Frank Mayadas and the Foundations of Modern Online Learning

 

By Gary Miller (HOF 2004)

I suspect that many Hall of Fame members who read the Hall’s quarterly Newsletter have read about the recent passing of 2006 Hall of Fame inductee Dr. Frank Mayadas.

Frank has had a very important impact on continuing education over the past three decades.  As the Sloan Foundation’s lead advocate for online learning, he worked closely with colleges and universities that received Sloan Foundation grants to develop and deliver online degree programs. Frank understood that institutions would need to rethink some basic policy, administrative, and cultural issues to effectively create a permanent home for e-learning within the institution.  He took steps to bring institutions that received funds into a community where institutions could share their experiences and help create viable standards and expectations.

Many Hall of Fame members have had the opportunity to work with the Online Learning Consortium and the JALN journal over the past decades. As we look back on Frank’s contributions and the impact of e-learning on our institutions, I encourage Hall members to share your experiences and ideas for the future of our field, as well as perspectives on Frank’s contributions, in a post for Leadership Perspectives.  Let’s celebrate the impact that Frank and the Sloan Foundation have had on our field.

 

Mission Possible: Renewing Adult and Continuing Education Futures

 

By Professor Don Olcott, Jr., FRSA (HOF 2024)

 

Good Morning, Mr. Phelps: The world has seen some very turbulent times for adult and continuing education during the past decade. Political populism, public and employer disillusionment, increasing educational costs, and competing interests across institutions and sectors have created an uncertain future. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is for you and your PMF (Possible Mission Force) to seek out courageous and inspiring adult and continuing educators to bring forward new strategies, ideas, and best practices for sustaining a thriving and innovative future for adult and continuing education. If you or any members of your PMF team are captured, you and your team will be disavowed, and your Mission Impossible 8 complimentary theater tickets will be revoked – just kidding!

 

Leadership is Essential

Is the future of adult and continuing education secure and guaranteed? A rhetorical question, indeed. There are no guarantees for the future. Today, many educational leaders are advocating “future proofing” education against unanticipated change, geopolitical shifts, global crises, and natural disasters, and new normals (plural) that may or may not define future societal eras or Zeitgeists (Gast, 2022).

The problem with this conceptual approach is that it is reactive rather than building institution response scenarios that are agile, flexible, and responsive to any “new normal” or crisis. Visionary and creative leadership will make this happen, including reframing the possibilities ahead for adult and continuing education.

 

Adult and Continuing Educators are the Possible Mission Force (PMF)

We all need a touch of humor (thus the opening dialogue above) to help us navigate the challenges of the future. Regrettably, Tom Cruise may not ultimately save us from ourselves any more than artificial intelligence (AI) will be the panacea for all things educational. As adult and continuing educators, we must embrace the challenge and re-engage in the conversation to foster collaboration about what we can do to strengthen and expand the role of adult and continuing education for future generations.

 

State of the Profession

The OECD 2023 Report on Trends in Adult Learning provided a snapshot of current trends in adult learning. It is beyond the scope of this commentary to provide a detailed analysis. Here are some highlights from the report.

 

• Participation in many countries appears to be falling; more alarming is that overall participation is declining despite the gap between socio-economic groups narrowing.
• Formal education is playing a diminishing role in adult learning. The focus is increasingly on non-formal job training-related programs.  Countries with strong participation in formal adult learning programs tend to have higher non-formal learning engagement. Tertiary qualifications dominate formal education.
• Over 40% of non-formal job-related learning lasts one day or less. Unemployed adults tend to attend longer programs, given time availability and the need to develop meaningful employment skills.
• Improving job performance and employability is the main motivation for engaging in adult learning programs. Lack of time, family obligations, and cost remain primary barriers to participation.
• Participation tends to be highest when available in the workplace and supported by employers.
• Policy misalignment, where compliance with Lifelong Learning skill development is fragmenting the possible mission impacts of training 

 

Strategies for Success: Sharing the Experience

I want to invite my IACE Hall of Fame global colleagues to share their own ideas on how to renew and empower the profession for future generations of learners. Here are a few strategies of mine. They may stimulate some of your own ideas.

 

Storytelling

Do we tell our adult and continuing education story clearly to our multiple publics and stakeholders? Interestingly, in my own research (Olcott, 2024) recently on the future of open universities, I discovered some perplexing trends.

Governments, employers, and prospective students view open universities much the same way. The diversity, and by extension, capabilities of open universities to be innovative and unique got lost in translation despite distinguished leaders such as Sir John Daniel (2019) and experienced leaders such as Professors Alan Tait and Ross Paul (2019) noting the vast diversity. 

Telling our story better means articulating our value, our creativity, and our commitment to serving adult learners. The adult and continuing education profession inherently reflects a steadfast optimism built on empowerment, creativity, and commitment to human learning. Indeed, this is a noble endeavor, but there are many competing stories that remind us all that we must tell our story often and consistently better than the rest.      

 

Micro-Credentials:  Strategic Game Changer or Tactical Diversion

Micro-credentials are not new. Short-term adult education and continuing education training programs have been around for decades, particularly evident in vocational-technical professions and the military (McGreal & Olcott, 2022). Micro-credentials are unique today because of the rigor applied to assessing knowledge and skills, with skills/competencies validated and certified. 

 

Remember the days when we attended a one-day seminar on Saturday and received a certificate of completion or attendance. This was not validation of new skills and knowledge, and these short-term, less rigorous activities could not be stackable into formal qualifications. This renewed focus on assessment provides the conduit to validating non-formal training and educational activities and in-turn leverages the stackability and conversion of non-formal learning normative units or value to be applied to existing or new formal qualifications.

I try to articulate to institutional leaders that micro-credentials can be a strategic tool as well as a tactical training approach for program delivery. Educational organizations are often criticized for trying to be all things to all people and often doing some of this very poorly. Conversely, the strategic integration of micro-credentials can, in fact, change the fundamental mission and architecture of an institution in ways that are catalysts for better serving our diverse stakeholders. An example of this is our approach to lifelong learning.      

 

Lifelong Learning (LLL) – Walking the talk

Indeed, it is mindboggling trying to scan the range of keynotes, organizational documents, and formal publications on lifelong learning for the 21^st century. What is even more amazing is that nearly all of these are predicated on a fundamental strategy that lifelong learning really means some type of magical transformation that happens ONLY after a student gets a first degree. The assumption suggests that a degree in Shakespearean tragedies is much more valuable than a micro-credential in hospitality management that leads to a workplace internship and employment.

If we return to the idea that micro-credentials can be a strategic approach for organizations, this suggests that skills development and employment become central priorities. This, in and of itself, has significant implications for how organizations are funded, structured, staffed, and marketed, and for which credentials and qualifications (degrees, certificates, micro-credentials) can be combined. 

Lifelong learning in its purest form means that learning occurs across the lifespan and that an 18-year-old can start with micro-credentials first and then return for a degree later. It means no imposed chronology of credentials: you get a degree first, then lifelong learning begins. As it stands, we advocate lifelong learning as long as it fits within traditional organizational structures that have stood for decades but are clearly not serving the needs of students, employers, and societies. Reframing this misalignment between education and society is perhaps the greatest challenge we face in the next fifty years, particularly the challenges facing students and employers in the developing world. 

 

Summary – We are the Champions!

All of us are adult and continuing education’s Possible Mission Force (PMF). I’ve shared a few of my own strategies to renew our commitment to the future. We must tell our story and better communicate our value. Micro-credentials are strategic as well as for tactical program delivery. And finally, a true lifelong learning model is flexible and offers the maximum options for engaging in a synthesis of formal and non-formal educational activities based on the learner's needs, not the mandates of the system.    

What are your strategies for sustaining and nurturing the future of adult and continuing education, including the broader framework of lifelong learning? 

 

References

Daniel, J. S. (2019). Open universities: Old concepts and contemporary challenges. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i3.4035

Gast, A.  (2022).  Four ways universities can future-proof education. World Economic Forum.  https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/01/four-ways-universities-can-future-proof-education/ 

McGreal, R., & Olcott, D. J. (2022). A strategic reset: Micro-credentials for higher education leaders. Smart Learning Environment, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00190-1

OECD.  (2023). Trends in adult learning. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/trends-in-adult-learning_ec0624a6-en.html

Olcott, Jr., D. (2024). Open universities: Reinventing, repurposing, and reimagining innovative futures. Journal of Open, Distance, and Digital Education (JODDE), 1(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.25619/ntkvsz26  

Paul, R. & Tait, A. (2019). Special issue editorial: Open universities: Past, present and future. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4575

 

 

The Technology Revolution and the Future of Continuing and Adult Education

 

By Gary E. Miller (HOF 2004)

 

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Industrial Revolution spurred significant immigration and a shift of the U.S. population from rural to newly industrialized urban areas. These social changes, combined with the growth of a sustained industrial economy, revolutionized American higher education. State land grant universities opened to stimulate more productive agriculture; colleges expanded their curricula to prepare professionals for careers in new social science disciplines; and, as the postal service began to deliver mail to rural homes in the 1980s, a new delivery system—correspondence education—joined later by courses offered by radio and television emerged in many higher education institutions around the nation.

 

Today, we are at a turning point in the Technological Revolution. Over the past two decades, much has been done to use streaming media and other technologies to improve access to education at both the K-12 and university levels. However, the introduction of Artificial Intelligence is raising new questions about the skills and knowledge students across disciplines need to develop to function in an increasingly technology-driven culture.

 

Dr. Raymond Schroeder recently wrote an article entitled “Higher Education AI Transformation 2030.” He noted that, to make the best use of artificial intelligence and other new technologies, higher education professionals “... must first rethink the very foundations of our institutions. This is not about adding a few new apps to the learning management system. Rather, it’s about a fundamental re-architecture of how we operate, how we teach, and how we define the work of our faculty and students. Key factors include institutional strategy, pedagogy, and the future of work.”

 

Today, many young adults are increasingly reluctant to move quickly into higher education as they reach the end of their high school years. That, along with other educational needs brought about by the rapid development of technology, suggests some structural changes in the curriculum—already underway in some colleges and universities — that may ease the transition for new students. Here are a few:

 

1.             Dual Enrollment Courses—Today, many high school students are taking dual enrollment courses—college-level courses that allow them to earn both high school and college credit. Much of the general education curriculum is duplicated in high school and college. Encouraging students to take dual enrollment courses will allow colleges and universities to address better the changing structure of society in general education curricula.

2.             Micro-Credentials—This is a relatively new arena for professional continuing education that is well-suited to technology-based delivery. Don Olcott (HOF 2023) and Rory McGreal recently described micro-credentials as a “strategic reset” for higher education. They noted:

 

Micro-credentials are certified documents that provide recognized proof of the achievement of learning outcomes from shorter, less duration educational or training activities. They focus on validating competency-based skills, outcomes, and/or knowledge using transparent standards and reliable assessments, thereby enhancing graduates’ employability prospects. A micro-credential can be accepted for credit by an institution or organization or be an attestation for employers. A micro-credential attests to specific knowledge or skills competencies with defined learning outcomes and may or may not be stacked towards larger units of accreditation (Brown et al., 2021; Cirlan, & Loukkola, 2020; COL, 2019; Debiais-Sainton, 2020; Fong et al., 2016; Kato et al., 2020).

 

3.             A New Undergraduate Curriculum—Just as textbooks changed the dynamics of undergraduate education in the 20th century, AI and other technologies are creating new demands for what students need to learn. The introductory “survey” course is less important for non-technical subjects like history, literature, sociology, and psychology. A more productive approach might be to focus instead on themes of social and personal development within disciplines. John Meacham’s book, The Soul of America (2008) provides a good example. Rather than using course time to highlight the historical timeline, Meacham offers several chapters that focus on how the country responded to several historical issues over time as the nation evolved to meet the challenges of the Industrial Revolution. This approach could help redefine the social studies and humanities curricula.

 

Many Hall of Fame members are leading the way in how their institutions will respond to this new environment. Please feel free to add your perspectives to this blog to help our community lead as the Technology Revolution matures.

------

 

References

Brown, M., Giolla Mhichil, M.N., Beirne, E. & Mac Lochlainn, C. (2021, in press). The global micro-credential landscape: Charting a new credential ecology for lifelong learning. Journal of Learning Development, 8(2). https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d.

Cirlan, E. & Loukkola, T. (2020). European project MICROBOL: Microcredentials linked to the key Bologna commitments. European University Association (EUA), 1–63. https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/microbol%20desk%20research%20report.pdf.

Commonwealth of Learning (COL). (2019). Designing and implementing micro-credentials: A guide for practitioners. http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/3279.

Debiais-Sainton, V. (2020). European approach to micro-credentials. EADTU Innovating Higher Education 2020 Bridging Event (I-HE2020). https://www2.slideshare.net/EADTU/ihe2020-european-approach-to-microcredentials.

Fong, J., Janzow, P, & Peck, K. (2016). Demographic shifts in educational demand and the rise of alternative credentials. Washington, D.C.: UPCEA-Pearson. https://upcea.edu/upceapearson-survey-demographic-shifts-in-educational-demand-and-the-rise-of-alternative-credentials.

Kato, S., Galan-Muros, V., & Weko, T. (2020). The emergence of alternative credentials. OECD Education Working Paper No. 216. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 1–40. Paris: OECD. https://www.oecd.org/publications/the-emergence-of-alternative-credentials-b741f39e-en.htm.

Meacham, J. (2008). The Soul of America. Random House.

McGreal, R., Olcott, D. (2022). A strategic reset: micro-credentials for higher education leaders. Smart Learn. Environ. 9, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00190-1

Schroeder, R. (October 15, 2025). Higher Education AI Transformation 2030. Inside Higher Education.

Celebrating Education

 

By Morten Flate Paulsen, Professor of Online Education
(IACEHOF 2024)

After four decades immersed in online education, I have concluded that my four favourite online education words are: flexibility, cooperation, transparency, and celebration. Since the IACE Hall of Fame has organized yearly celebrations of a new class of inductees since 1996, it is fitting to reflect on the significance of celebration in education.

I advocate for celebration as a vital tool to promote quality in education, focusing on excellence and significant achievements. It enhances personal and institutional pride, attracting more attention and joy to our field.

Anniversaries provide clear opportunities for celebrations and increased visibility. Graduation ceremonies and traditions surrounding diplomas, certificates, micro-credentials, and other proofs of academic achievements are certainly worth celebrating.

Many institutions share inspiring student and teacher testimonials, often initiated by marketing staff who uncover compelling stories through celebratory activities.

Awards of excellence, such as Teacher of the Year, Best Student, and Best Paper awards, can motivate individuals to excel and provide role models to admire. Various countries, organizations, and institutions have established schemes or strategies for such awards. Looking back, my personal motivation and career got a boost when I received the Best Presentation Award for Trends in International Electronic Distance Education at the NordData 89 conference thirty-six years ago in Copenhagen.

Several organizations have established schemes to honour educators for their important contributions in the field. Among the international organizations I know best: The International Council of Open and Distance Education (ICDE) offers prizes of excellence, the European Distance and E-learning Network (EDEN) maintains a Fellowship scheme, the International Adult and Continuing Education (IACE) Hall of Fame inducts outstanding educators, and the Commonwealth of Learning (COL) designates Honorary Fellows.

Many of these educators have inspired me and numerous others. Mark Nichols has interviewed more than a hundred educators in the podcast Leaders & Legends of Online Learning. Susan Bainbridge and Norine Wark authored The Encyclopaedia of Female Pioneers in Online Learning. And I have profiled about 160 prominent colleagues in the open-access books, which constitute the chronicles My online Education World 1980-2020. We can all learn from these international role models and celebrate our local heroes.

In conclusion, I urge educators to embrace celebration, innovate celebratory practices, and incorporate them into their strategies. Many in our field deserve more recognition for their outstanding work. Celebration can inspire individual achievement, enhance institutional excellence, and lead to positive media coverage. Let us remember the power of celebration in fostering a vibrant and motivating educational environment.

 

Students Need Due Diligence

 

By William J. Rothwell, Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Penn State University (IACEHOF 2023) and Aikumis Serikbayeva, Ph.D. Candidate, Penn State University

 

It has become fashionable in some political circles to sneer at the value of a college degree. Some pundits claim universities are “left‐leaning factories” and degrees are “worthless pieces of paper.” That’s nonsense. The truth is more complicated—and far more inconvenient for that simplistic narrative.

 

It is true that, at present, the unemployment rate for college graduates ages 22–27 is startling: for women, it is about 4 percent, and for men, about 6 percent (Apollo Academy, 2025). That compares to a general U.S. unemployment rate of about 4.3 percent in August 2025 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025).

 

But a degree alone is neither a magic ticket nor a silver bullet. Too many students, and their parents, drift through four years without ever asking the hard question: What will it take to be competitive after graduation? They don’t investigate job markets; they don’t seek internships; and they don’t build the skills employers demand. Then, when the job offers don’t flood in, they blame the professors, the major, the degree, or the school instead of their own lack of preparation.

 

Of course, it is also true that many school districts have defunded career counseling for secondary students. So students may arrive in college ill‐prepared to know what to do to become competitive. And many colleges and universities do not effectively integrate career planning as a requirement into academic curricula (Carnevale & Smith, 2018).

But despite challenges, the fact is that higher education can still work—if students and parents perform their due diligence. Employers overwhelmingly value degrees (Gallup & Lumina Foundation, 2023). But they also want graduates who can demonstrate more than a diploma. That means applied experience, marketable skills, and a willingness to take initiative (National Association of Colleges and Employers [NACE], 2024).

 

The attack on higher education is nothing more than a political stunt. Instead of tearing down universities, we should be telling young people: don’t just chase the paper. Use those years to set yourself apart. A business without a competitive edge will not long survive, and neither will an individual worker. A college degree remains a powerful path to opportunity—if students are willing to go beyond the paper chase.

 

References

Apollo Academy. (2025, September 14). Unemployment rate for recent college graduates: Rising for men, falling for women. The Daily Spark.  https://www.apolloacademy.com/unemployment-rate-for-recent-college-graduates-rising-for-men-falling-for-women/

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025, September 5). The employment situation—August 2025. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Carnevale, A. P., & Smith, N. (2018). Balancing work and learning: Implications for low-income students. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. https://cew.georgetown.edu

Gallup, & Lumina Foundation. (2023). The state of higher education 2023 report. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/education

National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2024). Job outlook 2024: Attributes employers want to see on student résumés. NACE. https://www.naceweb.org

 

 

What’s Wrong With Tenure and How to Improve It

 

By William J. Rothwell, Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Penn State University
(IACEHOF 2023)

 

The university tenure system is a cornerstone of higher education, intended to ensure job security, academic freedom, and the retention of high-quality faculty. But this system is under increasing scrutiny for failing to align with the evolving needs of students, institutions, and society (Sporn, 2024). Understanding and improving tenure is vital for students, parents, policymakers, and educators, as it can directly impact the quality and relevance of higher education (El Hajjar & Borna, 2025).

 

Challenges in the Tenure System

 

Research

Tenure decisions often overemphasize research output, pressuring faculty to prioritize grant acquisition and publication volume (Mutongoza, 2023). This “publish or perish” culture can compromise quality and ethics, encouraging isolated rather than collaborative efforts and diminishing focus on teaching or real-world application. Grant priorities may not align with pressing societal needs, further skewing academic efforts (Purnell, 2025).

 

Publishing

Tenure traditionally values peer-reviewed journal publications. However, this narrow definition of scholarly contribution excludes more accessible and impactful formats such as books, policy papers, or practitioner-oriented content. The peer review system, while important, can be biased, and the pressure to produce frequent articles may stifle innovation and inflate minor contributions (Sobkowicz, 2015).

 

Teaching

Teaching often receives less weight in tenure evaluations (Schimanski & Alperin, 2018). Faculty may have little motivation to improve instruction, adopt new methods, or prioritize student learning—especially when excellence in teaching is not rewarded. This neglect results in theoretically strong students with weak real-world preparation, especially if experiential learning is overlooked.

 

Advising

Advising and mentoring, critical to student development, are time-intensive and often undervalued in tenure reviews (Morrison et al., 2019). The demands of research and publishing leave faculty with limited availability for meaningful student support, particularly for those needing tailored guidance.

 

Service

Service—including committee work, faculty governance, and community engagement—is crucial to university functioning. Yet tenure reviews often treat it as a lesser duty (St. Louis University, 2022). This leads to uneven workloads, where committed faculty bear the brunt, potentially jeopardizing their research and teaching efforts.

 

How to Improve Tenure

 

A reformed tenure system should balance research, publishing, teaching, advising, and service:

 

Research Reform

• Prioritize quality, innovation, and relevance over quantity.
• Encourage interdisciplinary and collaborative projects.
• Expand definitions of scholarly output to include policy work, practitioner research, and cross-disciplinary contributions.
• Support faculty with funding, assistance, and time for meaningful research.

 

Publishing Reform

• Broaden recognition to include books, open-access journals, and digital dissemination.
• Promote in-depth, long-term research agendas.
• Improve transparency in the peer review process.
• Foster mentorship to develop thoughtful publication strategies.

 

Teaching Excellence

• Implement robust teaching evaluation methods (peer reviews, student feedback, teaching portfolios).
• Offer development programs to improve instructional quality.
• Recognize innovative pedagogies like active and experiential learning in tenure decisions.

 

Advising as a Priority

• Set clear expectations and provide training.
• Include advising effectiveness in tenure decisions, using input from advisees.
• Reward faculty who demonstrate excellence in student mentoring.

 

Valuing Service

• Distribute service duties equitably.
• Count diverse service activities (governance, outreach, leadership) in evaluations.
• Foster a culture that appreciates service as essential to academic life.

 

Other Considerations

Tenure decisions could also reflect faculty contributions to social impact and diversity, helping to combat the perception that higher education is elitist or disconnected from societal needs. Additionally, restoring faculty leadership in curriculum decisions, instead of delegating it to expanded administrative control of bureaucrats, can ensure relevance to students’ educational and professional aspirations.

 

Conclusion

Tenure should reflect the full scope of faculty responsibilities—research, teaching, advising, service, and societal contribution. Reforming the system to emphasize quality, balance, and relevance will ensure universities better serve students, faculty, and society. Such improvements can restore public trust, enhance student outcomes, and re-energize the academic profession.

 

 

References

El Hajjar, S., & Borna, S. (2025, May 5). The tenure dilemma: Stability or innovation? AACSB Insights. Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. https://www.aacsb.edu/insights/articles/2025/05/the-tenure-dilemma-stability-or-innovation

Morrison, J. A., Barthell, J. F., Boettcher, A., Bowne, D., Nixon, C., Resendes, K. K., & Strauss‑Soukup, J. (2019). Recognizing and valuing the mentoring of undergraduate research, scholarship, and creative activity by faculty members: Workload, tenure, promotion, and award systems (CUR White Paper No. 2). Council on Undergraduate Research.

Mutongoza, B. H. (2023). The negative consequences of the ‘publish or perish’ culture on academic staff in higher education. SOTL in the South, 7(2), 49–65.

Purnell, P. J. (2025). Transdisciplinary research: How much is academia heeding the call to work more closely with societal stakeholders such as industry, government, and nonprofits? Scientometrics, 130(6), Article 53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05367-2

Schimanski, L. A., & Alperin, J. P. (2018). The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research, 7, Article 1605. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.16554.2

Sobkowicz, P. (2015). Innovation suppression and clique evolution in peer review. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18(2), 13. https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.2957

Sporn, B. (2024). Higher education institutions as change agents in society. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 14(2), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2024.2412764

Saint Louis University, Gender Policies and Initiatives Council, & Academic Faculty Affairs Committee. (2022). Lip service? White paper on service in the personnel review process. Saint Louis University.

 

The Compelling Need for Talent Acceleration

 

By William J. Rothwell, Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Penn State University

(ACEHOF 2023)

 

The need for accelerated talent development is no longer optional. It is imperative. The convergence of disruptive technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), demographic shifts such as the mass retirement of Baby Boomers, policy changes affecting skilled immigration, and the reindustrialization of economies like the United States has exposed a widening gap between current workforce capabilities and future business demands. To compete and thrive in the Fourth Industrial Revolution—also known as Industry 4.0—organizations, educational institutions, and governments must urgently embrace faster, more responsive approaches to upskilling, reskilling, new skilling, and cross-skilling the workforce (World Economic Forum, 2018).

 

One significant force driving the need for accelerated talent development is the integration of AI into every aspect of business (Marguerit, 2025). As machines become more capable of performing routine cognitive and manual tasks, the demand for human workers who can interpret data, make decisions, and apply judgment in new contexts is soaring. Traditional educational models—centered around four-year degrees—are simply too slow to respond to evolving and dynamic workforce demands (Kovalev et al., 2025). By the time a student completes a degree, the skills they’ve learned may already be outdated. Organizations need people who are agile, adaptive, and equipped with skills that can be rapidly refreshed or reconfigured to meet emerging needs.

 

At the same time, the retirement of the Baby Boomer generation is triggering a massive brain drain across industries (Chaudhuri & Ghosh, 2012). These experienced professionals, many of whom hold institutional knowledge and leadership capabilities, are exiting the workforce in large numbers. Their departure leaves critical gaps that cannot be filled through conventional hiring and development cycles. To sustain operational continuity and competitiveness, companies must fast-track the development of younger and mid-career employees who can step into leadership roles and technical positions—often with limited time for traditional onboarding or formal education.

 

The situation is compounded by recent federal policy shifts that have led to a decline in skilled immigration to the United States (Mandelman, 2024). Slowdown in immigration, labor shortages, and declining skill premia. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper. For decades, the U.S. economy has benefited from the influx of talented professionals from around the world, particularly in STEM fields. With fewer skilled immigrants available, the pressure is mounting to develop talent domestically—faster and more efficiently than ever before.

 

In parallel, the U.S. is undergoing a reindustrialization as manufacturing returns to domestic soil. This “reshoring” of industry is driven by a desire to strengthen supply chains, secure national interests, and support economic recovery. However, the factories of today are not the same as those of previous generations. Smart manufacturing facilities rely on robotics, machine learning, and cyber-physical systems. These new technologies require workers with hybrid skill sets—combining technical know-how with problem-solving, critical thinking, and digital fluency—and the learning agility to learn faster and more effectively than ever before. Meeting these complex and changing talent demands calls for a more dynamic, flexible approach to workforce development.

 

Globally, similar pressures are driving the need for talent acceleration in Asia-Pacific economies. In a recent invited keynote address delivered to ASEAN and APEC nations, I emphasized how the migration of Chinese industry to Southeast Asia is transforming the region’s labor markets. Countries must rapidly prepare their low-tech workforces for high-tech, high-value work or risk losing out. Like in the U.S., the answer lies not in traditional degree programs, but in stackable credentials, certifications, microlearning, and experiential learning—methods that provide targeted, just-in-time learning experiences aligned to workforce needs.

 

Higher education everywhere in the world must respond to this shift. Universities and colleges must expand their focus beyond conventional degree paths and embrace alternative learning formats that prioritize speed, relevance, and adaptability. That includes offering short-term, modular programs that can be combined into broader qualifications; partnering with employers to co-develop learning pathways; encouraging experiential learning methods that appeal to a new generation of learners who grew up with exciting videogame entertainment and expect the same level of engagement in their education; and investing in digital platforms that make lifelong learning more accessible.

 

The future of work will belong to those who can learn quickly, pivot often, and deliver results in an environment of constant change. The average person in the future is expected to have 3-7 career changes in their lifetime. For younger generations, like Gen Z, this number is projected to be even higher, with estimates ranging from 5-7 careers, including potentially 16-17 jobs (Jobera, 2023). This shift is driven by factors like the evolving job market, technological advancements, and changing economic conditions. Talent acceleration is not just a strategy; rather, it is an essential lifeline that will determine whether organizations and nations can adapt, compete, and lead in the age of AI.

 

References

Chaudhuri, S., & Ghosh, R. (2012). Reverse mentoring: A social exchange tool for keeping the Boomers engaged and Millennials committed. Human Resource Development Review, 11(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484311417562

Jobera. (2023, October 11). 59+ latest career change statistics, facts & trends. Jobera.

Kovalev, A., Stefanac, N., & Rizoiu, M.-A. (2025). Skill‑driven certification pathways: Measuring industry training impact on graduate employability [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04588

Mandelman, F. S. (2024). Slowdown in immigration, labor shortages, and declining skill premia. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper.

Marguerit, D. (2025, March 24). Augmenting or automating labor? The effect of AI development on new work, employment, and wages [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.19159

World Economic Forum. (2018). Towards a reskilling revolution: A future of jobs for all. See: https://www.aspeninstitute.org/of-interest/towards-reskilling-revolution-future-jobs-all/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22337449436&gbraid=0AAAAA-vx0GEb8KVy55MqeMLwEWUL31JRL&gclid=Cj0KCQjwzOvEBhDVARIsADHfJJSDUYDLc-98fcWeXcjhZvHLcHTvwZd12gXkKa-rSx3TDWXVrzKqRDIaAhftEALw_wcB