The ambiguous policy-concepts 'effectivity' and 'needs' were introduced to Finnish VET. This research utilises cultural historical activity theory to analyse how different conflicting motives emerge within student counselling and to discuss the prospective development of VET. Managerialist approaches to accountability and competency-based training form a tension between the needs of persons in counselling on the one hand and effectiveness of counselling in relation to economy on the other. We ask, what types of needs are met within VET and from whose perspective is VET effective? Data include ethnographic observations of counselling sessions (N = 32) and semi-structured interviews (N = 12). The results show the emphasised instrumental value of an individual in society. Measurement of atomistic and individualist achievements and institutional effectivity (accountability) have become important whilst actual needs and relational meaning for persons involved in counselling were obscured, viz. 'the grey zone.' Student counselling was skewed to focus on individualised goals and fragmented tasks whilst acknowledgement of human uniqueness and recognition of counselees/students as persons is needed. None of the latter provides measured accountability or direct and tangible competency and thus they become ignored. We call for democratic discussions about the meaning of VET, including persons of its primary concern: practitioners and students.