implications. This confirms our experience regarding the harmonization of the three competence bases: technical competence, professional (work) skills and professional values, ethics and attitudes towards work and the chosen profession.

However, it is not just about applying professional knowledge and converting it into hard skills. Soft skills are also important and are developed in activities. The authors [12] came to the empirical conclusion that university graduates do not only need hard skills such as diplomas and certificates, but they need to acquire soft skills, to be able to communicate, learn, be critical, be creative, have their own views on problem solving and be able to work in a team. The authors recommend for the internship not to be integrated into the curriculum as a course only, but that it be integrated as a credit component of each professional course. Authors also recommend that companies should pay students for completing internships to increase the attractiveness and effectiveness of completing internships. Companies providing internships and placements for university students perceive significant deficiencies in time management, communication skills, teamwork skills and especially in the entrepreneurial perspective in interns. In addition, students often fail to respond to critical suggestions and comments from their bosses and colleagues [13].

Generally speaking, numerous research studies show that the main problems are communication and behavior, time management, problem-solving skills, confidence building, etc. According to another semantically related study [14], students should not only prepare themselves physically and mentally, but also be aware of accepting work conditions, adapting activities and taking the initiative to improve soft skills (i.e., confidence, communication and behavior and problem-solving skills). Firms should create more chances for trainees to apply the knowledge and skills they have learnt at the university. In line with this, another study [15] emphasizes the need for pedagogical intervention on the one hand and the important support of students’ internships and traineeships on the other. The need for communication and collaboration between supervisors is seen as important for the creation of an ecosystem of knowledge exchange and as a condition for increasing the number of joint projects between universities and partner companies [16]. It was found that when students stay in a company for a long time, they also start working there. However, sometimes university supervisors are the weak link, as they do not play the desired role during the internship and there is a lack of contact with them. Evaluation research sees a solution to this problem [17] oriented towards university teachers, those responsible for internship placements and supervisors so that they can better evaluate the performance of students during internships.

The next solution comes from research [18], which sees the future of internships in the development of inter-university networks, building on external national and international practice. The authors recommend the extension of internships and placements to a wider range of students, the strengthening of the relationship with the activities of the participants, intensive monitoring procedures using ICT and the guaranteeing of the quality of the processes through appropriate protocols. Authors see the starting point in the introduction of new paradigms of teaching at university level, more related to constructivist theory, learning in the workplace, the learning process outside the classroom and learning through professional internships. The authors of the study [19] developed an e-mentoring program designed to help students in the marketing program (Columbia University) recognize the level of mastery of professional competencies already in academic practice. The aim of the study was to validate an e-mentoring model to promote professional in students in their internships. In particular, positive results were demonstrated in four distinct competencies (project management, problem solving, autonomous work and teamwork), with progression in each of them, confirming the importance of support, training and trust in creating links between students, universities and firms. Positive experiences with digitalization and modern media are acknowledged in the study [20] using MOOCs to cover student academic placements during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors addressed the question of whether MOOCs could be used as a substitute for internships in an emergency, which was confirmed. According to the authors, MOOCs augment traditional internships and traineeships. The authors’ study [21] revealed that learning in small groups of interns with professionals who need to respect and trust each other was statistically significantly different between the group of students at the end of the internship and those at the beginning of the internship. The study [22] demonstrated the need to implement the critical incident method to explicitly assess the level of attainment of cross-cutting competencies.

Another study [23] highlights the importance of integrating mentoring and, on its basis, introducing students to the internship environment with the added bonus of a closer connection between students and the practitioner through which the student’s needs can be understood and discussed in depth on a personal level. If, on the other hand, students are only placed in internships in a directive way without understanding the reason and without their consent, just to meet the setting of the study program or the needs of employers, there is a risk of loss of motivation and a similar problem of mismatch between their chosen field of study and the focus of the internship, which can devalue the basic principle of vocational education, which is the combination of theory and practice within a sector or field-oriented training program [24]. Authors of a follow-up study [25] point out the advantages and risks of the dual model of vocational training, which develops educational processes in two institutions: in the training centre, where students acquire a theoretical foundation, and in the company, where they apply professional competences that complement the learning outcomes acquired. However, it is necessary that company tutors are trained as tutors and have the necessary pedagogical and social skills. Under such systemic conditions, dual education is considered ideal by the authors [26]. The impact of quality internships on better employment prospects are undeniable, as evidenced by other research [27] related to our starting point, which has shown that completing an internship improves the prospects of obtaining and keeping a good job in the short term (first job after graduation), medium term and long term (employment of four years and more). In conclusion, the above-mentioned authors, including the authors of this study and in line with the results of competence-oriented research, with all the different didactic perspectives on the issue and differentiated education systems in different countries, clearly demonstrates the inevitability of well-profiled internships for the formation of competence profiles required by employers. This is also true for postgraduate students [28] for all higher education institutions regardless of the “very different world” [29].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Sample

The sample consists of Czech companies engaged in services, manufacturing and trade. Authors have included 90 firms in the survey. The sample was purposively selected based on the cooperative relationship between firms and universities where some of the authors of this study work. The final sample consisted of 83 valid questionnaires, with the primary criterion for this selection being the provision of internships, included in the study program, by companies to students during their studies. In order to increase the credibility of the survey results, 7 firms that had not provided internships to undergraduate students in the past were excluded. The research sample was tracked according to the size of the entity (i.e., by number of employees) and the length of its presence on the Czech market (

Table 1. Structure of the research sample (n = 83).

Variable	Frequency	Percentage
Company size by the number of employees	83	100
Micro	33	39.76
Small	24	28.92
Medium	12	14.46
Large	14	16.87
Length of operation on the Czech market	83	100
Up to 20 years	25	30.12
21–40 years	58	69.88

). Firms were divided in terms of length of presence on the market into two basic categories: (a) up to 20 years; (b) from 21 to 40 years. The relevant circumstance that caused the division of firms by age into these two categories was the experience of firms in providing internships. Firms with a market tenure ranging from 21 to 40 years have a richer experience in providing internships to university graduates—future economists—compared to firms with a history of up to 20 years. The relevant feature for our study was neither the industry nor the subject of the companies’ activity, so the sample is not split in this way.

The investigation focused on firms that have a cooperative relationship with the university. At the same time, the internship is conceived as a compulsory subject implemented in the accreditation of the economics degree program. In the economics study programs of a given university in the Czech Republic, the internship takes place in the sixth semester of undergraduate studies for 15 weeks. There is a purely one-sided individual relationship between the student completing the internship and the company, which results in certain benefits for the intern. Most often, these include the opportunity to continue working for the company as a full-time employee or the opportunity to work on a final thesis in their (company’s) environment in order to complete a university degree.

3.2. Data Collection, Methods

For data collection, a quantitative research method was used, which was based on interviewing through a non-standardized questionnaire. The survey was conducted online using a web-based questionnaire that was sent to the email addresses of representatives of Czech companies. All sensitive data were anonymized and encrypted. Prior to the actual research, a pre-survey was conducted with a sample with the characteristics of respondents from the main research. These were representatives from five companies who provided supervision prior to the distribution of the questionnaire in the main research. One relevant representative of the firm was always involved in both the pre-survey and the main research, most often from a human resources position. This increased the content validity of the research instrument. Reliability of the questionnaire was measured by computing the Cronbach’s alpha [30]. The questionnaire was evaluated as reliable, as the Cronbach’s alpha is 0.853. The questionnaire was designed into seven domains that represented the aspects under investigation in relation to internship provision. Their selection was inspired by personal experience, examples of good practice and empirical studies that examined the willingness of Czech students to attend internships, comparing the importance of higher education with the skills acquired through work experience [31], the student’s readiness for internship or employment and the requirements of the future profession in terms of soft competencies [32].

Table 2. Description of data and variables.

Aspect	Variable’s Description	Possible Answers, Variable Type
A	Reason for choosing the internship by the student	1—A family member, boyfriend/girlfriend or friend of the student works for the company. 2—Student was already employed by the company before his/her internship (e.g., temporary job). 3—The internship in our company was assigned to the student by the university. 4—The student was financially rewarded for his/her performance in the internship. 5—Student wanted to write a bachelor’s/master’s thesis about our company. 6—Student would like to be employed in our company or a similar company in the future. 7—Student was interested in our company and its products. 8—The student lives near our company. (nominal variables)
B	Evaluation of the student’s work performance	Likert scale 1—low to 5—high (ordinal variables)
C	Motivation of the student to do the internship by the company	1—Full financial remuneration of the student. 2—Partial financial remuneration of the student. 3—Offer of a job after graduation 4—Assistance in writing a bachelor’s/master’s thesis if the student chooses our company as their topic (providing information, resource, etc.) 5—Flexible working hours 6—Option to work from home 7—Opportunity to try out several different work processes and tasks (nominal variables)
D	Required level of education	At least a high school diploma/secondary education At least a university degree (nominal variables)
E	Required competencies (i.e., 1-independence, 2-reliability, 3-diligence, 4-willingness to work, 5-drive to improve, 6-speed of work performance, 7-teamwork, 8-theoretical knowledge of the assigned work, 9-ability to follow instructions, 10-capacity to accept criticism)	Likert scale 1—least required to 5—most required (ordinal variables)
F	Willingness of companies to provide internships	1—The university will provide our company with a certain financial reward. 2—The university will provide some form of promotion for our company (e.g., posters, flyers, banners with the company logo in the university). 3—Students of the university who participate in this internship will choose our company as the topic of their bachelor’s or master’s degree. 4—Students of the university will be sufficiently prepared for the job responsibilities of our company and we will not need to expend our resources to train them. 5—Students who participate in the internship will join our company as employees for a minimum period of time after completing their studies. 6—We have no conditions. (nominal variables)
G	Willingness of companies to employ students	1—If students would be interested in the same job as their internship. 2—If students had been trained. 3—If students performed very well. 4—Our company is not currently looking for new employees. 5—Our company required more work experience from full-time employees. 6—Our company requires full-time employees to have higher education than the student achieved. (nominal variables)

shows the areas of the questionnaire and the associated possible choice of answers for companies.

Other areas of the questionnaire were aimed at identifying the characteristics of the respondents that were examined by research questions 1 and 2 (Table 1).

3.3. Statistical Analyses

From the six research questions, six hypotheses were defined to test the relationships between the variables with respect to the quantitative research methods used. These null hypotheses were subject to statistical analysis and tested at 95% confidence level:

H_0-1: 

Firms’ attitudes towards the variables examined in relation to the provision of internships to students do not differ depending on the size of the firm.

H_0-2: 

Firms’ attitudes towards the variables examined in relation to the provision of internships to students do not differ depending on the length of time they have been on the market.

H_0-3: 

There is no relationship between the evaluation of a student’s job performance and the willingness of firms to provide internships.

H_0-4: 

There is no relationship between the evaluation of a student’s job performance and the willingness of firms to employ students.

H_0-5: 

There is no relationship between firm’s willingness to provide internships and their willingness to employ students.

H_0-6: 

Firms’ attitudes towards the evaluation of student performance and the required competencies for student internships are not correlated.

The data contain nominal and numerical ordinal variables using a five-point Likert scale from 1 to 5. In the case of ordinal variables, the Mann–Whitney U test was also used to verify hypotheses H_0-1 and H_0-2, the reason being these variables do not meet the homogeneity of variances required (verified by the Levene test). The relationship of pairs of nominal variables in the case of hypotheses H_0-1 and H_0-2 are described by means of a contingency table. These are alternative variables, so we can speak specifically of an association table, which has only two rows and two columns, and thus contains four combinations of pairs of variants of the two mutually assessed statistical features.

A correlation matrix was constructed to determine the correlation relationships between variables in the case of testing hypotheses H_0-3–H_0-6. The tables presented in Section 4 show only part of it. The field inside the body of the table always contains the value of Pearson’s correlation coefficient r, which is usually used for this type of data. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS.

Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) are included for the ordinal variables B—evaluation of student’s work performance and E—required competencies. For nominal variables, these descriptive statistics are not relevant.

4. Results

This section contains significant results of quantitative research. The results are presented in coherence with the methodology and research questions or statistical hypothesis.

4.1. Descriptive Statistics of the Evaluation of the Student’s Work Performance (B) and the Required Competencies by the Company (E)

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of ordinal variables.

Variable	Mean	Standard Deviation
B—evaluation of the student’s work performance	3.289	0.885
E1—independence	3.494	1.236
E2—reliability	3.807	1.689
E3—diligence	3.783	1.568
E4—willingness to work	3.807	1.682
E5—drive to improve	3.687	1.396
E6—speed of work performance	3.229	1.010
E7—teamwork	3.470	1.311
E8—theoretical knowledge of the assigned work	3.325	1.203
E9—ability to follow instructions	3.663	1.417
E10—capacity to accept criticism	3.482	1.245

shows the means and standard deviations for each ordinal variable analyzed.

4.2. Differences in Firms’ Attitudes towards Variables Affecting the Provision of Internships to Students in Terms of Sorting Features

Table 4. Significance of differences between firms’ attitudes towards variables affecting internship delivery by firm size (H_0-1), chi-square test.

Variables	Value	df	Company Size (p)
A Reason for the student’s choice of internship
A3 The internship in our company was set by the university.	13.634	3	0.003
F Willingness of companies to provide internships
F5 Students who participate in the internship will join our company as employees for a minimum period of time after completing their studies.	8.710	3	0.033

and

Table 5. Significance of differences between firms’ attitudes towards variables influencing internship provision by firm’s length of time on the market (H_0-2), chi-square test.

Variable	Value	df	Length of Time the Firm Has Been on the Market (p)
A Reason for the student’s choice of internship
A3 The internship in our company was set by the university.	3.946	1	0.047
C Motivation of the student to do the internship by the company
C5 Flexible working hours	7.065	1	0.008
C6 Option to work from home	12.344	1	<0.001
G Willingness of the company to employ students
G3 If students performed very well.	5.622	1	0.018

show the results of the verification of hypotheses H_0-1 and H_0-2 in the case of nominal and ordinal variables in terms of sorting features (firm size, firm’s length of time on the market) to identify differences in firms’ attitudes. Only results with significant differences found at a 5% significance level are presented in the tables.

At the 5% significance level, we reject the null hypothesis H_0-1 in the case of variable A3, i.e., the internship is set by the student’s university and in the case of variable F5, i.e., firms are willing to provide internships if the student joins the company as an employee for a set minimum period of time after graduation. In the case of variable A3, it can be further noted that micro firms disagree with this statement, while large firms have the opposite attitude towards this factor. In the case of variable F5, large firms are more inclined towards this statement. The other variables are not perceived significantly differently by firms in terms of their size.

At the 5% level of significance, we reject the null hypothesis H_0-2 in the case of variable A3, i.e., the internship is set by the student’s university, in the case of variables C5 and C6, i.e., firms perceive the possibility of flexible working hours and the possibility of working from home as a motivation for students to complete the internship, and in the case of variable G3, i.e., firms are willing to employ students if the students perform very well (Table 5). In terms of frequencies, it can be noted that more firms with less than 20 years of market presence reported that the internship was not assigned to the student by the university compared to firms with an older history. Firms with a younger history believe that the student is motivated by the possibility of flexible hours and the ability to work from home. Firms with an older history are of the opposite opinion. Firms with up to 20 years in the market indicated that they would be willing to employ a student if he or she performed very well. The other variables are not perceived significantly differently by firms in terms of their length of time in the market.

4.3. Correlation Relationships between Variables

Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to find the correlations between the variables. Firstly, hypothesis 3 was tested, i.e., finding a relationship between student’s job performance evaluation and the willingness of companies to provide internships. Since the willingness of companies carries six aspects, the dependency was tested separately according to these six aspects (

Table 6. Relationship between the student’s job performance rating and firms’ willingness to provide internships.

		F1	F2	F3	F4	F5	F6
B	Pearson’s r	−0.344	−0.096	−0.050	0.082	0.014	−0.028
	p	0.001	0.387	0.653	0.462	0.901	0.804

Comment: F1—The university will provide our company with a certain financial reward. F2—The university will provide some form of promotion for our company (e.g., posters, flyers, banners with the company logo in the university, etc.). F3—Students of the university who participate in this internship will choose our company as the topic of their bachelor’s or master’s degree. F4—Students of the university will be sufficiently prepared for the job responsibilities of our company, and we will not need to expend our resources to train them. F5—Students who participate in the internship will join our company as employees for a minimum period of time after completing their studies. F6—We have no conditions.

).

A significant negative relationship was found between the student’s job performance evaluation and the willingness of firms to provide internships if the university provides the firm with a certain financial reward.

At 5% significance level, we reject the null hypothesis H_0-3 in the case of the F1 factor—the university will provide the firm with some financial reward for providing internships to students. Thus, firms that rate students’ job performance at a high level do not demand a financial reward for providing internships. There are 76 such firms out of the total sample, with only seven firms demanding financial reward for providing internships. No relationship was found between other aspects of firms’ willingness and the evaluation of students’ work performance.

Furthermore, hypothesis 4 was tested to determine the relationship between the student’s job performance evaluation and the willingness of firms to subsequently employ the student consisting of six aspects. The relationship between these variables was found separately according to these six aspects (

Table 7. Relationship between the student’s job performance rating and the willingness of firms to hire the student.

		G1	G2	G3	G4	G5	G6
B	Pearson’s r	−0.042	−0.070	−0.124	0.038	−0.036	−0.036
	p	0.706	0.529	0.263	0.736	0.746	0.746

Comment: G1—If students would be interested in the same job as their internship. G2—If students had been trained. G3—If students performed very well. G4—Our company is not currently looking for new employees. G5—Our company required more work experience from full-time employees. G6—Our company requires full-time employees to have higher education than the student achieved.

).

At the 5% significance level, we do not reject the null hypothesis H_0-4. No relationship was found between all aspects describing firms’ willingness to employ students and the firm’s assessment of the student’s job performance.

The Person correlation coefficient was used to test hypothesis 5, i.e., whether the willingness of firms to provide internships and subsequently employ students is correlated. The two variables were described by six sub-aspects, and a correlation was found for each (

Table 8. Correlation of the aspects of firms’ willingness to provide internships (F) and student’s subsequent employment (G).

		G1	G2	G3	G4	G5	G6
F1	Pearson’s r	−0.084	0.034	0.228	−0.228	−0.034	−0.036
	p	0.450	0.763	0.038	0.038	0.764	0.746
F2	Pearson’s r	0.216	0.064	0.215	−0.207	−0.064	−0.064
	p	0.050	0.563	0.051	0.060	0.564	0.564
F3	Pearson’s r	0.014	0.034	0.228	−0.138	−0.034	0.364
	p	0.899	0.763	0.038	0.213	0.764	<0.001
F4	Pearson’s r	0.053	0.124	−0.043	−0.050	0.226	−0.054
	p	0.637	0.263	0.697	0.655	0.040	0.628
F5	Pearson’s r	0.149	−0.097	0.010	−0.113	−0.031	0.396
	p	0.180	0.381	0.928	0.308	0.782	<0.001
F6	Pearson’s r	0.004	−0.146	−0.178	0.289	−0.120	−0.120
	p	0.972	0.187	0.107	0.008	0.279	0.279

Comment: F1—The university will provide our company with a certain financial reward. F2—The university will provide some form of promotion for our company (e.g., posters, flyers, banners with the company logo in the university, etc.). F3—Students of the university who participate in this internship will choose our company as the topic of their bachelor’s or master’s degree. F4—Students of the university will be sufficiently prepared for the job responsibilities of our company, and we will not need to expend our resources to train them. F5—Students who participate in the internship will join our company as employees for a minimum period of time after completing their studies. F6—We have no conditions. G1—If students would be interested in the same job as their internship. G2—If students had been trained. G3—If students performed very well. G4—Our company is not currently looking for new employees. G5—Our company required more work experience from full-time employees. G6—Our company requires full-time employees to have higher education than the student achieved.

).

At the 5% significance level, we reject the null hypothesis H_0-5. These aspects describing the willingness of firms to provide internships and to employ students are positively and negatively correlated, respectively:

• Aspect F1 is positively correlated with G3, i.e., firms that require financial rewards for providing internships stated that they will employ students if they perform the assigned work very well.
• Aspect F1 is negatively correlated with G4, i.e., firms that do not ask for a financial reward for providing an internship reported that they are not currently looking for new employees.
• Aspect F2 is positively correlated with G1, i.e., firms that require some form of promotion at a given university in return for providing an internship stated that they will employ students if they are interested in the same job as the internship they are completing. This relationship highlights the collaborative nature of the application sphere (firms) and the university environment.
• Aspect F3 is positively correlated with G3, i.e., firms that require the provision of an internship to be the subject of a bachelor’s or master’s thesis said they would hire students who would perform well in the job. Thus, such firms can focus on the quality of students in the context to a well-crafted academic thesis that would address the specific case of the firm and would therefore be of some benefit to them.
• Aspect F3 is positively correlated with G6, i.e., firms that require a bachelor’s or master’s thesis to be completed in return for providing an internship indicated that they require full-time employees to have a higher level of education.
• Aspect F4 is positively correlated with G5, i.e., firms that require students to be prepared when providing internships and do not want to expend additional in-house resources to train students reported that they require full-time employees to have more experience.
• Aspect F5 is positively correlated with G6, i.e., firms that require students to join the firm for a minimum period of time after the internship when providing the internship reported that they require full-time employees to have a higher level of education.
• Aspect F6 is positively correlated with G4, i.e., firms that do not impose any conditions on the provision of internships reported that they do not seek new employees.
• No correlation was found for the other aspects.

It should be noted that the strength of the correlation between significant variables is not very high according to the coefficient r. The strongest correlation was found for the pair F3 and G6 (r = 0.364); F5 and G6 (r = 0.396). Thus, firms that require being the subject of a final academic thesis or require a student to join them for a minimum period of time after completing an internship stated that they require higher education for full-time employees.

The same method was used to test hypothesis 6, i.e., whether the firm’s evaluation of the student’s job performance B and the required competencies for the student internship (E) are correlated. The required competencies were expressed in terms of 10 sub-competencies (1—independence, 2—reliability, 3—diligence, 4—willingness to work, 5—drive to improve, 6—speed of work performance, 7—teamwork, 8—theoretical knowledge of the assigned work 9—ability to follow instructions, 10—capacity to accept criticism). The results are presented in

Table 9. Correlation of job performance evaluation and required competencies.

		E1	E2	E3	E4	E5	E6	E7	E8	E9	E10
B	Pearson’s r	−0.020	−0.019	0.002	0.021	−0.053	−0.101	−0.003	0.013	−0.028	0.016
	p	0.855	0.864	0.987	0.849	0.631	0.364	0.979	0.904	0.802	0.888

Comment: E1—independence; E2—reliability; E3—diligence; E4—willingness to work; E5—drive to improve; E6—speed of work performance; E7—teamwork; E8—theoretical knowledge of the assigned work; E9—ability to follow instructions; E10—capacity to accept criticism.

.

At the 5% significance level, we do not reject the null hypothesis H_0-6. This means that job performance evaluation is not related to firms’ required competencies for the provided internship.

5. Discussion

The aim of the study was to determine the interest of Czech companies in providing internships to university students of economic study programs during their studies in relation to the conditions under which these internships take place. The research was focused on the aspects that, according to our findings, are most important in Czech conditions for establishing cooperation with companies in the field of student internships and their sustainability. It is clear that internships are indispensable for preparing graduates to enter the labor market on a professional level [1]. Internships are a highly relevant tool for assessing students’ performance in the application sphere and an identifier for determining whether the education students have received is actually relevant to the requirements of the labor market. Several aspects undoubtedly influence this. The research found that firms with a market presence of up to 20 years believe that students are motivated to participate in internships by the possibility of flexible working hours and the opportunity to work from home. Furthermore, firms in this category responded that they would be willing to employ students on the condition of very good work performance. Firms with a younger market presence stated that the student chooses the internship and is not assigned by the university to undertake it. This aspect is very important in the case of the evaluation of the student’s work performance in the internship, as the possibility of self-selection boosts, to some extent, the student’s motivation during the internship or traineeship [4]. These facts are highlighted by research [24]. If students are only placed in internships in a directive manner without their consent, just to meet the setting of the curriculum or the needs of employers, there is a risk of loss of motivation. A similar problem is a mismatch between the field of study and the focus of the internship, which can devalue the basic principle of vocational education.

It should be noted that our research found significant differences in firms’ responses in terms of the length of time they have been in the market. Historically, older firms with over 20 years of operation reported that students are assigned internships by the university. Further, these firms responded that the student is not motivated to intern by flexible hours or working from home, which can be seen as a result of the university’s directive assignment of internships. Beyond the studies, our study revealed [4,7,24,27] differences in firms’ attitudes towards providing internships in terms of their size. Large firms generally hire students as employees for a minimum period of time after graduation and also indicated that the internship is assigned to the student by the university. Small firms behave in the opposite way in this respect, i.e., they do not offer a job to students who are completing an internship in their firm’s environment and the student arranges the internship himself/herself, i.e., chooses the firm.

Our research supports the findings of the study [4] that it is necessary to link students’ theoretical preparation at university with practice, or at least to blend theory with experiential learning based on solving practical situations during university studies. Empirical studies [4,7] emphasize, and our research welcomes, the need for students to gain work-related and soft skills when they enter internship, among other things to help them kick-start their careers. However, our research did not confirm that the evaluation of work performance by the company is correlated with the required competencies for the provided internship, which were selected as independence, reliability, diligence, willingness to work, drive to improve, speed of work performance, teamwork, theoretical knowledge of the assigned work, ability to follow instructions and capacity to accept criticism. This finding is contrary to some international studies [18,19,23]. We explain the discrepancy partly by the structure of the sample with respect to the firms involved, which differed from each other in terms of the length of market presence and size. The result for independence may also be due to the existing differences in the way the firm is chosen for the internship, whether the student chooses it himself or the student is assigned to the firm by the university. The result points to the fact that students are assigned to internships only to meet the setting of the curriculum or the needs of employers and there is no real development of the required competences of the students through the assigned tasks during the internship or placement (cf. [24]).

Furthermore, it was found that Czech companies focus on quality students in the context of a well-developed academic thesis that would address a specific case for a given company. Our finding supports the conclusions of the study [23], which highlights the importance of integrating mentoring and, on its basis, introducing students to the work environment via internships with the added bonus of a closer connection between the student and professional. Very often, experts from practice are involved in conducting the final thesis with a focus on solving a specific company problem. The practitioner then acts not only as a thesis supervisor, but also as a mentor, giving the student the opportunity to penetrate the company culture in an intensive way and to improve due to the mentor’s expert guidance.

Our research found correlations in the case of education and the willingness of a firm to employ a student who has completed an internship in the firm after graduation. This finding supports the research findings [27] which showed that completing an internship improves the prospects of obtaining and keeping a good job in the short term (first job after graduation), medium term and long term. In this context, differences were found between large and smaller firms in terms of students’ post-internship job applications. Large firms believe that students are more likely to apply for jobs with them. Smaller firms are of the opinion that students are less likely to choose employment with small firms. Although this finding is not in line with other national or international studies, it can be suggested that the different attitudes of these Czech firms may be due to the ambition, desire and willingness of students to develop and learn new knowledge and skills, which is what large firms experience, where these opportunities for development are more widespread.

There are some limitations of this study that point to a number of opportunities for future research. It would be appropriate to expand the sample to include other relevant firms. As the authors of this study have limited themselves to a shortlist of firms with which they work in integrating work experience and internships into the curriculum. It would be interesting to extend the research further by including the perspective of students who have already completed their internships in these firms to gain their perspectives on evaluation of work assignments by mentor, professional development and mentor guidance with respect to immersing students in their daily professional lives.

The empirical study has a theoretical impact as it extends and explains aspects related to practice-oriented education in the field of science and research. The practical impact of our study is mainly in the area of sustainability of accreditation in the context of professionally-oriented study programs and the development of study programs that integrate compulsory or voluntary student internships and placements.

6. Conclusions

The study confirmed that internships are a highly relevant tool for assessing students’ performance in the application sphere and an identifier for determining whether the education they have received is applicable to the requirements of the labor market. Firms’ attitudes vary according to their historical length of existence in the market. According to the perception of representatives of younger companies, the main motivation for students is the possibility of flexible working hours and working from home. Research shows that completing an internship improves the prospects of obtaining and keeping a good job, but also the risk of students being placed in internships without their consent to meet the needs of the curriculum setting or employers’ needs. This can lead to a devaluation of the basic principle of vocational education.

The empirical study has a theoretical impact as it extends and explains aspects related to practice-oriented education in the field of science and research. The practical impact of our study is mainly in the area of sustainability of accreditation in the context of vocationally oriented study programs in which compulsory or voluntary student work placements and internships are integrated. In the future, it will be necessary to reflect the risks identified in this study in economics’ study programs, as well as to focus on strengthening cooperation between universities and companies not only at the level of providing internships.